The Definition of God

[Delphi]

God is often defined as having various extraordinary characteristics. Infinitely loving, all powerful, omniscient, the creator of the Universe, etc.

How can we know that this is indeed true? How can we verify such grandiose assertions? No greater claims could possibly be made!

Normally, we make definitions based on verifiable evidence and observation. For example, we define a giraffe as being a large four-legged grazing mammal with a long neck, hooves, a mouth, a tongue, teeth, and two eyes. We can rationally define a giraffe this way based on verifiable observation. We define a giraffe by going out and finding a giraffe, then defining it based on its attributes.

Yet somehow, God is defined in the opposite manner. We do not go out and find god and define it based on its attributes. Instead, we apply god's characteristics to him without ever observing god. Definitions seem to fabricated out of imagination. I find this extremely dubious.

It seems to me that we are applying these definitions to the concept of a god. We cannot verify nor falsify these attributes.

What is going on here?

[Yahu]

There is no 'Yah' in NT or the OT.

Yes there is.

Ps 68:4 (AV) Sing unto God, sing praises to his name: extol him that rideth upon the heavens by his name JAH, and rejoice before him.

Ps 150:6 (Darby) let everything that hath breath praise Jah. Hallelujah!
Ps 106:1 Hallelujah! give ye thanks unto Jehovah; for he is good; for his loving-kindness endureth for ever.

Yah is the Hebrew form as in Hallelujah which means 'praise Yah' in Hebrew. Many translations use the germanized form like Jehovah using the 'J' instead of the 'Y'. That is why it is Jah in the above verse, the germanized corrupted form.

Yah is also used as part of many prophets names like Elijah in Hebrew is Eliyahu. Most prophets have Yah in their names in the Hebrew form.

Isaiah = 'Yah has saved'
Jeremiah = 'Whom Yah has appointed'
Elijah = 'Mighty in Yah is he'
Nehemiah = 'Yah comforts'
Obadiah = 'servant of Yah'
Zechariah='Yah remembers'

Yah is the short form of YHVH. So generally when Yah is referenced in scripture it is part of a compound word that is part of a name or Hallelujah. You will find those names in both the OT and NT but of course the NT uses the Greek form of the names like Elijah becomes Elias.

Here are NT references to Hallelujah.

Re 19:3 and a second time they said, Hallelujah. and her smoke goes up to the ages of ages.
Re 19:4 and the twenty-four elders and the four living creatures fell down and did homage to god who sits upon the throne, saying, amen, Hallelujah.
Re 19:6 and I heard as a voice of a great crowd, and as a voice of many waters, and as a voice of strong thunders, saying, Hallelujah, for the lord our god the Almighty has taken to himself kingly power.

[Monta]

[Replying to post 51 by Yahu]


"Ps 68:4 (AV) Sing unto God, sing praises to his name: extol him that rideth upon the heavens by his name JAH, and rejoice before him. "

Thanks, I never noticed it before*

[JLB32168]

You seem to really like simplicity, don't you?

My likes are pretty much irrelevant here. If simplicity is called for then it is appropriate.

God is an evil monster from another dimension who wants to torture humans as much as possible for it's own pleasure.

You’re certainly entitled to your opinion but it doesn’t really comport with the NT – which is authoritative on this board – that says that God takes no displeasure in the destruction of the wicked.
And of course, the theology of the Eastern Orthodox Church (I’ve gotta get my free plug in) is that Hell isn’t a literal place since Christ used Gehenna to refer to it – a garbage dump outside of Jerusalem where fires were constantly burning to keep disease at bay (and it would be just asinine to conclude that Christ meant that evil doers would go to wait out eternity in the town dump.)

That being the case, the EOC sees “Hell� as how one experiences God – whether He is experienced as torment or paradise. To give an analogy, the Sun is good – at least most people think it is since it gives us life. Of course, the sun doesn’t grant light and life to the vampire. It’s pretty painful for him – not that the sun can help it. The sun isn’t punishing the vampire; it can’t help the fact that the vampire spends his life doing evil things, and that the consequences of that evil-doing now means the life-giving sun is experienced as torment.

It’d be ridiculous of us to claim that the sun was a monster set on tormenting these poor vampires with sadistic glee, after all – the sun can’t just stop being the sun and doing what it does.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 53 by JLB32168]



[center]Fallacious Religious Reasoning:
1. The sun is a moral agent.
2. My opinions are facts, your opinions are opinions[/center]

You seem to really like simplicity, don't you?

My likes are pretty much irrelevant here. If simplicity is called for then it is appropriate.

You don't even LIKE your own opinions?
I think that you should, you know.

Is it an opinion or a fact that "simplicity is called for"?
Are you telling us that when you judge something "appropriate" , it instanbly becomes "appropriate" for the rest of us, too?

God is an evil monster from another dimension who wants to torture humans as much as possible for it's own pleasure.

You’re certainly entitled to your opinion but it doesn’t really comport with the NT – which is authoritative on this board – that says that God takes no displeasure in the destruction of the wicked.

Ironic typo up there... I think you meant the opposite of that.


I take it that in your opinion, my opinion doesn't comport with the NT.
Well, I base my opinion on a careful study of the whole authoritative Bible, and not just parts of it.

The rule here is that the Bible is authoritative, not your opinions about what you think it says. The Bible is the authority here, not someone's opinion.

But all of us are free to express our opinions.
I am not an exception:

In my opinion, good things that are said about God are "evil propaganda" and proof that God is hypocritical, and a liar. Which, in my opinion, are evidence of evil intentions. I base my opinion on the authority of the Bible.


But I have to wonder why theists feel the need to always remind me that I am entitled to my opinion over and over again?

I really got it by now.
You don't have to keep repeating that as if somehow, I keep forgetting.
Thanks for the reminder... ( but I really didn't need it, you see )

I am entitled to my opinions.
Got it.

And of course, the theology of the Eastern Orthodox Church (I’ve gotta get my free plug in) is that Hell isn’t a literal place since Christ used Gehenna to refer to it – a garbage dump outside of Jerusalem where fires were constantly burning to keep disease at bay (and it would be just asinine to conclude that Christ meant that evil doers would go to wait out eternity in the town dump.)

You see, this is where you are free to have your opinions.

Is the theology of the Eastern Orthodox Church the authority in this forum or is the Bible?

Is the fact that we are free to express our opinions something that Christians tend to forget? Because I can remind them each and every time they express an opinion. And that would be very often don't you think?

I'll do you a favor.
If you want me to remind you each and every time you voice an opinion in here.. I shall.. just for you. In case you need me to, just ask and you shall receive.

That being the case, the EOC sees “Hell� as how one experiences God – whether He is experienced as torment or paradise.

I don't take opinions as facts.

As you so wisely stated we are entitled to our opinion, and yours is that you believe something to be "the case". But if you want to say that your opinion happens to also be a FACT, you will have to demonstrate it to all of us. Maybe not everyone agrees with your particular theology. Maybe not everyone agrees with what you claim is "the case".

Or maybe you are confused with the difference between opinions and facts.
People have a LOT of trouble distinguishing opinion from fact.

I present an opinion, you present an opinion.
These are not FACTS.

Facts and opinions are not the same.

To give an analogy, the Sun is good – at least most people think it is since it gives us life.

• Are you saying that the sun is good, or that in your OPINION, the sun is good?
  Are you saying that the sun is INTENTIONAL?
  The sun THINKS?

Of course, the sun doesn’t grant light and life to the vampire. It’s pretty painful for him – not that the sun can help it.

In your opinion, when GOD sends someone to hell, can HE help himself? Or in your opinion, does God not have a choice in the matter?

It’d be ridiculous of us to claim that the sun was a monster set on tormenting these poor vampires with sadistic glee, after all – the sun can’t just stop being the sun and doing what it does.

It would be MORE ridiculous to claim the sun is a moral agent, without proving it first.
Your analogy don't take into consideration that in your opinion, GOD decides, but the SUN does not. In your own words, the sun cannot help itself. It has no choice in the matter but I would guess that in your opinion, God has a choice.

Your analogy fails ... God and sun are not both free moral agents.
The sun cannot BE good or evil. God can be either.

I say that God is perfectly evil, and that, as humans, we don't know why, except from what a CLOSE and ( in my opinion ) CAREFUL study of the authoritative Bible forces us to conclude. One hint is that when God says "do not kill".. he doesn't mean that for himself, but for others.

In MY opinion a careful study of the authoritative Bible shows that:

• God is depicted as a jealous killer.
  God is a depicted as a vindictive torturer.
  God is depicted as a liar and a fraud.

In the authoritative Bible, He can kill whoever He likes, and then torture them for eternity. Using MY little human brain, I call that "very evil" indeed.

Am I entitled to my opinion?
I forgot.

Meow

[JLB32168]

Fallacious Religious Reasoning: 1. The sun is a moral agent. 2. My opinions are facts, your opinions are opinions.

Why exactly is it fallacious since your verbal fiat proves that you can say things. I made to claims about facts. You’re rebutting arguments that you wish I had said rather than debating things I actually said.

Are you telling us that when you judge something "appropriate". . .

This comment is petty and high-schoolesque and contributes nothing to furthering the discussion.

Ironic typo up there... I think you meant the opposite of that.

Yup.

I take it that in your opinion, my opinion doesn't comport with the NT.

Well – the text says that God takes no pleasure in their destruction and you say God does. Let’s just let people decide for themselves.

In my opinion, good things that are said about God are "evil propaganda" and proof that God is hypocritical, and a liar.

Okay. I disagree with your opinion.

The voluminous number of posts on opinion/fact directed at my unmitigated audacity in saying, “You’re entitled to your opinion� is little more than getting personal Sss! Fftt! Sss! Ffft! ROWR!! so I don’t need to address it.

I don't take opinions as facts.

I made no claims to facts. I gave EO theology and you’re by no means obliged to accept it so there’s really no need to be so defensive.

But if you want to say that your opinion happens to also be a FACT . . .

I didn’t say it was fact. You’re manufacturing arguments that no one has brought to the table.

Are you saying that the sun is good, or that in your OPINION, the sun is good?

I gave the theology. How a person can accuse someone else of stating facts when he’s stating theology is a mystery to me, but you’ve built the lion’s share of your post upon that outrageously asinine idea.

In your opinion, when GOD sends someone to hell . . .

I don’t believe Hell is a place; therefore, God certainly can’t send people there.

It would be MORE ridiculous to claim the sun is a moral agent, without proving it first.

Like all analogies, it isn’t meant to be a perfect match; however, the comparisons jibe when necessary. According to EO theology, Hell/Heaven aren’t places. Certainly Hell isn’t since, as I stated already, Gehenna – the word Christ used – was the town dump and it would be ridiculous to conclude that Christ meant that that the souls of evil doers will go to spend eternity in the dump. I’m not going to repeat anything else since you don’t seem to have bothered reading it.

I say that God is perfectly evil, and that, as humans, we don't know why, except from what a CLOSE and ( in my opinion ) CAREFUL study of the authoritative Bible forces us to conclude.

Hey – you’re entitled to your opinion.

In MY opinion a careful study of the authoritative Bible shows that:

• God is depicted as a jealous killer.
  God is a depicted as a vindictive torturer.
  God is depicted as a liar and a fraud.

Okay. I disagree with that assessment but okay.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 55 by JLB32168]


[center]We might agree !! We might agree !![/center]

Fallacious Religious Reasoning: 1. The sun is a moral agent. 2. My opinions are facts, your opinions are opinions.

Why exactly is it fallacious since your verbal fiat proves that you can say things.

I don't know what you are referring to, sorry.
Please, make yourself clear.

I made to claims about facts. You’re rebutting arguments that you wish I had said rather than debating things I actually said.

Well, that's another claim, isn't it?
Is a claim a fact or an opinion?

I take it that in your opinion, my opinion doesn't comport with the NT.

Well – the text says that God takes no pleasure in their destruction and you say God does. Let’s just let people decide for themselves.

I know the authoritative Bible doesn't SAY that he does.. but that's why God is a hypocrite and a liar. He might take a LOT of pleasure in what he does. And then, the authoritative Bible DOES say a lot of things, doesn't it?

As it says in the Authoritative Bible:

_____________

Ecclesiastes 3:14

“I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before him.�

King James Version (KJV)

- I interpret this passage to mean that we should fear before God.

_____________

And let's not forget the passage that reads:

"Our God is in heaven; he does whatever pleases him."
Psalm 115:3, New International Version

- Which I interpret to mean that whatever God does, God likes, as when God kills people and tortures them forever.
_____________

In my opinion, good things that are said about God are "evil propaganda" and proof that God is hypocritical, and a liar.

Okay. I disagree with your opinion.

There you go.
I agree that you can disagree with my opinion !!

( I think that we are making good progress here )

The voluminous number of posts on opinion/fact directed at my unmitigated audacity in saying, “You’re entitled to your opinion� is little more than getting personal Sss! Fftt! Sss! Ffft! ROWR!! so I don’t need to address it.

You might not need to address it.
But you just did.

I don't take opinions as facts.

I made no claims to facts. I gave EO theology and you’re by no means obliged to accept it so there’s really no need to be so defensive.

I feel no "need to be defensive".
I don't know what you are talking about.

Could you clarify how you came to the conclusion that I am being so defensive?
What I clearly stated was that:

"I don't take opinions as facts."

Do you interpret that statement as " so defensive "?


Here is another statement about Blastcat:

" I don't pretend to read people's minds. "

Do you consider that statement to be so defensive, too?
I don't understand what you mean.

If it's important, maybe you can clarify.
But be careful, moderators don't allow for comments about the person in the forums.

We are supposed to stick to the ideas.

But if you want to say that your opinion happens to also be a FACT . . .

I didn’t say it was fact. You’re manufacturing arguments that no one has brought to the table.

Did you notice the word "IF" in my statement?
Do I have to explain how conditional statements work, or did you just miss the conditional nature of my statement?

Are you saying that the sun is good, or that in your OPINION, the sun is good?

I gave the theology. How a person can accuse someone else of stating facts when he’s stating theology is a mystery to me, but you’ve built the lion’s share of your post upon that outrageously asinine idea.

You will notice that I'm trying to get you to answer my questions.
It's not always easy.

When I ask questions, I am NOT making a statement.
If you could just answer my questions, I would have my answer and then we could move ON.

So, please, I urge you to answer me as clearly as you can.
Otherwise, I will CONTINUE to not understand what you are talking about.

Don't you INTEND to be understood in here?

And as to YOUR comprehension :

You missed the point of the question entirely. I will try to rephrase the question better: Are you expressing your OPINION about the sun, or are you expressing FACTS about the sun?

In your opinion, when GOD sends someone to hell . . .

I don’t believe Hell is a place; therefore, God certainly can’t send people there.
You say that God certainly can't send people to Hell.

Ok, you don't believe that.
Other Christians do. When I read the authoritative Bible, I believe it means Hell is a real place.

Are you saying that we all believe or disbelieve the same thing as you do?
Or even SHOULD?

It would be MORE ridiculous to claim the sun is a moral agent, without proving it first.

Like all analogies, it isn’t meant to be a perfect match; however, the comparisons jibe when necessary. According to EO theology, Hell/Heaven aren’t places.

I agree. No analogy is perfect.

But it has to at least MATCH in some way with what we are trying to describe. I don't see how you are matching the sun with God. Sorry, I just don't get it.

Is the SUN a place?
How is it NECESSARY to equate the sun with God's judgements?

Does the sun think or is the sun some metaphorical place?
Is the sun a moral agent who can be good or evil?

I just don't get it.
I can't make heads or tails out of what you are trying to get at here....

I say that God is perfectly evil, and that, as humans, we don't know why, except from what a CLOSE and ( in my opinion ) CAREFUL study of the authoritative Bible forces us to conclude.

Hey – you’re entitled to your opinion.

Yeah, I know.
Thanks for the reminder.

But do we REALLY need to remind each other that we are entitled to our opinions?
Can't we just agree that we are and be DONE with it?

In MY opinion a careful study of the authoritative Bible shows that:

• God is depicted as a jealous killer.
  God is a depicted as a vindictive torturer.
  God is depicted as a liar and a fraud.

Okay. I disagree with that assessment but okay.

I think we made a bit of progress in here.
Do you?

[JLB32168]

I don't know what you are referring to, sorry. Please, make yourself clear.

I cited your “Fallacious Religious Reasoning: 1. The sun is a moral agent. 2. My opinions are facts, your opinions are opinions� because they made no sense to me.

Well, that's another claim, isn't it? Is a claim a fact or an opinion?

You said that I asserted facts. I didn’t assert any facts. I asserted theology. That you take a statement of theology as a statement of fact is your affair.

I know the authoritative Bible doesn't SAY that he does.. but that's why God is a hypocrite and a liar.

Hey – you’re entitled to your opinion.

I don't take opinions as facts.

I’m going to cut through all of the catty drivel on opinion v. facts since it does nothing to address the topic.

If you could just answer my questions, I would have my answer and then we could move ON.

Thus far most of your questions have been asking me why I’m asserting facts when they’re opinions. I explained the idiocy of inferring “the theology of X� means “it is fact that X� and am done with it. Do please refrain from commenting on someone else’s comprehension or the lack thereof. It reminds me of a scene from Tina Fey’s Mean Girls.

You say that God certainly can't send people to Hell.

If Hell isn’t a place can someone be sent to a non-place?

But it has to at least MATCH in some way with what we are trying to describe.

And I say it does. The sun cannot help it that people experience it in different ways. In that respect, God cannot help it that people experience Him in different ways. The sun hasn’t punished people who leave a lighted path by setting wolves upon them; they wandered into the dark and removed themselves from protection of the light and wolves attacked. God is the same way. People depart from Him. He doesn’t punish them by sending them to Hell. They have taken evil into themselves so that goodness – God – now torments them. That is the Heaven/Hell in Eastern Orthodox theology. I realize that it isn’t the only theology, but you’re not addressing EO theology – probably because it doesn’t facilitate your argument that God delights in casting people into Hell where He can actively torment them forever.

That the sun is not a moral entity has absolutely no bearing upon this scenario. It is your red herring. Your “misunderstanding� and my “lack of clarity� is akin to an analysis you would make of “He is as stoic as a statue.� You would say, “I don’t get it. The statue can’t walk, talk. It has no feelings – no moral agency. How is he like it?�

I think we made a bit of progress in here. Do you?

No – not at all – I think I’ve spent much more time with this nonsense than what it deserved.

[JLB32168]

I reject this argument because I see it as nothing more than denial on the part of the Christian theologians.

Um . . . okay but it doesn’t really address my comment that there were ancient Greek/Latin Fathers who didn’t teach that the Genesis account was supposed to be slavishly literal, how few non-theists seem to know this, how those non-theists base all of their arguments upon a slavishly literal interpretation, and accuse some theists (who actually follow ancient Greek/Latin Fathers’ thinking) are allegedly backpedaling.

There are also major hypocrisies associated with this view.

Hypocrisy is the pretense to high morals and principles while practicing the opposite. Your use in context makes no sense.

He says that not one jot or one tittle shall pass from law until heaven and earth pass.

You left out “’til all be fulfilled�, Dude. The last words Christ said from the cross were “It is fulfilled�- fulfilled being the actual word used and which the Latin translated correctly rendered as “consummatus est� or “It is consummated.�

I've heard all the apologies for this and I reject them all.

Okay.

The rest of your post deals with how horrible God was to do all this stuff. That’s your pet-peeve subject and doesn’t address most of what I said, namely, that most skeptics base their arguments against the bible based upon their glorious ignorance of what it contains.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 57 by JLB32168]




[center]Fallacious Religious Reasoning:
1. The sun is a moral agent.
2. My opinions are facts, your opinions are opinions
Part 3[/center]

I don't know what you are referring to, sorry. Please, make yourself clear.

I cited your “Fallacious Religious Reasoning: 1. The sun is a moral agent. 2. My opinions are facts, your opinions are opinions� because they made no sense to me.

Ok, I'll try to explain.
I'm not too sure what you're getting at.. but let me try to guess:

I usually describe fallacious religious reasoning when I want to discuss it further on in the post.

I wanted to focus our attention on the fallacious reasoning.
So that people can see what I'm trying to talk about.

If you think that the sun is a moral agent, fine.
But you haven't established that it is.
In your analogy, you use the sun as an example of a moral agent.

I don't see how that can be.
I asked you later how that can be.

Did you reply to that?

And the other fallacious reasoning that I spotted in your post is that you seem to be quite comfortable with YOUR opinions, but not so much at all with consenting opinions. In my opinion ( and I might be wrong ) is that you present your opinions as facts, and when other people express their opinions ( in this case, Blastcat ) you say that he is "entitled to his opinion". It's almost as if you know the truth and that others do not.

So, I am giving you an opportunity to clear that up, you see.
Hope that clarifies.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 57 by JLB32168]




[center]
Accusation: Blastcat reputedly said that JLB was asserting facts.
Demand for evidence.[/center]

Well, that's another claim, isn't it? Is a claim a fact or an opinion?

You said that I asserted facts. I didn’t assert any facts. I asserted theology. That you take a statement of theology as a statement of fact is your affair.

Blastcat does not CLAIM to have the bestest memory or gramarz.
Could you quote me saying that?

Thanks.
A link would be great, too.

Thank you for the opportunity of retracting yet another one of Blastcat's spectacular errors !!