A God Who Fits Reality

[Jagella]

Question for Debate: If the Christian god is hard to square with what we know about the world, then can we think of a god who would be a better fit?

I can think of a god who better fits the "facts." Let's call her "Hewhay" (since I'm making up my own god, I can make her female). Hewhay is basically indifferent to human affairs. She never started a religion, never "chose" a people, and doesn't bother showing off her magical powers to impress people. If you're suffering or in need, she doesn't care and might not even be aware of it. Nobody speaks for her because she knows full well that she can speak for herself any time to anybody anywhere she chooses. However, she never bothers to do so. She has preferred to remain silent. She has authored no books because she doesn't need them and doesn't want them.

Nevertheless, Hewhay knows all about our religion. She sees people wearing funny clothes and trying to sing hymns. She knows that people try to talk to her by praying. She's even aware about how wrong we are about her! She doesn't care, though. As far as she's concerned people can believe anything they wish, and they will believe anything they wish.

Finally, if Hewhay were to say anything to atheists, it might be: "Wrong!"

[Divine Insight]

Question for Debate: If the Christian god is hard to square with what we know about the world, then can we think of a god who would be a better fit?

I can think of a lot of of Gods and Goddesses that would be a better fit with reality than the Christian God. Let's not forget also that there could be many God not just one.

Depending on how a person thinks of her the Moon Goddess of Wicca can already a better fit with reality than the Christian God. Plus the Moon Goddess of Wicca doesn't hold anything against anyone who doesn't believe in her including atheists who don't believe that any Gods exist at all. Strangely the Moon Goddess of Wicca is actually far more compatible with morality than the Christian God, because (again depending on how you think of her) she can be totally focused on morality and honesty while the same cannot be said for the Christian God.

The God of Buddhism is also a better fit with reality. But again this can depend on how a person thinks of this God. The problem with the Christian God is that it's truly not open to how a person would like to think about it. According to Christianity the Christian God has to condemn all non-believers no matter how moral or righteous they might be. Once again, the God of Buddhism doesn't even care whether a person believes in a God or not. The God of Buddhism is solely concerned with how a person behaves, and not at all with what they believe.

Taoism is also far more compatible with reality. Although many people may not view the Tao as a "God". But then again, this would come down to how they choose to define God. In the case of Taoism God may simply not be what many theists which a God would be.

The bottom line for me is that we typically (although not always) use the term "God" to refer to righteous and just deities, while reserving the term "Devil" to refer to deities that are cruel or mean.

Strangely the Christian God actually fits the definition of a "Devil" far more than the definition of a "God" because the God of Christianity condemns the vast majority of souls that he creates. And Christians cannot deny this unless they want to claim that their Jesus was an idiot who knew nothing about their God. Because Jesus confirms that only a few souls will make it. Thus leaving the vast majority of souls this God creates to be condemned to everlasting punishment.

So the God of Christianity is far more of a Devil than a God.

Could that be reality? Perhaps so. But it certainly wouldn't be anything to rejoice about or be happy about. Christianity, if true, would be among the most depressing realities we can imagine. Save for a few people who are so arrogant that they believe they are better than everyone else.

[1213]

Question for Debate: If the Christian god is hard to square with what we know about the world, then can we think of a god who would be a better fit?

“Good� is very subjective matter, but if you insist, my answer is no, I think we can’t.

I can think of a god who better fits the "facts." Let's call her "Hewhay" (since I'm making up my own god, I can make her female). … …she doesn't care… …She doesn't care, ..

Maybe it is true, maybe if I would have to pick gender that doesn’t care, I would also pick female.

Bible tells God cares (loves), for example in here:

But I tell you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who mistreat you and persecute you, that you may be children of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the just and the unjust.
Mat. 5:44-45

According to that the caring can be seen from that God makes sun rise and sends rain. Obviously, atheist don’t agree with that. But if we think could God be something that doesn’t care, I think it is not possible, because of all the good things in life.

[Jagella]

So the God of Christianity is far more of a Devil than a God.

I've often thought that an evil god would make much better sense than a good god because bad things happen, but there is much more good in the world than bad. Christians might cite this preponderance of good as a reason to believe in a good god. However, it might be argued that a good god would allow no evil at all.

In any case, I don't normally argue that there are no gods because there is suffering in the world. A God might want suffering or not care if there is suffering. So I think it's better to argue that there are imperfections in the world that a perfect god would not allow.

But you can always believe in an imperfect God!

[Divine Insight]

I've often thought that an evil god would make much better sense than a good god because bad things happen, but there is much more good in the world than bad. Christians might cite this preponderance of good as a reason to believe in a good god. However, it might be argued that a good god would allow no evil at all.

The problem is that Christians can't cite the preponderance of good in the world as a reason to believe in their God because the Bible, including Jesus, does not allow for there to be a preponderance of good. Keep in mind that according to Jesus only few will make it. So any Christians who concede that there is a preponderance of good in the world have already conceded that their religion must indeed be wrong.

[Difflugia]

Question for Debate: If the Christian god is hard to square with what we know about the world, then can we think of a god who would be a better fit?

Evel Knievel.

The problem is that Christians can't cite the preponderance of good in the world as a reason to believe in their God because the Bible, including Jesus, does not allow for there to be a preponderance of good. Keep in mind that according to Jesus only few will make it. So any Christians who concede that there is a preponderance of good in the world have already conceded that their religion must indeed be wrong.

Even that depends on which Jesus you prefer. Mark's Jesus offers salvation to a select few, but John's Jesus offers salvation so broadly ("...whoever believes in me...") that John's Gospel is often used to prooftext universalism.

[Divine Insight]

The problem is that Christians can't cite the preponderance of good in the world as a reason to believe in their God because the Bible, including Jesus, does not allow for there to be a preponderance of good. Keep in mind that according to Jesus only few will make it. So any Christians who concede that there is a preponderance of good in the world have already conceded that their religion must indeed be wrong.

Even that depends on which Jesus you prefer. Mark's Jesus offers salvation to a select few, but John's Jesus offers salvation so broadly ("...whoever believes in me...") that John's Gospel is often used to prooftext universalism.

This is true. Even the authors of the Gospels apparently had no clue what Jesus preached.

[Jagella]

According to that the caring can be seen from that God makes sun rise and sends rain. Obviously, atheist don’t agree with that. But if we think could God be something that doesn’t care, I think it is not possible, because of all the good things in life.

Yahweh is supposed to be able to answer prayer curing diseases miraculously.
Hewhay laughs at our prayers and never bothers to perform any kind of magic.
People with diseases pray for cures that never come.

Yahweh is believed to have started Judaism and later Christianity favoring both religions exclusively.
Hewhay never started any religion and favors none of them.
No religion appears to have any exclusive supernatural favor or any supernatural favor at all.

Yahweh is said to have appointed prophets as his only spokesmen.
Hewhay never appointed anybody to speak for her.
Although many people from many different religions claim to speak for God, as far as we can tell none of them ever said anything they could not have made up.

It looks like Hewhay is a much better fit than Yahweh!

[Jagella]

Mark's Jesus offers salvation to a select few, but John's Jesus offers salvation so broadly ("...whoever believes in me...") that John's Gospel is often used to prooftext universalism.

Another trait of Hewhay is that she offers no salvation and no life after death. People just die never to return. Again, Hewhay fits the facts much better than Yahweh.

[Swami]

Question for Debate: If the Christian god is hard to square with what we know about the world, then can we think of a god who would be a better fit?

I can think of a god who better fits the "facts." Let's call her "Hewhay" (since I'm making up my own god, I can make her female). Hewhay is basically indifferent to human affairs. She never started a religion, never "chose" a people, and doesn't bother showing off her magical powers to impress people. If you're suffering or in need, she doesn't care and might not even be aware of it. Nobody speaks for her because she knows full well that she can speak for herself any time to anybody anywhere she chooses. However, she never bothers to do so. She has preferred to remain silent. She has authored no books because she doesn't need them and doesn't want them.

Nevertheless, Hewhay knows all about our religion. She sees people wearing funny clothes and trying to sing hymns. She knows that people try to talk to her by praying. She's even aware about how wrong we are about her! She doesn't care, though. As far as she's concerned people can believe anything they wish, and they will believe anything they wish.

Finally, if Hewhay were to say anything to atheists, it might be: "Wrong!"

You are on the right track. The concept of God should be about ultimate reality which involves the source that everything comes from or is made from.

I propose that consciousness is God in that it is what reality is based in. I explain further here:
Reality is based in consciousness

I can go into more details upon request.