What does God mean to you?

[Michael]

I've always been curious about the subject of religion and the concept of God and all the various different ways different people perceive these things.

So what does God mean to you?

[Michael]

Here are a few recovered posts in reply to this thread...

I don't actually believe in God but based on the way I was raised and the region I lived in George Carlin pretty much sums up what I have been lead to think about God. It is roughly as follows: "There's an INVISIBLE MAN...LIVING IN THE SKY...who watches every thing you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a list of ten special things that he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish where he will send to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry for ever and ever 'til the end of time...but he loves you. He loves you and he needs money!!!"

It may seem low brow to use a comedian's quote to describe it but it is pretty accurate with the way many think about it.

So what does God mean to you?
Nothing at all. But that humans seem to always be inclined to invent and believe in the stuff means alot.

"Mean" in what sense? Are you referring to how I might define God or what significance God has to me?

Nothing at all. But that humans seem to always be inclined to invent and believe in the stuff means alot.
Ha! That gets quote of the week.

There are plenty of Gods out there. I'd reckon that any being of vast power, immorbidity, and involvement in worldly affairs counts as a God-- and what any particular God means to me would depend on my relationship to that God.

"Mean" in what sense? Are you referring to how I might define God or what significance God has to me?
Subjective significance.

I should think an attempt to 'define' God would fall under the "Properties of God" thread would it not?

Sidenote: seems to be a lame question to ask when surrounded by all these atheists! God is little more than an abstraction to most atheists by definition.

I was actually a bit more curious about the significance of God to the believers...

[Non Sequitur]

I'll be the believer to pipe up then.

The significance of God to believers (as Michael asked) is a difficult question partly because the significance, but mostly because it misses the mark depending on what we mean by significance. If we mean purpose, then the question significantly misses the mark. As a Christian God needs no purpose because that subjects the all powerful to a human reason to exist. God's "significance" (in the purpose sense) rests solely on him being God.

but if we understand "significance" to mean what effect on my life is then that is a different question. Fredrick Schielmacher wrote that The essence of religion consists in the feeling of an absolute dependence." I cannot speak for all, but for me this sums up my feelings. Once one accepts that God exists and that He is good (a leap of faith on both counts) then one realizes that you owe all to this God (I'm quoting Augustine here). God's meaning rests on the fact that he is provider. It is my right, duty, and joy to worship God.

[Helene]

For me the word god brings up a question rather than answers. Which god are you referring to?

But in essence I think that all gods are attempts at answering Why-questions. Science can't answer those; it's limited to parts of How.

I guess I'm more of an agnost than an athiest, because I think that denying the existence of (a) god requires as much belief as "knowing" that he/she does exist.

Margaret Atwood (don't know if she was the first to do that as I'm not big on reading on the subject, but I read it in one of her interviews) once defined/described god as the singularity that existed before the big bang. And that therefore everything is made of god. With that definition, I think that I can accept the existence of such a god. But obviously, it requires very little belief (I'll just assume that the big bang occured, although obviously it's not certain, nothing is).

[Michael]

But in essence I think that all gods are attempts at answering Why-questions.
I agree with this very much - and I think Non Sequitur's reply above illustrates this very well.

If one accepts/believes that God exists (and God is good) then that answers every question of "why".

I guess I'm more of an agnost than an athiest, because I think that denying the existence of (a) god requires as much belief as "knowing" that he/she does exist.

Margaret Atwood (don't know if she was the first to do that as I'm not big on reading on the subject, but I read it in one of her interviews) once defined/described god as the singularity that existed before the big bang. And that therefore everything is made of god. With that definition, I think that I can accept the existence of such a god. But obviously, it requires very little belief (I'll just assume that the big bang occured, although obviously it's not certain, nothing is).
I've always considered this to be the generic "deist" position.

[Helene]

I agree with this very much - and I think Non Sequitur's reply above illustrates this very well.

If one accepts/believes that God exists (and God is good) then that answers every question of "why".

It's good to know that eventhough I am not too knowledgeable on the subject, I've got someone with as much philosophical knowledge as you have on my side :D.


I've always considered this to be the generic "deist" position.

I suppose Margaret Atwood is a deist, then? I'll stick with agnosticism for myself. I mostly consider the question of god's existence to be irrelevant, as during our lifetimes we'll never actually be able to answer it.

[Non Sequitur]

For me the word god brings up a question rather than answers. Which god are you referring to?


Well I'm speaking from the Christian perspective, but the answer would probably be much the same for big three monotheistic faiths because all hold that God is creator and that he is good.

[Multiplum]

To me, god(s) is a cheap answer.

We don't need gods anymore to explain the world around us. At least we're getting there. We're constantly filling in the gaps god(s) filled by default.

Other than that, god is quite handy if you want people to obey your wishes, as long as you can convince them that he/she/they are on your side.

I find the idea of a god with a will and consciousness weird. We're just projecting our human characteristics to something that wouldn't compare to us at all. If there was some sort of supernatural entity, I don't think human beings would be any more related to it than a branch, a rock or a rabbit.

[Greendruid]

I'm a pagan (druid specifically) and I find the similarities and differences between one particular Christian answer offered by Non Sequitur and my own views quite interesting.

For me, the gods are anthropomorphisations of all those things in our human lives that we can never know with science and all of those things that are so big that we cannot presently replicate with science on any scale that is remotely similar. This includes all of those abstractions of human life - war, lust, death, rebirth, warmth, lightning, the sun, the moon, earth, song, dance, fire, water, wind, flight, journey, etc. These are things we struggle to grasp the immensity of and can generally only talk about by example or effect rather than directly describe.

I find Multiplum's comment that, should one exist, we would be no closer to some supernatural entity than we are to a branch or a rock or a rabbit to be the polar opposite of my understanding/perspective of my existence. I feel and believe in my closeness to all of those things because we all come from the same stardust that created this planet in the first place.

For me then, god also an answer to those things I can't explain with science or even ask scientific questions about, those things that inspire awe in me and those things that exemplify the human experience. We turn them into human-shaped things, I believe, so that we have a way of explaining them to our children that is familiar, real and sometimes comforting to them.

[Multiplum]

I find Multiplum's comment that, should one exist, we would be no closer to some supernatural entity than we are to a branch or a rock or a rabbit to be the polar opposite of my understanding/perspective of my existence. I feel and believe in my closeness to all of those things because we all come from the same stardust that created this planet in the first place.

Other way around! What I was thinking is that the supernatural entity would hold no special place for us. I don't see man as "chosen" in any way.

[Greendruid]

Ah, gotcha. I misread your posting. I understood it to mean that we would be no closer to a branch, rock or rabbit than we would be to a supernatural entity. You meant that we'd be no closer to a supernatural entity than would be a branch, rock or rabbit. Got it - we agree.

[The Drunk Guy]

To me, god(s) is a cheap answer.

We don't need gods anymore to explain the world around us. At least we're getting there. We're constantly filling in the gaps god(s) filled by default.

Other than that, god is quite handy if you want people to obey your wishes, as long as you can convince them that he/she/they are on your side.

I find the idea of a god with a will and consciousness weird. We're just projecting our human characteristics to something that wouldn't compare to us at all. If there was some sort of supernatural entity, I don't think human beings would be any more related to it than a branch, a rock or a rabbit.You get a beer, pal.

As for the references to deism, I can attest that I was once a deist. I believed strongly in God As The Universe based on my take on quantum theory. However, I have read further arguments against those theories and have chose to leave God out of my belief.

I have went through many transitions to get to where I am today and I think the biggest reason I have struggled with religion is that I fear absolute death. The thoughts of just blinking out of existence is a bit terrifying for someone with thoughts of grandeur such as myself. I feel like Alexander the Great; my achievements will ensure my eternal existence.

[Michael]

I have went through many transitions to get to where I am today and I think the biggest reason I have struggled with religion is that I fear absolute death. The thoughts of just blinking out of existence is a bit terrifying for someone with thoughts of grandeur such as myself. I feel like Alexander the Great; my achievements will ensure my eternal existence.
Alexander is a mighty high standard to hold to. But he too sought immortality - and unlike so many, actually achieved it.

There does seem to be a strong "make my mark" element to humans - of which the passion for an immortal soul is very strong. Breeding children, or writing books, or great deeds are 'mundane' manifestations of the same element. Or rather, the 'faith' in an immortal soul speaks to the same impetus that drives us to breed, or write books or to make great deeds that will live on beyond our meagre mortal lives.

[Multiplum]

The idea of no ultimate consequence is something I quite like. No god, no afterlife, the knowledge that mankind's time is limited... is nice.

No pressure, you know. When I die, I become as significant as I was before I was born. From nothing to nothing, my conscience is a momentary thing.

[Korimyr the Rat]

I would like to revisit my earlier reply to this post.

When people say "god", they seem to mean one of two things-- an anthropomorphic deity of the kind my post referred to, the kind present in the folklore of most tribes, and the immeasurable source of all light and life in the universe. Most folk, especially those of the Abrahamic persuasion, do not draw a distinction between the two concepts of "god", because their faith does not hold them as distinct.

I believe in both concepts, with the anthropomorphic deities being both real individuals and part of the all-encompassing life force-- must like we ourselves are both individuals and part of the whole. They are not too much unlike us, in my belief-- and we are not so much unlike them that we cannot aspire to become them.

If the source of all energy can be said to have any purpose, I believe that is it-- for its constituent parts to grow and develop, to form stronger and more stable structures under the pressure to survive and perpetuate ourselves.

[Michael]

In reply to the thread question (and in possible danger of derailing this thread), I'll offer my own view on the issue.

Really quite simple - God means absolutely nothing to me.

The closest I can come to a quasi-religious viewpoint is to imagine that our solar system is but a single atom that makes up a molecule of dust caught between the toes of some exponentially larger dimension. In this respect, God would be the giant. He would be the 'source of all energy' from our limited (and microscopic) perspective. :)