Each god is described in a different way by his (or it's or whatever) followers. In some ways it's small enough that it doesn't matter. But in some ways it's large enough that one definition of god excludes another.
On the crazy, off chance that a god exists, don't you think he'd be confused at the definitions that don't apply to him? Don't you think he'd wonder how a group of people who claim he has properties that he disdains, worship him in a way that he never intended, and do things that he considers wrong "in his name" could possibly be considered his followers?
I'm not talking about one religion over another. I'm just saying that when definitions exclude each other, the only option is that either there are different gods, or that there is only one and the others do NOT exist. Either way, a being cannot have properties that COMPLETELY negate or exclude each other.
Posts: 6367 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Each god is described in a different way by his (or it's or whatever) followers. In some ways it's small enough that it doesn't matter. But in some ways it's large enough that one definition of god excludes another.
Don't make me quote the old "four blind men describe an elephant" story. Or maybe I should. You all remember this, right? Each one has access to only a small part of the giant critter and each describe it as they 'feel' it. If we are indeed talking about something that is "infinite" or even just really huge, one can clearly see that God can be viewed differently in different cultures and still potentially be the same being of unknown origin.
Even Christians, who have one of the more blander versions of the supreme being (sorry, but upset old guy who keeps saying "keep off my lawn!" just isn't as rich or mythical as other pantheons) can't agree on how god is perceived. Aren't we talking hundreds if not thousands of demonimations which at some level must disagree on the whole "what is God and what does S/He want me to do?" question. I think there is a LOT of room for multiple interpretations and yet, the same being.
posted
I think it CAN matter what you call God, if you are using a descriptive associated with that name that is against your particular religion.
For instance, the use of Zues is offensive to most Christians as it is a pagan name, usually associated with a pantheon that many Christians have rejected. Although I have heard the statement that Allah is simply another name for God in a different language, that is not always the case. For an English speaker to call God Allah is offensive to many Christians who have rejected Mahhamad(?) as prophet and Islam as the true religion. The association of the name is too deep to simply use it as one of many label-names. In the reverse, if a person is to call God Christ rather than Allah, Muslims would be offended as it would imply a seperate divine salvational individual from Allah. Lets not forget how horrified Jews would be if someone called God Jesus as almost all Christians do.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The thing is, Zeus is not the equivalent of the Judeo-Christian God (or the Muslim one, either). Zeus is a created being, so it's not even parallel.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Duh. I'm not saying they can or can't call anyone anything. I'm saying when they talk about Zeus, they are not talking about the same entity as I am when I talk about God. And when I talk about God, I'm not talking about the same entity as they are when they talk about Zeus.
posted
But fil, in the blind-men-and-the-elephant parable, all the blind men are wrong. In fact, even the combination of all their perceptions is wrong.
What if, to extend the analogy, you believe that people all have varying degrees of blindness, from complete to very slight. Then some perceptions of the elephant will be entirely off-base, and some very close to accurate.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:The thing is, Zeus is not the equivalent of the Judeo-Christian God (or the Muslim one, either). Zeus is a created being, so it's not even parallel.
How so? Stepping outside the religious box leaves me with the same impression of both. I am outside of your religious beliefs and the Ancient Greek's religious beliefs. Both the Christian God and the Greek Zeus are equally "created beings" and their creators are obviously humans. From that perspective, they are similar. The whole "worship" thing is similar too...though Christians pray to God for all things and the Greeks might have spread their prayers over a pantheon, to presumably the same effect. From a storytelling point of view there are similarities, too (though I will hope a scholar of this stuff will wander by to make better points of this). I think the Jesus story verges away from this, but the whole "godstuff" history with rebellion of angels, lashing out against earth, and so on smacks of the same sorts of stories that other religions created to explain nasty events...why do bad things (floods, tornado, famine, disease) happen to good people? Well, they must not be all that good...and the story rolls along...
posted
Yes, you are outside the religious box, so of course you don't care what God is called. But can you truly not understand why religiously minded folks might prefer one term over another?
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:But fil, in the blind-men-and-the-elephant parable, all the blind men are wrong. In fact, even the combination of all their perceptions is wrong.
This is the most relevant thing said in this thread, I think. In my opinion, anyway. I think this parable TOTALLY applies to the divine and spiritual. I don't think there is any group that has the answer...we are a bunch of completely blind beings grasping at tails and legs and never grasping the full picture. To take this story along a bit more, the state of the world today has the blind men not only arguing, but beating each other senseless about their perceptions when in the end, they are probably entirely wrong.
I think the bigger point is, reach out and make up your own mind what you are holding on to at that moment.
quote:I am outside of your religious beliefs and the Ancient Greek's religious beliefs. Both the Christian God and the Greek Zeus are equally "created beings" and their creators are obviously humans.
So in your mind the question is really, "Does it matter if we call Gandalf Dumbledore?"
Since your talking about a different question than me, I guess the discussion is pointless.
posted
I am outside of your religious beliefs and the Ancient Greek's religious beliefs.
Therefore, for you this whole discussion is meaningless. Call God whatever you want, or nothing at all. However, some people ARE in particular religious beliefs and therefore names DO mean things. It doesn't matter how similar the things may or may not be -- Jesus Christ is NOT ever going to be a Jewish name for God.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Duh. I'm not saying they can or can't call anyone anything. I'm saying when they talk about Zeus, they are not talking about the same entity as I am when I talk about God.
Why not? Did God only decide to talk to His creations at one particular time and one particular way? I suppose according to Judeo-Christian teachings, that is exactly the case. But that is limiting, not expansive. Not nearly the immense being that I imagine the divine to inhabit.
posted
Oh well. You can believe what you want. However, don't assume others should see it a different way because your way is so much more expansive. It smacks of "my God is bigger than your God" that you seem to at least imply shouldn't be going on.
posted
Hey, I didn't start this thread. Just participated in it. For you, it is obvious that the hypothesis of this thread "Does it matter what you call 'God'?" would be yes! For me, no.
I wasn't trying to be snarky...I am as outside of the Christian and Greek relgions as most of you are outside of Greek or my belief system. Is this thread only for Judeo-Christians? In that case, maybe I made a mistake posting here. It should have said "Does it matter what Christian's call 'God'" in which case, the answer would be "maybe" at best.
As an ex-Catholic, I never heard Jesus and God being the same thing. One is definitely separate from the other. In other Christian denominations, that isn't the case and Jesus and God are one and the same.
quote:Why not? Did God only decide to talk to His creations at one particular time and one particular way? I suppose according to Judeo-Christian teachings, that is exactly the case. But that is limiting, not expansive. Not nearly the immense being that I imagine the divine to inhabit.
Because Zeus is a created being who did not make the Universe, and God is not. They're entirely different entities, as different from each other as God is from us.
That's the point of the monotheistic religions, and was a marked break from the surrounding religions.
posted
I personally don't think Zeus ever "revealed" himself to anyone. I think they are stories, though perhaps in their ancient beginings based on actual interactions between God and man. I realize others look at my believed deity as being just a story. But I honestly believe that what Zeus is told to be is not very much like what God actually is. So if that is what I believe, why would *I* call God Zeus? It doesn't make sense.
Out of curiosity, does anyone believe in Zeus anymore? The Greeks?
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
But you have been *repeatedly* asking these Judeo-Christian posters why they believe as they do as though to to say you think it is silly and ridiculous. That seems snarky to me.
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:As an ex-Catholic, I never heard Jesus and God being the same thing. One is definitely separate from the other. In other Christian denominations, that isn't the case and Jesus and God are one and the same.
Then you weren't paying attention. From the Nicene Creed:
quote:We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father.
It's said at about half the masses each year.
And no one said you couldn't post. But when people who are part of the faiths you are asking about tell you that it does matter and give the reasons for it, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to just say, "It only matters because they're all fake."
quote:Yes, you are outside the religious box, so of course you don't care what God is called. But can you truly not understand why religiously minded folks might prefer one term over another?
Well, I should have caught and editted it a bit...I should have said "outside of SPECIFIC religious boxes, namely Judeo-Christian and the Greek Pantheon" but I did not.
I can understand why some religiously minded folks might prefer one term over another but again, if this is a primarily Judeo-Christian forum (duh) then it IS kind of a moot question...unless you are okay with pagans, heathens, and (gasp) Unitarian-Universalists mucking up the discussion with ideas that God (to me and others) is bigger than any one religion's labels.
Which brings me back to the point...It doesn't matter what YOU call God (you call him Jesus and that is important to you whereas another YOU (like Nicolas who calls his God Zeus) but it does matter what OTHER people call God.
quote: Which brings me back to the point...It doesn't matter what YOU call God (you call him Jesus and that is important to you whereas another YOU (like Nicolas who calls his God Zeus) but it does matter what OTHER people call God.
Yeah, I remember you stating that. I didn't understand what you meant then, and I still don't understand what you are saying. I must be slow.
I'm not sure why you have interpreted hostile reactions here as hostile against your beliefs. I for one respect how you view God. But I am annoyed at the way you question other's views as though you don't understand them when I think you do. It is as though you want to grapple people over to your view of God. I don't like that.
I think we understand what you have explained about your beliefs, and I think you understand what others have explained here. What you are trying to do beyond that feels suspect.
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:It doesn't matter what YOU call God (you call him Jesus and that is important to you whereas another YOU (like Nicolas who calls his God Zeus) but it does matter what OTHER people call God.
You're still missing the point. The greeks believed in gods, plural. Beings all of the same type, although some were much more powerful than others. A Greek worshipper presumably wouldn't think that their gods were the same as a non-corporeal being that created everything.
If you prefer, the platonic ideal referred to by Greeks worshipping Zeus is a different platonic ideal referred to by Christians worshipping God.
It seems like you're really asking if all religions have dieties that correspond to the monotheistic concept of God; the answer is no.
Dagonee Edit: In other words, as I said before, they can call anyone Zeus they want to.
posted
Actually, you might be surprised how open some Christians can be (Universalists for instance) toward concepts to the point of this not a moot point. For instance, bet you didn't know that half those who say "it didn't matter" are actually part of that exclusive group of Judeo-Christians?
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is only snarky because I am the heathen among the enlightened. OBVIOUSLY I am completely wrong and God of the Old and New Testement is exactly as depicted there...to you. Doesn't anyone else see the irony in this? People can sit there and say that a whole other religous belief is just a bunch of stories and it is okay...until it gets to YOUR religious beliefs. Then it is personal. I love all religious beliefs and feel that if people live a positive life that is rewarding to them, their family and their community, by golly that is a good thing. And if you call god "dude" or "santa" or "Lord Almighty" that is cool as it doesn't matter (to me) what YOU call God.
posted
Fil, none of us has questioned your beliefs or told you we think you are wrong. You have done both.
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
fil: the point isn't that you disbelieve our beliefs - most of us having this discussion with you believe mutually exclusive things about God.
The point is you are simply stating the same thing over and over again, and insisting on trying to fit all religions into a monotheistic mold when they just don't fit into it.
In other words, you are misstating both what we believe and what the Zeus-worshippers believe.
And it may surprise you to know that I don't consider Zeus to be just stories.
posted
OBVIOUSLY I am completely wrong to bring my ideas about God to the surface. I should just reject everything I know and succumb to your superior indifference.
In case your wondering, none of us have argued you are wrong. What we have argued is that not everyone sees things, or wants to see things, the way you do. It is you, and not us, that is arguing the "your ignorant" card.
To Dagonee: I wasn't talking to you, although the post came right after yours. sorry.
posted
I wondered to myself aloud if anyone these days believed in Zeus, you implied that you think there is more there than just a story. I am ignorant on the subject.
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Fil, none of us has questioned your beliefs or told you we think you are wrong. You have done both.
bev, you are absolutely right. I am sorry. I am getting way to excited about this. Too much time I could be spending cleaning the house or something! Thanks for pointing it out.
I guess I am so sensitive to this because the whole concept of what people call "god" is at the center of so many major events right now. We have this Christian/Islam/Jewish war going on in the world. We have the whole separation of church and state thing going on in the US and I guess I am projecting my fears of how this all could end keeps me on edge.
I apologize. My point was never to question people's beliefs, only to point out that all beliefs are equally valid to others in the world...one person's Allah is another's Zeus and that should be an okay thing.
posted
Here is what is ironic for me: That in some cases what I am arguing about making a difference in the use of names, can be used against my religion getting included in a particular catagory. Therefore, I am not as high strung about this as might be supposed. Its just that the whole argument seemed to become way too one-sided. Not that I disagree with myself (I am not playing devils advocate), but that I can see where the "no-label" just doesn't work.
posted
Hmmm, I guess I can understand your frustration that people's religious beliefs have affected this war and have caused such suffering. If more people looked at deity as you do, things would be different. I know when I get deeply involved in a discussion it is often because there are concerns in my mind related to but outside of that discussion.
Thanks for explaining. Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
fil, I think the point people are trying to get across is that one person's Allah is NOT another person's Zeus, and to say that is actually (in this case) to project a western monotheistic religious view on a pagan religion. You're the one limiting what religion can be by making equivalencies that don't exist. It's as if you're saying, for a people to have a religion, they must have a God-allegory.
The irony is that Jews/Christians/Muslim have far more in common with each other than they do with the rest of the world.
If you're just trying to make the larger point that respect for others' religious beliefs would help make the world a nicer place, I doubt anyone here would argue with you. But part of that respect is realizing that the ancient Greeks are NOT the same except that they call God Zeus.
posted
Here is the question I was working from. At what point does a lack of name for God make you no longer part of a religious group? IF you say that you are not part of a religious group, than the question is probably not very important. On the other hand, if you do belong to a particular religious group, than what kind of names have associations that go against your religious beliefs or not?
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
oooooh..I can't shut up. But I won't say anything remotely snarky. I hope.
I guess I look at God in a certain way (and maybe it would help if I stray away from "religion" which is why even people who believe in the same god can still shoot each other, as Dag points out with the similarities between Islam/Judeo/Christianity). And by that I mean, I look at how other people look at God. Why do they look to God? Some for comfort. Some for guidance. Some for repentance. Some for forgiveness. Some for help. Some to simply worship. Some for...whatever. Many for all these and much more.
By this thinking, people look to their various gods for these things. One might pray to the Judeo-Christian god for good luck with the crops this year. Ancient Norse would pray to Thor (I think,the whole thunder thing) for the same thing. People go to church and pray to God to send their loved ones home from the war safely. Ancient Greeks might have prayed in the same way for the same thing to Mars.
This is why for me it doesn't matter what people call God...just that they get the same thing out of it.
Does that make better sense? At least for where I am coming from in this discussion?
quote: It makes sense. But I see that as more limiting of religion, not less.
At least I made sense! I would also agree that religion can limit God, but I don't want to talk religion, just God (if that is humanely possible). I think as a rule religions limit what God is or what God can be by the very rules that separate one religion from the other.
posted
...and to continue that thought, it goes great with Occ's point.
quote:what kind of names have associations that go against your religious beliefs or not?
This is where people choose their religions, I guess. Do people switch religions or churches because their view of God is different from the the church they are attending?
posted
Do people switch religions or churches because their view of God is different from the the church they are attending?
Happens all the time, every day. In fact, many become agnostic because of that.
By the way Dagonee, can you explain your concept more. I don't think you meant what it sounds like you said, although I could be wrong.
Posts: 2207 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Je(h)ova, and Elo(h)im. The former being used in situation where god is merciful, and the latter in cases where he is seen as a judicious.
Actually, in a few cases the two appear to be used interchangeable. See , for instance, Moses' vision at the burning bush. Both YHWH and Elohim are invoked there in the same appearance.
For the record, YHWH (or Jehovah) is a proper name. Elohim is a title.
As in the case of "Jesus Christ" - Jesus is the proper name, Christ is the title.
Posts: 7600 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
I stand corrected.
