Defining “god”

Full disclosure: I am an atheist so I have not seen any argument for god as sufficient to “prove” the existence of what I would consider “god”.

The biggest problem I seem to run into when talking to other people about “god” is the inconsistent definition of this idea. I would like to put forth my definition about what a “god” has to be for me.

god: (n) a being which

  1. manifests in the physical world
  2. is omnipotent (all-powerful)
  3. is benevolent (good/just)
  4. is omniscient (all knowing
  5. requires acknowledgement
  6. grants life after death

What do you think of my “definition”? What needs to be changed for you? I will be doing a series defending my reasoning for this definition.

Advertisements
7 comments
  1. No matter what definition you have, you will find believers who disagree. So who cares? No evidence for a god, no matter what definition you use.

    • But to have a definition that a large number of people can agree on is a better starting point than an ambiguous term. It is my step one to show the lack of evidence of a god to people who believe.

      • Well, I’m afraid, theologians will have problems with 1 and wriggle around, claiming that god doesn’t manifest inside the world, but IS the ultimate existence and what else. *shrug*

        That’s a problem with Christianity: Even if you prove beyond any doubt that one interpretation is bullshit, two other Christians will jump around the corner and cry “Well, WE didn’t believe THAT nonsense anyway.”. Christianity is not a major religion. It’s a huge collection of minorities that claims to be the same thing.

      • If “god” does not manifest in reality, “he” cannot affect anything. If god does not have the ability to change anything in reality, he is not worth acknowledgement regardless of existence or non-existence.

      • Oh, I once was that naive. You will learn, that the ability of theologians to come up with stranger and stranger concepts is almost as infinite as human stupidity 🙂

      • 🙂 Well, I guess the nativity will be crushed eventually. Until then, I will continue to try.

  2. Ignostic Atheist said:

    I recently tried to do the same. I ultimately decided that it must be a multipart definition.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: