-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
A Simple Start
- Thread starter Earthling
- Start date
syo
Well-Known Member
To me, immortality is the factor.
A Vestigial Mote
Well-Known Member
Might in what, exactly? An adult gorilla is far stronger than any human could ever hope to be in the muscular department. Dolphins can out-swim us any day of the week... oh, and so can sharks, and catfish, and minnows, etc. The jaw strength of a crocodile is something no human could ever hope to possess. Are these creatures gods, in your estimation? You want to talk staying power? Look at trees. Some outlive humans by years numbering in the hundreds. And I'd like to see a human hold their place on the Earth in the middle of a hurricane as well as many trees can. Can plants be gods in your opinion?
When I was studying philosophy of religion in college (and let's get real, it was really philosophy of classical monotheism, not of religion more broadly) one of the traditional perspectives we learned about was the general "God is that which is fundamentally greater." Even as someone who doesn't hail from a monotheistic perspective, I can generally concur with the statement. I tend to view "Gods are that which a person deems worthy of worship" to be more neutral about it, but a major reason why something is deified in a culture is because it is fundamentally greater or beyond.
That said, I see this entire conundrum as pointing a finger at the uselessness of some of the labels we use when discussing theology. Sure, I know of no human who denies there are powers greater than themselves in the universe (and if there was, they would likely be considered mentally ill), but to wield that against non-theism or atheism is something I find misguided. It's more beneficial to expand our dialogues about what theism is - beyond the supernaturalistic stereotypes imposed by theologies that dominate Western culture - and then what it means in practice. Or even get rid of the theological vocabulary altogether. It isn't needed, and it's a turn-off for some folks.
exchemist
Veteran Member
Obviously not.
The might of the president of the Russian Federation is a lot greater than mine, but I don't regard Putin as a God.
This way of thinking used to be standard amongst human cultures back when polytheism was the norm. Various aspects of the "natural" world were honored as gods (or the equivalent thereof). Asking questions like this are a major reason why I settled on polytheism myself. It's not something that happens often, given we live in a culture that insists that gods must look like God.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
What does it mean by Greater?
Disagree about the superhuman definition.. A god determines fate. In the western traditions going all the way back to pre-ptolemaic religion this makes gods moral judges.
Sorry, no.
The Rock is not my God, for instance.
In practice (in reality) a god is anything or anyone that someone takes a fancy for calling a god.
Earthling
David Henson
Correct.
Don't you think that makes worship sort of... pointless?
Earthling
David Henson
Earthling
David Henson
Define worship.
WalterTrull
Godfella
Well, I guess I gotta' come up with another word. Sorta liked God. Rats.
That thing which defines some varieties of gods. Those which are useful for religions.
Edited to add: that came more flippant than I meant it to be, so let me explain.
Worship and god are both rather vague concepts, extremely so in the case of "god". But I assume that you mean to propose a meaningful concept of god in this thread, hence my question.
Last edited:
Earthling
David Henson
Yes, any of those things can be and probably are gods. The attribution is what you seem to be overlooking. There are no rules regarding what can or can't be a god. It's, as they say, in the eye of the beholder.
syo
Well-Known Member
I mean all gods are immortal
and that is why they are greater than us.
Earthling
David Henson
Then Putin isn't your god. But he could be. Your problem is that you are restricting the definition of the word god. Putin isn't Jehovah, or Shiva, or any other god. But he could be a god in the same manner, i.e., the common definition of the word God.
Jehovah is a God. God isn't a name, it's a title. Putin doesn't have to be Jehovah to be a God. He doesn't have to be supernatural, etc.