People say gods with humanistic traits are man-made, I disagree

[Rainbow Mage]

Why must they be man-made? How isn't the idea of an all-powerful, all-knowing, transcendent God much more man-made then a divine being that just exists on a higher plane and has limitations like we do?

I honestly think the transcendent God is more likely to be man-made, because that's just the kind of god a human being would want. They wouldn't want a god that can't do certain things, or can't give them all the answers, or can fail.

 

[Madhuri]

God is not covered by ignorance. If a human acts immaturely, selfishly, cruelly, it is because he has ignorance. This is the idea in Hinduism. When man reaches enlightenment, then he no longer will exhibit such negative traits. As God has complete knowledge, there is no room to be anything but loving.

And also, you are talking about a god that exists distinctly from all of existence. Like you and me. Pieces of the whole.
I never think of God as one piece of the whole. God is the source of everything in existence. God is Time, God is Space. How can this Being fail at anything? Honestly. How would that be possible?
This is much different from a god like Poseidon or Neptune or Osiris who are individual beings with unique characteristics and personalities. They are not the Whole. They are pieces of the puzzle. In their finite nature, of course they can fail, of course they can have faults.

That's why God and god are different.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

I agree with you, except that I don't think I'd call the whole God. I have never received interaction from this thing, it's just something that is.

The Gnostics called it true father to differentiate from Jehovah. They also said the other gods were it's members, so it cannot be jealous. They claim Jesus eminated from this source and was born into flesh. I am not sure how much I agree with the last part.

 

[Engyo]

So, you contend that man did NOT create God in his image?

 

[Onkara]

Yes, it seems illogical that God could be wounded or appear to be defeated. I had to deal with this issue whilst reading the Hindu Srimad Bhagavatam where Vishnu fights for hours and is actually struck whilst fighting Hiranyaksha (overview here). I had to explain these events to myself as the Lord's play, it being only of appearance in nature but not real because Vishnu would not be defeated by His very definition as the supreme being, so why fight unless it is to communicate a message in some way.

It is easier for us to understand God as invisible and intangible. This is another reason why Abraham acted out against "icons worship" because for him it may have limited the people's understanding of God or may have appeared to have limited people's understanding in his eyes? (Actually did God tell him to smash them?)

 

[Jacksnyte]

I agree with you, except that I don't think I'd call the whole God. I have never received interaction from this thing, it's just something that is.

The Gnostics called it true father to differentiate from Jehovah. They also said the other gods were it's members, so it cannot be jealous. They claim Jesus eminated from this source and was born into flesh. I am not sure how much I agree with the last part.

Netjer is the ALL, the Names ar distinct facets of the ALL. Netjer is the distant, nearly unknowable Source. The Names are the ways in which we approach Netjer. (this is the Kemetic Orthodox take on the subject of God/gods).

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Netjer is the ALL, the Names ar distinct facets of the ALL. Netjer is the distant, nearly unknowable Source. The Names are the ways in which we approach Netjer. (this is the Kemetic Orthodox take on the subject of God/gods).

Yeah right I know, but I interact with the names is what I mean. I have my way of approaching Netjer as the whole, as opposed to the names.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

So, you contend that man did NOT create God in his image?

Why would I do that? I said I actually have had experiences with my gods. That means they're real.

 

[Tree)O(Life]

Scientifically our behaviour has evolved with makind and has developed from basic survival instinct which I would like to add is perfectly compatable with Pagan and Wiccan beliefs. Wicca believes that nature is God and though it has specific deitys that are one with the world and the universe they didnt create mankind just exist alongside mankind theoretically. There may be referance that woman and man are the seed of the Goddess' but it fits nicely with evolution. Its wise to remember some pagan religions believe that mankind was spurned from Aliens travelling here from maybe even our own galaxy im not certain of the specifics but it is a fact, Aborigioni for example.
See for a Wiccan the gods and goddess' are another lifeform that live within nature along with us that have a greater power they are greater beings and do not ask or deserve to be worshipped but those who wish to be coincided with them take the path of Wicca. Some would claim they have ultimate power over our and life on Earths survival but more adept Wicca would consider this view.

 

[Madhuri]

I agree with you, except that I don't think I'd call the whole God. I have never received interaction from this thing, it's just something that is.

But according to my religion, that Whole is the transcendent God. So to answer the OP, no it cannot be defeated, it has no limitations, whereas a god can and does. However, it is not to say that a god is man-made. Gods could exist, but they are something more similar to us than the Supreme.

 

[Madhuri]

I agree with you, except that I don't think I'd call the whole God. I have never received interaction from this thing, it's just something that is.

So what is 'God' to you, if not the Whole or Origin? (as opposed to 'god)

 

[Rainbow Mage]

I told you the whole or origin could be called God, but I'm not sure it's useful to do so, because it seems impersonal to me. You could call it the ocean, the mountains, the cosmos, the trees, they'd all be just as accurate.