Why do so many of us allow others to define "God" for us?

[PureX]

... Especially when we won't accept their definitions as valid, or their assertions of God's existential reality?

This makes no sense to me. First, that we routinely allow other people to tell us what "God" is (if God exists) and second, to tell us how our believing in or not believing in their idea of God will effect our lives. That we allow other people to define existence and reality for us, like this, and then judge us by it, is truly mind-boggling.

Are we really THIS LAZY??? So lazy that we can't be bothered to contemplate and develop for ourselves a reasonable idea of what the nature and existence of "God" might be if such an entity/phenomena exists? Or, even more importantly, are we too lazy to consider how our own lives might be improved if we were to choose to trust in and act on our best and most positive conceptualization of "God", even if we can't know such a God is 'real'? And if we are really this lazy, why do so many of us expend so much time and energy negating the god-concepts of others, presuming that having done so, we have negated the idea of God all together?

Are our egos so weak and in need of shoring up that we can't trust ourselves to develop our own god-concept, and then have to expend so much energy disparaging everyone else's?

 

[Jumi]

This makes no sense to me. First, that we routinely allow other people to tell us what "God" is (if God exists) and second, to tell us how our believing in or not believing in their idea of God will effect our lives. That we allow other people to define existence and reality for us, like this, and then judge us by it, is truly mind-boggling.

Indeed it's best to ignore those who want to define our meanings to suit their agendas. There's no reason to join the borg willingly.

 

[Shushersbedamned]

Do you propose we stop people from doing that;?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

... Especially when we won't accept their definitions as valid, or their assertions of God's existential reality?

This makes no sense to me. First, that we routinely allow other people to tell us what "God" is (if God exists) and second, to tell us how our believing in or not believing in their idea of God will effect our lives. That we allow other people to define existence and reality for us, like this, and then judge us by it, is truly mind-boggling.

Are we really THIS LAZY??? So lazy that we can't be bothered to contemplate and develop for ourselves a reasonable idea of what the nature and existence of "God" might be if such an entity/phenomena exists? Or, even more importantly, are we too lazy to consider how our own lives might be improved if we were to choose to trust in and act on our best and most positive conceptualization of "God", even if we can't know such a God is 'real'? And if we are really this lazy, why do so many of us expend so much time and energy negating the god-concepts of others, presuming that having done so, we have negated the idea of God all together?

Are our egos so weak and in need of shoring up that we can't trust ourselves to develop our own god-concept, and then have to expend so much energy disparaging everyone else's?

Because a lot of people who do define god, do so based on their former experiences. They saw god as with the same definition as others as a whole. As such, understanding who god is and why they still define god regardless their present belief or morals lifestyle is appropriate.

Those of us who have not believed in god nor raised in a environment that does, Id say can have our own view without stepping on others definitions of god (which there are sooo many).

No ones the victim.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

If you said a specific god: Jehovah, Vishnu, Zues, Yemaya, however defined as god etc, I can see your point.

Defining god is not the same as defining, I dont know, the holy or spirit spirit, Vishnu unless one is familar with jehovah or brahma to properly use god in its context of either said religion.

 

[Koldo]

... Especially when we won't accept their definitions as valid, or their assertions of God's existential reality?

This makes no sense to me. First, that we routinely allow other people to tell us what "God" is (if God exists) and second, to tell us how our believing in or not believing in their idea of God will effect our lives. That we allow other people to define existence and reality for us, like this, and then judge us by it, is truly mind-boggling.

Are we really THIS LAZY??? So lazy that we can't be bothered to contemplate and develop for ourselves a reasonable idea of what the nature and existence of "God" might be if such an entity/phenomena exists? Or, even more importantly, are we too lazy to consider how our own lives might be improved if we were to choose to trust in and act on our best and most positive conceptualization of "God", even if we can't know such a God is 'real'? And if we are really this lazy, why do so many of us expend so much time and energy negating the god-concepts of others, presuming that having done so, we have negated the idea of God all together?

Are our egos so weak and in need of shoring up that we can't trust ourselves to develop our own god-concept, and then have to expend so much energy disparaging everyone else's?

Why do we allow others to tell us what ANY term means ?

Welcome to Language 101.

 

[exchemist]

... Especially when we won't accept their definitions as valid, or their assertions of God's existential reality?

This makes no sense to me. First, that we routinely allow other people to tell us what "God" is (if God exists) and second, to tell us how our believing in or not believing in their idea of God will effect our lives. That we allow other people to define existence and reality for us, like this, and then judge us by it, is truly mind-boggling.

Are we really THIS LAZY??? So lazy that we can't be bothered to contemplate and develop for ourselves a reasonable idea of what the nature and existence of "God" might be if such an entity/phenomena exists? Or, even more importantly, are we too lazy to consider how our own lives might be improved if we were to choose to trust in and act on our best and most positive conceptualization of "God", even if we can't know such a God is 'real'? And if we are really this lazy, why do so many of us expend so much time and energy negating the god-concepts of others, presuming that having done so, we have negated the idea of God all together?

Are our egos so weak and in need of shoring up that we can't trust ourselves to develop our own god-concept, and then have to expend so much energy disparaging everyone else's?

Most of us just get on with our lives, frankly. One valuable function of organised religion is to give us a structure to our week so that we make time to contemplate God and our place in the world etc. So it's hardly surprising that many of us allow those who spend all their time thinking about it to offer us ideas about God and how to live our lives.

I suspect most of us listen and then make up our own minds about what we are willing to accept, however.

 

[74x12]

... Especially when we won't accept their definitions as valid, or their assertions of God's existential reality?

This makes no sense to me. First, that we routinely allow other people to tell us what "God" is (if God exists) and second, to tell us how our believing in or not believing in their idea of God will effect our lives. That we allow other people to define existence and reality for us, like this, and then judge us by it, is truly mind-boggling.

Are we really THIS LAZY??? So lazy that we can't be bothered to contemplate and develop for ourselves a reasonable idea of what the nature and existence of "God" might be if such an entity/phenomena exists? Or, even more importantly, are we too lazy to consider how our own lives might be improved if we were to choose to trust in and act on our best and most positive conceptualization of "God", even if we can't know such a God is 'real'? And if we are really this lazy, why do so many of us expend so much time and energy negating the god-concepts of others, presuming that having done so, we have negated the idea of God all together?

Are our egos so weak and in need of shoring up that we can't trust ourselves to develop our own god-concept, and then have to expend so much energy disparaging everyone else's?

It's not as if we can create God. You must seek God and see for yourself what He reveals about Himself to you. If God is real then He can show you. That is the way to know God and not to rely on your fellow humans to tell you what God is and isn't. If you find God then you can know the truth of what they say. You will know when someone tells you the truth about God or if they are wrong. Because you will personally know God and so God Himself will be your teacher and not anyone else.

 

[BSM1]

Everyone has to find their own truth.

 

[PureX]

Do you propose we stop people from doing that;?

I certainly won't allow others to tell me what God is, or how I should behave in relation to it. Do you? But nor do I tell other people what God is or how they should behave in relation to it. I have my own ideas, developed over a long time and a lot of consideration that informs how I think and behave as a human. And I don't understand why we all don't just do this for ourselves.

 

[PureX]

Because a lot of people who do define god, do so based on their former experiences.

I don't see why this definition should then be applied to others, though. As we do not all share the same experiences. Nor do we interpret the experiences that we do share the same way.

They saw god as with the same definition as others as a whole. As such, understanding who god is and why they still define god regardless their present belief or morals lifestyle is appropriate.

I don't believe that anyone experiences God the same way, even when they agree on a definition of God.

When I see 'blue', and you see 'blue', and we both agree that we see blue, what we actually experience in our eyes and our brains is not the same thing. We've just learned to label these different experiences with the same label.

No ones the victim.

Everyone is the victim of their own ignorance and neglect.

 

[PureX]

Why do we allow others to tell us what ANY term means ?

We don't. We allow them to tell us what the terms they use mean to them. Or we assume that we already know what they mean to them, when we don't, really. But there is a reason that there are so many different definitions or any given word. And that's because the meanings of the words we use are so inexact.

 

[PureX]

I suspect most of us listen and then make up our own minds about what we are willing to accept, however.

That's not really the same thing, however. Passing judgment on other people's idea of God is not the same thing as developing our own ideas about what God could be, and how such a God might be of value to us in our lives.

 

[Shushersbedamned]

I certainly won't allow others to tell me what God is, or how I should behave in relation to it. Do you? But nor do I tell other people what God is or how they should behave in relation to it. I have my own ideas, developed over a long time and a lot of consideration that informs how I think and behave as a human. And I don't understand why we all don't just do this for ourselves.

I cannot tell others what to do.

 

[exchemist]

That's not really the same thing, however. Passing judgment on other people's idea of God is not the same thing as developing our own ideas about what God could be, and how such a God might be of value to us in our lives.

Of course not, I quite agree. I'm simply pointing out that most people do not think about such things enough to develop their own ideas ab initio. And I, personally, would not stigmatise them as "lazy" for not doing so.

 

[PureX]

It's not as if we can create God. You must seek God and see for yourself what He reveals about Himself to you.

That's all very mysterious and poetic, but I'm not talking about creating God, I'm talking about creating conception of "God" that we think could be possible, and then asking ourselves if trusting that this concept of God is true, and acting accordingly, will improve the quality of our experience of life, and of those we interact with. This isn't really about God, because the nature and existence of God is and will remain a mystery to us. What I'm talking about is the conception of God that we humans create and hold in our minds.

If God is real then He can show you.

Not even God can "show me" something that I cannot see.

If I don't know what an elephant is, you could show me a picture of an elephant and call it an elephant and I wouldn't be able to recognize the difference. This is what happens when one person tells another person what "God" is and the other person does not consider for themselves how an elephant might, would or should really exist.

 

[PureX]

Of course not, I quite agree. I'm simply pointing out that most people do not think about such things enough to develop their own ideas ab initio. And I, personally, would not stigmatise them as "lazy" for not doing so.

Why not? It seems to me to be a primary function/purpose of humanity to contemplate such mysteries. It's what sets us apart from the other life forms.

 

[Subduction Zone]

... Especially when we won't accept their definitions as valid, or their assertions of God's existential reality?

This makes no sense to me. First, that we routinely allow other people to tell us what "God" is (if God exists) and second, to tell us how our believing in or not believing in their idea of God will effect our lives. That we allow other people to define existence and reality for us, like this, and then judge us by it, is truly mind-boggling.

Are we really THIS LAZY??? So lazy that we can't be bothered to contemplate and develop for ourselves a reasonable idea of what the nature and existence of "God" might be if such an entity/phenomena exists? Or, even more importantly, are we too lazy to consider how our own lives might be improved if we were to choose to trust in and act on our best and most positive conceptualization of "God", even if we can't know such a God is 'real'? And if we are really this lazy, why do so many of us expend so much time and energy negating the god-concepts of others, presuming that having done so, we have negated the idea of God all together?

Are our egos so weak and in need of shoring up that we can't trust ourselves to develop our own god-concept, and then have to expend so much energy disparaging everyone else's?

Perhaps because so many theists are afraid to define what they mean by the word. When theists won't define what they mean then they open up the floodgates for others to define what god is.

Strangely enough the tables are turned in a cattywumpus manner by theists when they try to define "atheism". Even though atheism is well defined by atheists theists often seem bound and determined to define what one is for themsleves.

And another point is that sometimes theists are sloppy in their definitions of "god". That also allows others to refine the definition.

To sum up, make a coherent definition of "god" and the problem is likely to go away.

 

[YmirGF]

... Especially when we won't accept their definitions as valid, or their assertions of God's existential reality?

This makes no sense to me. First, that we routinely allow other people to tell us what "God" is (if God exists) and second, to tell us how our believing in or not believing in their idea of God will effect our lives. That we allow other people to define existence and reality for us, like this, and then judge us by it, is truly mind-boggling.

Are we really THIS LAZY??? So lazy that we can't be bothered to contemplate and develop for ourselves a reasonable idea of what the nature and existence of "God" might be if such an entity/phenomena exists? Or, even more importantly, are we too lazy to consider how our own lives might be improved if we were to choose to trust in and act on our best and most positive conceptualization of "God", even if we can't know such a God is 'real'? And if we are really this lazy, why do so many of us expend so much time and energy negating the god-concepts of others, presuming that having done so, we have negated the idea of God all together?

Are our egos so weak and in need of shoring up that we can't trust ourselves to develop our own god-concept, and then have to expend so much energy disparaging everyone else's?

Why would you care how others define the god you imagine?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I don't see why this definition should then be applied to others, though. As we do not all share the same experiences. Nor do we interpret the experiences that we do share the same way.

Thats why god as so many definitions just alone by the people who believe in him, her, or it. I can see why it strikes a personal chord. If it were a specific god, it would make more sense. If someone said human being is described diffierently to different people, thats fine. If they said my name is described differently and its a personal name, thats when Id be annoyed. Not all people personalize the word god (even believers dont) when a more specific name could be used.

Believers define god in so many ways that its hard to tell whats the right god. Being a believer shouldnt change the definition anymore than one who doesnt like math anymore changes the way math works and is taught by those who like math. One owns math regardless the definitions.

If anything, the reason the definitions are messed up is because believers cant define it for themselves.

I don't believe that anyone experiences God the same way, even when they agree on a definition of God

No. Not really. People on RF are real people too and you can see the definitions they have of god and in this, they all say they are christian. Bahai, judaism, Muslim, Christian (the non-trinitarian of sorts) all have different views of god based on gods dictations and prophets.

The word god is such a misplaced word that the only people I can think of to own it is the Greeks and Romans.

When I see 'blue', and you see 'blue', and we both agree that we see blue, what we actually experience in our eyes and our brains is not the same thing. We've just learned to label these different experiences with the same label.

Thats external. Having brain issues, my blue and your blue can be completely different. Even two healthy people dont see exactly the same. We use language to communicate fluently but colors, abstract words like love, and sounds are so vastly different that vague term I just mentioned needs to be more specific: Aqua blue, marrital love, and saprano compared to alto. But even then, these words are blurred.

Everyone is the victim of their own ignorance and neglect.

Everyone.

True. No one is excluded. As with the word god, its not owned by any religion nor culture. If it were owned by someone, it would probably be the Pagans.