The difference between a god and God

[Questioner]

A "god" is a simplistic image of a mortal-like or andromorphic being, who naïve people assuming has a physical forum, like Zeus or one of the pagan gods, who was essentially just a powerful mortal or celebrity.

God is the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words.

 

[alang1216]

A "god" is a simplistic image of a mortal-like or andromorphic being, who naïve people assuming has a physical forum, like Zeus or one of the pagan gods, who was essentially just a powerful mortal or celebrity.

God is the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words.

How do you know? Do you have any source other than the Bible? If I told you I created the universe, would you believe me? Why not?

 

[Questioner]

A "god" is a simplistic image of a mortal-like or andromorphic being, who naïve people assuming has a physical forum, like Zeus or one of the pagan gods, who was essentially just a powerful mortal or celebrity.

God is the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words.

How do you know? Do you have any source other than the Bible?

Yes.

If I told you I created the universe, would you believe me? Why not?

Because you're more akin to a god, than to God.

 

[Likkmee]

Oh gawd............

 

[alang1216]

A "god" is a simplistic image of a mortal-like or andromorphic being, who naïve people assuming has a physical forum, like Zeus or one of the pagan gods, who was essentially just a powerful mortal or celebrity.

God is the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words.

How do you know? Do you have any source other than the Bible?

Yes.

Awesome, please share.

 

[ding]

A "god" is a simplistic image of a mortal-like or andromorphic being, who naïve people assuming has a physical forum, like Zeus or one of the pagan gods, who was essentially just a powerful mortal or celebrity.

God is the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words.

How do you know? Do you have any source other than the Bible? If I told you I created the universe, would you believe me? Why not?

Creation itself.

 

[bodecea]

A "god" is a simplistic image of a mortal-like or andromorphic being, who naïve people assuming has a physical forum, like Zeus or one of the pagan gods, who was essentially just a powerful mortal or celebrity.

God is the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words.

No, they are all gods. You are belittling other gods besides your own.

 

[anynameyouwish]

A "god" is a simplistic image of a mortal-like or andromorphic being, who naïve people assuming has a physical forum, like Zeus or one of the pagan gods, who was essentially just a powerful mortal or celebrity.

God is the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words.

you forgot to tell us who you want to eliminate

 

[Questioner]

A "god" is a simplistic image of a mortal-like or andromorphic being, who naïve people assuming has a physical forum, like Zeus or one of the pagan gods, who was essentially just a powerful mortal or celebrity.

God is the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words.

How do you know? Do you have any source other than the Bible?

Yes.

Awesome, please share.

History, the church, the writings of authors, theologians, law and so forth which go beyond merely what is contained in the Bible, or those who decided what to be included in the Bible to begin with, or even the authors of the books of the Bible themselves and their own thoughts; the Bible not having existed or been written "in a vacuum" to begin with, as is so often erroneously and superstitiously asserted and touted by the historically ignorant and dishonest, as is often akin to those of the Secular Humanist religion or cult, so to speak, and its ironic cultural appropriation of many Judeo-Christian or Western Values, such as those of the Common Law system, and the many legal thinkers and authors, many of which were and are "Christian" or even "Biblical" in their origins to begin with, Oliver Wendall Holmes being an author to whom I give reference in regards to his legal and moral philosophy and theories of law, society, government, right and wrong, the purpose and intentions of the law, and philosophical axioms on human nature and so forth which are predicated to be the bases of adherence to and the development and perpetuation thereof to begin with, for those otherwise ignorantly or morally uninformed, such as often erroneously conflating the law, or their limited and unscholarly knowledge of it, or moral axioms so simplistic that no one is held to be able to claim ignorance of to begin with, regardless of what society or era they are or were a part of, with the deeper legal theory and philosophy, such as the theories behind the development of more thousands of "minor" laws, the legitimacy or potential "silliness" thereof, no one, possibly not even many legal scholars themselves having a full knowledge or comprehension of, with the original reasons and moral or cultural sentiments which they were predicated on to begin with often being forgotten, and potentially erroneous to begin with, along with their cause and effects, in many cases being predicated on archaic axioms such as "behaviorism" or pure ignorance of the potential "cause and effect" thereof to begin with, or ignorance, blindness, and stupidity as to the theme or belief that "cause and effect" even exists to begin with, or wanting the law as it is to be something "different" or lesser altogether in some cases or instances, often conflating silly man made "laws", mathematical approximations, theories, philosophies, archaic or relevant or presumptions with the actual "law", or Common law as it actually is, as well as private "contracts", non-legally binding or mandated, naturally and maturily negotiatable "rules", "agreements", childish or childhood or parential "rituals" "customs", behaviors, or positive actions, rites of passage, and the breaking or deviating or drifting away therof upon mature adolsecence and adulthood, as occurs in the context of any mature childhood or adult development in a 1st world country with "the law" itself, or archaic and uneducated notions of what it is to begin with, whether medieval, 19th century, or otherwise, as well as the false conflation, as per Holmes and the common law itself with private or interpersonal morality or immorality with mere ritualistic or externalized adherence to the law, which do not always go hand-in-hand, the law giving a man or a woman a right to be immoral or have a "bad heart" in private, so long as they do not go over the line and actually break the law, whether they are aware of it or this, ignorant of it or the fact that the existence of 10,000s of laws, most people having never read, studied, written about, and so on, which it would be mathematically impossible not to break nor have broken at some time in one's life, aware of or not (such as using "fighting words" on the internet being potentially illegal, as well as not constitutionally protected "free speech" to begin with, as well as a sign of maladaptedness to civilization, and a subconsciously longing to be uncivilized or engage in romanticized behaviors of "uncivility", which alledegly would exist in real life had the law not subordinated these feral "passions" and mandated self control and self awareness instead, to quote Sigmund Freud and others who commented on the psychopathology of everyday life, some people being less civilized or healthily adapted to civilization and lacking less self control or self-awareness than others, such as presumably Freud, Holmes, and others who helped make and preserve the law and aspects of civilization, such as the private institutions of medicine and psychology or psychology and the private, voluntary agreements which those institutions and the involvement of or within those institutions, or private interpersonal institutions as a whole to begin with are predicated on, not unvoluntarily or legally bound or binding except in extreme cases as decided by a judge and jury in a court of law, as the unlawful, immoral, and superstitious and those willfully or apathetically ignorant of the law or the society or the time period(s) they're a part of imagine so childishly to begin with, being unable to be reasoned with like a mature and well-adjusted and developed adult, such as perhaps a lawyer, judge, or attorney, or any of the more productive and imaginate men and women of society would otherwise be expected to be able to do, perhaps even by default and without consciously having to "think" about it at all, being something more spontaneous or habitual in many of said mature men, women, and individuals in general, if not most but the most hapless, maladjusted, inept and dependent, chemically, behaviorally or otherwise, not being able to manage or control their impulses on any level like that of a more mature man or woman in society at large, simple etiquette, manners, moral customs, sentiments, axioms, maturities, self-awareness, logic, or just plain common sense being oblivious to them, let alone deeper knowledge of pretty much any subject, whether sciences, medicine, law, society, health, etiquette, work ethic, learning, thinking and comprehension, as opposed to rote memorization, drilling, or mindless repetition of archaic and ineffectual habits or rituals, or anything else to be named entirely.

 

[ding]

A "god" is a simplistic image of a mortal-like or andromorphic being, who naïve people assuming has a physical forum, like Zeus or one of the pagan gods, who was essentially just a powerful mortal or celebrity.

God is the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words.

No, they are all gods. You are belittling other gods besides your own.

Wrong. You have that backwards.

You seem to believe multiple perceptions of God disproves God when in reality it proves people are hardwired to believe in God.

 

[ding]

A "god" is a simplistic image of a mortal-like or andromorphic being, who naïve people assuming has a physical forum, like Zeus or one of the pagan gods, who was essentially just a powerful mortal or celebrity.

God is the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words.

you forgot to tell us who you want to eliminate

No one.

Diversity of thought is good.

 

[anynameyouwish]

A "god" is a simplistic image of a mortal-like or andromorphic being, who naïve people assuming has a physical forum, like Zeus or one of the pagan gods, who was essentially just a powerful mortal or celebrity.

God is the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words.

How do you know? Do you have any source other than the Bible?

Yes.

Awesome, please share.

History, the church, the writings of authors, theologians, law and so forth which go beyond merely what is contained in the Bible, or those who decided what to be included in the Bible to begin with, or even the authors of the books of the Bible themselves and their own thoughts; the Bible not having existed or been written "in a vacuum" to begin with, as is so often erroneously and superstitiously asserted and touted by the historically ignorant and dishonest, as is often akin to those of the Secular Humanist religion or cult, so to speak, and its ironic cultural appropriation of many Judeo-Christian or Western Values, such as those of the Common Law system, and the many legal thinkers and authors, many of which were and are "Christian" or even "Biblical" in their origins to begin with, Oliver Wendall Holmes being an author to whom I give reference in regards to his legal and moral philosophy and theories of law, society, government, right and wrong, the purpose and intentions of the law, and philosophical axioms on human nature and so forth which are predicated to be the bases of adherence to and the development and perpetuation thereof to begin with, for those otherwise ignorantly or morally uninformed, such as often erroneously conflating the law, or their limited and unscholarly knowledge of it, or moral axioms so simplistic that no one is held to be able to claim ignorance of to begin with, regardless of what society or era they are or were a part of, with the deeper legal theory and philosophy, such as the theories behind the development of more thousands of "minor" laws, the legitimacy or potential "silliness" thereof, no one, possibly not even many legal scholars themselves having a full knowledge or comprehension of, with the original reasons and moral or cultural sentiments which they were predicated on to begin with often being forgotten, and potentially erroneous to begin with, along with their cause and effects, in many cases being predicated on archaic axioms such as "behaviorism" or pure ignorance of the potential "cause and effect" thereof to begin with, or ignorance, blindness, and stupidity as to the theme or belief that "cause and effect" even exists to begin with, or wanting the law as it is to be something "different" or lesser altogether in some cases or instances, often conflating silly man made "laws", mathematical approximations, theories, philosophies, archaic or relevant or presumptions with the actual "law", or Common law as it actually is, as well as private "contracts", non-legally binding or mandated, naturally and maturily negotiatable "rules", "agreements", childish or childhood or parential "rituals" "customs", behaviors, or positive actions, rites of passage, and the breaking or deviating or drifting away therof upon mature adolsecence and adulthood, as occurs in the context of any mature childhood or adult development in a 1st world country with "the law" itself, or archaic and uneducated notions of what it is to begin with, whether medieval, 19th century, or otherwise, as well as the false conflation, as per Holmes and the common law itself with private or interpersonal morality or immorality with mere ritualistic or externalized adherence to the law, which do not always go hand-in-hand, the law giving a man or a woman a right to be immoral or have a "bad heart" in private, so long as they do not go over the line and actually break the law, whether they are aware of it or this, ignorant of it or the fact that the existence of 10,000s of laws, most people having never read, studied, written about, and so on, which it would be mathematically impossible not to break nor have broken at some time in one's life, aware of or not (such as using "fighting words" on the internet being potentially illegal, as well as not constitutionally protected "free speech" to begin with, as well as a sign of maladaptedness to civilization, and a subconsciously longing to be uncivilized or engage in romanticized behaviors of "uncivility", which alledegly would exist in real life had the law not subordinated these feral "passions" and mandated self control and self awareness instead, to quote Sigmund Freud and others who commented on the psychopathology of everyday life, some people being less civilized or healthily adapted to civilization and lacking less self control or self-awareness than others, such as presumably Freud, Holmes, and others who helped make and preserve the law and aspects of civilization, such as the private institutions of medicine and psychology or psychology and the private, voluntary agreements which those institutions and the involvement of or within those institutions, or private interpersonal institutions as a whole to begin with are predicated on, not unvoluntarily or legally bound or binding except in extreme cases as decided by a judge and jury in a court of law, as the unlawful, immoral, and superstitious and those willfully or apathetically ignorant of the law or the society or the time period(s) they're a part of imagine so childishly to begin with, being unable to be reasoned with like a mature and well-adjusted and developed adult, such as perhaps a lawyer, judge, or attorney, or any of the more productive and imaginate men and women of society would otherwise be expected to be able to do, perhaps even by default and without consciously having to "think" about it at all, being something more spontaneous or habitual in many of said mature men, women, and individuals in general, if not most but the most hapless, maladjusted, inept and dependent, chemically, behaviorally or otherwise, not being able to manage or control their impulses on any level like that of a more mature man or woman in society at large, simple etiquette, manners, moral customs, sentiments, axioms, maturities, self-awareness, logic, or just plain common sense being oblivious to them, let alone deeper knowledge of pretty much any subject, whether sciences, medicine, law, society, health, etiquette, work ethic, learning, thinking and comprehension, as opposed to rote memorization, drilling, or mindless repetition of archaic and ineffectual habits or rituals, or anything else to be named entirely.

wow


(ever hear of PARAGRAPHS and periods?)

I just ran that through the BSometer and it gave you a 10 on the BSmeter......


in fact, it specifically stated that everything you typed had no value whatsoever and appeared to be just lots of meaningless phrases and statements that were NOT backed up by any facts or data.


and you still neglected to tell us who you think should be exterminated

 

[alang1216]

A "god" is a simplistic image of a mortal-like or andromorphic being, who naïve people assuming has a physical forum, like Zeus or one of the pagan gods, who was essentially just a powerful mortal or celebrity.

God is the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words.

How do you know? Do you have any source other than the Bible?

Yes.

Awesome, please share.

History, the church, the writings of authors, theologians, law and so forth which go beyond merely what is contained in the Bible, or those who decided what to be included in the Bible to begin with, or even the authors of the books of the Bible themselves and their own thoughts; the Bible not having existed or been written "in a vacuum" to begin with, as is so often erroneously and superstitiously asserted and touted by the historically ignorant and dishonest, as is often akin to those of the Secular Humanist religion or cult, so to speak, and its ironic cultural appropriation of many Judeo-Christian or Western Values, such as those of the Common Law system, and the many legal thinkers and authors, many of which were and are "Christian" or even "Biblical" in their origins to begin with, Oliver Wendall Holmes being an author to whom I give reference in regards to his legal and moral philosophy and theories of law, society, government, right and wrong, the purpose and intentions of the law, and philosophical axioms on human nature and so forth which are predicated to be the bases of adherence to and the development and perpetuation thereof to begin with, for those otherwise ignorantly or morally uninformed, such as often erroneously conflating the law, or their limited and unscholarly knowledge of it, or moral axioms so simplistic that no one is held to be able to claim ignorance of to begin with, regardless of what society or era they are or were a part of, with the deeper legal theory and philosophy, such as the theories behind the development of more thousands of "minor" laws, the legitimacy or potential "silliness" thereof, no one, possibly not even many legal scholars themselves having a full knowledge or comprehension of, with the original reasons and moral or cultural sentiments which they were predicated on to begin with often being forgotten, and potentially erroneous to begin with, along with their cause and effects, in many cases being predicated on archaic axioms such as "behaviorism" or pure ignorance of the potential "cause and effect" thereof to begin with, or ignorance, blindness, and stupidity as to the theme or belief that "cause and effect" even exists to begin with, or wanting the law as it is to be something "different" or lesser altogether in some cases or instances, often conflating silly man made "laws", mathematical approximations, theories, philosophies, archaic or relevant or presumptions with the actual "law", or Common law as it actually is, as well as private "contracts", non-legally binding or mandated, naturally and maturily negotiatable "rules", "agreements", childish or childhood or parential "rituals" "customs", behaviors, or positive actions, rites of passage, and the breaking or deviating or drifting away therof upon mature adolsecence and adulthood, as occurs in the context of any mature childhood or adult development in a 1st world country with "the law" itself, or archaic and uneducated notions of what it is to begin with, whether medieval, 19th century, or otherwise, as well as the false conflation, as per Holmes and the common law itself with private or interpersonal morality or immorality with mere ritualistic or externalized adherence to the law, which do not always go hand-in-hand, the law giving a man or a woman a right to be immoral or have a "bad heart" in private, so long as they do not go over the line and actually break the law, whether they are aware of it or this, ignorant of it or the fact that the existence of 10,000s of laws, most people having never read, studied, written about, and so on, which it would be mathematically impossible not to break nor have broken at some time in one's life, aware of or not (such as using "fighting words" on the internet being potentially illegal, as well as not constitutionally protected "free speech" to begin with, as well as a sign of maladaptedness to civilization, and a subconsciously longing to be uncivilized or engage in romanticized behaviors of "uncivility", which alledegly would exist in real life had the law not subordinated these feral "passions" and mandated self control and self awareness instead, to quote Sigmund Freud and others who commented on the psychopathology of everyday life, some people being less civilized or healthily adapted to civilization and lacking less self control or self-awareness than others, such as presumably Freud, Holmes, and others who helped make and preserve the law and aspects of civilization, such as the private institutions of medicine and psychology or psychology and the private, voluntary agreements which those institutions and the involvement of or within those institutions, or private interpersonal institutions as a whole to begin with are predicated on, not unvoluntarily or legally bound or binding except in extreme cases as decided by a judge and jury in a court of law, as the unlawful, immoral, and superstitious and those willfully or apathetically ignorant of the law or the society or the time period(s) they're a part of imagine so childishly to begin with, being unable to be reasoned with like a mature and well-adjusted and developed adult, such as perhaps a lawyer, judge, or attorney, or any of the more productive and imaginate men and women of society would otherwise be expected to be able to do, perhaps even by default and without consciously having to "think" about it at all, being something more spontaneous or habitual in many of said mature men, women, and individuals in general, if not most but the most hapless, maladjusted, inept and dependent, chemically, behaviorally or otherwise, not being able to manage or control their impulses on any level like that of a more mature man or woman in society at large, simple etiquette, manners, moral customs, sentiments, axioms, maturities, self-awareness, logic, or just plain common sense being oblivious to them, let alone deeper knowledge of pretty much any subject, whether sciences, medicine, law, society, health, etiquette, work ethic, learning, thinking and comprehension, as opposed to rote memorization, drilling, or mindless repetition of archaic and ineffectual habits or rituals, or anything else to be named entirely.

Thanks for keeping your response to a single paragraph.

To summarize: you have no direct knowledge of what you call "God" is in fact "the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words", you only know what you have been told and your logic. Sorry but I find that unconvincing.

 

[anynameyouwish]

A "god" is a simplistic image of a mortal-like or andromorphic being, who naïve people assuming has a physical forum, like Zeus or one of the pagan gods, who was essentially just a powerful mortal or celebrity.

God is the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words.

How do you know? Do you have any source other than the Bible?

Yes.

Awesome, please share.

History, the church, the writings of authors, theologians, law and so forth which go beyond merely what is contained in the Bible, or those who decided what to be included in the Bible to begin with, or even the authors of the books of the Bible themselves and their own thoughts; the Bible not having existed or been written "in a vacuum" to begin with, as is so often erroneously and superstitiously asserted and touted by the historically ignorant and dishonest, as is often akin to those of the Secular Humanist religion or cult, so to speak, and its ironic cultural appropriation of many Judeo-Christian or Western Values, such as those of the Common Law system, and the many legal thinkers and authors, many of which were and are "Christian" or even "Biblical" in their origins to begin with, Oliver Wendall Holmes being an author to whom I give reference in regards to his legal and moral philosophy and theories of law, society, government, right and wrong, the purpose and intentions of the law, and philosophical axioms on human nature and so forth which are predicated to be the bases of adherence to and the development and perpetuation thereof to begin with, for those otherwise ignorantly or morally uninformed, such as often erroneously conflating the law, or their limited and unscholarly knowledge of it, or moral axioms so simplistic that no one is held to be able to claim ignorance of to begin with, regardless of what society or era they are or were a part of, with the deeper legal theory and philosophy, such as the theories behind the development of more thousands of "minor" laws, the legitimacy or potential "silliness" thereof, no one, possibly not even many legal scholars themselves having a full knowledge or comprehension of, with the original reasons and moral or cultural sentiments which they were predicated on to begin with often being forgotten, and potentially erroneous to begin with, along with their cause and effects, in many cases being predicated on archaic axioms such as "behaviorism" or pure ignorance of the potential "cause and effect" thereof to begin with, or ignorance, blindness, and stupidity as to the theme or belief that "cause and effect" even exists to begin with, or wanting the law as it is to be something "different" or lesser altogether in some cases or instances, often conflating silly man made "laws", mathematical approximations, theories, philosophies, archaic or relevant or presumptions with the actual "law", or Common law as it actually is, as well as private "contracts", non-legally binding or mandated, naturally and maturily negotiatable "rules", "agreements", childish or childhood or parential "rituals" "customs", behaviors, or positive actions, rites of passage, and the breaking or deviating or drifting away therof upon mature adolsecence and adulthood, as occurs in the context of any mature childhood or adult development in a 1st world country with "the law" itself, or archaic and uneducated notions of what it is to begin with, whether medieval, 19th century, or otherwise, as well as the false conflation, as per Holmes and the common law itself with private or interpersonal morality or immorality with mere ritualistic or externalized adherence to the law, which do not always go hand-in-hand, the law giving a man or a woman a right to be immoral or have a "bad heart" in private, so long as they do not go over the line and actually break the law, whether they are aware of it or this, ignorant of it or the fact that the existence of 10,000s of laws, most people having never read, studied, written about, and so on, which it would be mathematically impossible not to break nor have broken at some time in one's life, aware of or not (such as using "fighting words" on the internet being potentially illegal, as well as not constitutionally protected "free speech" to begin with, as well as a sign of maladaptedness to civilization, and a subconsciously longing to be uncivilized or engage in romanticized behaviors of "uncivility", which alledegly would exist in real life had the law not subordinated these feral "passions" and mandated self control and self awareness instead, to quote Sigmund Freud and others who commented on the psychopathology of everyday life, some people being less civilized or healthily adapted to civilization and lacking less self control or self-awareness than others, such as presumably Freud, Holmes, and others who helped make and preserve the law and aspects of civilization, such as the private institutions of medicine and psychology or psychology and the private, voluntary agreements which those institutions and the involvement of or within those institutions, or private interpersonal institutions as a whole to begin with are predicated on, not unvoluntarily or legally bound or binding except in extreme cases as decided by a judge and jury in a court of law, as the unlawful, immoral, and superstitious and those willfully or apathetically ignorant of the law or the society or the time period(s) they're a part of imagine so childishly to begin with, being unable to be reasoned with like a mature and well-adjusted and developed adult, such as perhaps a lawyer, judge, or attorney, or any of the more productive and imaginate men and women of society would otherwise be expected to be able to do, perhaps even by default and without consciously having to "think" about it at all, being something more spontaneous or habitual in many of said mature men, women, and individuals in general, if not most but the most hapless, maladjusted, inept and dependent, chemically, behaviorally or otherwise, not being able to manage or control their impulses on any level like that of a more mature man or woman in society at large, simple etiquette, manners, moral customs, sentiments, axioms, maturities, self-awareness, logic, or just plain common sense being oblivious to them, let alone deeper knowledge of pretty much any subject, whether sciences, medicine, law, society, health, etiquette, work ethic, learning, thinking and comprehension, as opposed to rote memorization, drilling, or mindless repetition of archaic and ineffectual habits or rituals, or anything else to be named entirely.

Thanks for keeping your response to a single paragraph.

To summarize: you have no direct knowledge of what you call "God" is in fact "the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words", you only know what you have been told and your logic. Sorry but I find that unconvincing.

yes...but.....

science and logic and the bible and morals and ethics and good and bad and heaven and smart and ignorant.....


does THAT help?

did THAT prove the existence of god?

 

[alang1216]

A "god" is a simplistic image of a mortal-like or andromorphic being, who naïve people assuming has a physical forum, like Zeus or one of the pagan gods, who was essentially just a powerful mortal or celebrity.

God is the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words.

How do you know? Do you have any source other than the Bible? If I told you I created the universe, would you believe me? Why not?

Creation itself.

Even if you take creation to imply a creator, there is no link to that creator being the God of the Bible.

 

[ding]

A "god" is a simplistic image of a mortal-like or andromorphic being, who naïve people assuming has a physical forum, like Zeus or one of the pagan gods, who was essentially just a powerful mortal or celebrity.

God is the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words.

How do you know? Do you have any source other than the Bible? If I told you I created the universe, would you believe me? Why not?

Creation itself.

Even if you take creation to imply a creator, there is no link to that creator being the God of the Bible.

I’m not taking creation to imply a creator. I am taking creation as evidence of a creator.

Why do you care about the creator being the God of the Bible?

 

[alang1216]

Why do you care about the creator being the God of the Bible?

It is what people have been telling me my whole life.

 

[Lysistrata]

I've always thought that there must be some sort of Supreme Being/Creator, or at least I hope so, but I think of this entity as a shape-shifter who, being omnipotent, can manifest as anything, according to whim. The idea that this being has a permanent physical human form is ridiculous. This is why I laugh at people who insist that the Creator is a male or white or something. If the Creator has certain genitalia or a certain skin color, the Creator would also have lungs, kidneys, etc.

We just have to admit that there are things that we can't know and live with the uncertainty.

 

[anynameyouwish]

I've always thought that there must be some sort of Supreme Being/Creator, or at least I hope so, but I think of this entity as a shape-shifter who, being omnipotent, can manifest as anything, according to whim. The idea that this being has a permanent physical human form is ridiculous. This is why I laugh at people who insist that the Creator is a male or white or something. If the Creator has certain genitalia or a certain skin color, the Creator would also have lungs, kidneys, etc.

We just have to admit that there are things that we can't know and live with the uncertainty.

"We just have to admit that there are things that we can't know and live with the uncertainty."


I'm ok with that.

 

[luchitociencia]

A "god" is a simplistic image of a mortal-like or andromorphic being, who naïve people assuming has a physical forum, like Zeus or one of the pagan gods, who was essentially just a powerful mortal or celebrity.

God is the supreme being of the cosmos, abstract and having no physical form, unable to be depicted except through representational imagery and words.

I guess you are having your thoughts from a "second hand" source or just by your own insight.

When you read the Hebrew writings, the word god is elohim.

Elohim refers to a powerful being, a master, a judge. etc.

In the case of the creator, there is an interested situation. It mentions that elohim created the heavens and the earth, but it is not up to when creation was complete when the name of the god is mentioned. From here, every time the bible makes a difference between the creator with other gods, the difference is identifying him by his name. Abraham didn't pray to elohim but to YHWH elohim (this is to say, he prayed to god YHWH) as an example.

No capital letters but what it makes the difference between the creator of the universe with the rest of gods is his name.

Jesus himself said it several times John 17:6-12

6 “I have revealed your name to those whom you gave me out of the world. They were yours; you gave them to me and they have obeyed your word. 7 Now they know that everything you have given me comes from you. 8 For I gave them the words you gave me and they accepted them. They knew with certainty that I came from you, and they believed that you sent me. 9 I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours. 10 All I have is yours, and all you have is mine. And glory has come to me through them. 11 I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name, the name you gave me, so that they may be one as we are one. 12 While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled.

In former wars, the troops were to scream the name of their king or their god in order to identify themselves in the battles. The confusion between them is great at the time of fight, so they scream the name of their king or god to let the others know whom he is fighting for.

If not David, the name of their king, then Israelite were to scream loud the name of god YHWH while in battle.

Today, with the changes made in modern language, you are interpreting that saying God identifies the creator of heavens and earth, while god identifies any other kind of deity, but unfortunately it doesn't work that way.

When you want to refer the creator of the universe, you can call him god, but you must ad his name, then is god YHWH. Only saying god YHWH is the valid way, according to the bible, of mentioning the creator.