Talk:Conceptions of God

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Spirituality Portal
This article is supported by WikiProject Spirituality.

This project provides a central approach to spirituality-related subjects on Wikipedia.
Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

Contents

[edit] Cleanup

After a general re-structure of the article and a few add-ons, with the intention of creating a basis for further necessary development of the article, I am removing the "cleanup tag" of December 2005. Hope it's ok. Thanks --88.214.139.161 04:02, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

The objective was[is] to limit each conception, transmiting its core idea, to a maximum of two paragraphs (the rest of each one would be at each specific related article). This way perhaps it is easier for the users to get a more clear picture of the whole conceptions presented when reading the entire article. I have re-written certain conceptions to fit the two paragraphs, and perhaps I may have not summarized them in the best way; so, they can and should be rewritten in a more effective way. Thanks --88.214.139.161 05:50, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Characteristics of monotheistic Gods

holiness, justice, sovereignty, omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence, omnipresence, and immortality

Very impressive list but I think charisma or something of the sort should be added.

[edit] Judaism

Shouldn't there be an article on the jewish god, I mean it IS kind of important, we did kind of create the belief in monotheism (I think that's what it's called). - NJ Rock

You could look up Judaism or Yahweh, which is the biblical name for God. Sure, it's pretty important. Without it, there'd be no Christianity or Islam.--Gazzster 14:09, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Is it the same God?

I've always wondered this question, "Is the Supreme God of Monotheism, Henotheism, Polytheism, and Pantheism and all religious faiths that worship a Supreme God the same God? God of Christianity and Judaism could be the same God of Islam. Don't you think? I mean, I've never seen why not and I've always assume that Yaweh, Jehovah, Allah, Brahman, ect... Have all referred to the same Supreme Being. So why not? Anker99 08:58, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Many people do believe all faiths worship the same deity. Others don't. Others say there is no Supreme Being, or that, if it exists, it is not a personal being outside humanity. A matter of faith, I suppose. But it is wonderful and fascinating, isn't it? The various ways people have expressed a belief in something beyond them?--Gazzster 14:06, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Referring to this statement, "These religions all share the same roots and God, yet simply differ on the details." This is being stated as a fact rather than a belief, and I believe many people will find it offensive. It is already stated many times that some people believe it is all the same God. This statement should be deleted.---Sfmwol 10:16, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

---Trinity doctrine definitely does NOT use the concept of Mother. It is always, in every case, in Judaism, Christianity and Islam referred to as Father. This statement is absolutely incorrect and should be deleted.Sfmwol —Preceding comment was added at 03:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Source ?

In the section "God in Christianity," Is there a good source for this, or mutliple sources? This is a blanket statement that needs to be reviewed : "Within Christianity, the doctrine of the Trinity states that God is a single being that exists, simultaneously and eternally, as a perichoresis of three persons (personae, prosopa): Father (the Source, the Eternal Majesty); the Son (the eternal Logos or Word, human as Jesus of Nazareth); and the Holy Spirit (the Paraclete or advocate)." Not all "Christians" or Christian faiths subscribe to the Trinity. See : Binitarianism (two deities/persons/aspects), Unitarianism (one deity/person/aspect), the Godhead (Latter Day Saints) (three separate beings, one in purpose) and Modalism (Oneness). Should this be re-worded? "Notable dissenting groups include the Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Christadelphians, Unitarians, Arians, and Adoptionists;" appears to be a negative statement ("dissenting"?). I really believe the entire section needs to be reviewed and reworked (or deleted if left as is). Master Redyva ♠ 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New introduction

There are many conception of the chief gods of religions. The monotheistic Gods are extremely like in their characteristics.The Standard Model of (monotheistic) God(s) Gods in non-monotheistic religions can vary widely. Polytheistic religions, for example, have usually a hierarchy of gods.

I modified the introduction to reflect the conception of gods according to all religions, not like the monotheistic ones.--Names of chief gods (talk) 04:34, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm opposed to this. You are modifying the subject of the article for no obvious reason. Ilkali (talk) 08:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
"Conceptions of God can vary widely" is false. The traits are Yahweh, Allah, Vahiguru are almost identical. It is unclear what you're opposing.--71.108.2.69 (talk) 08:55, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I disagree with the claim that those deities are almost identical. The issues discussed in the article seem sufficient evidence to the contrary. Ilkali (talk) 09:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence, omnipresence, and immortality are all traits of Yahweh, Allah, Vahiguru. Aren't these sufficient likenesses?--71.108.2.69 (talk) 09:10, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
No, the commonality of five properties among three deities is not enough to reject the proposition that "Conceptions of God can vary widely". Ilkali (talk) 09:36, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
The conceptions become varied once non-monotheistic religions are added.--71.108.2.69 (talk) 09:37, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
They become more varied. Ilkali (talk) 09:51, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I named 5 likeness of Yahweh, Allah, Vahiguru. You haven't specified a major single variation of these 3 monotheistic gods.--71.108.2.69 (talk) 09:54, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Read the article. Ilkali (talk) 10:05, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I can only smile at the clarity of your response. Again, I emphasize that Yahweh, Allah and Vahiguru aren't the same. Yet, they don't vary widely in their characteristics.--71.108.2.69 (talk) 10:10, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
It is your opinion that the differences in conceptions are not sufficient to describe them as varying "widely". It is my opinion that they are. If your position were simply that we should reword the lead to be less subjective, you'd be met with more receptive ears. Instead you are arguing that it be replaced by something equally subjective that asserts the exact opposite. Not only that, but you want to change the entire focus of the article. So far you do not have consensus. Consider trying an RfC. Ilkali (talk) 10:33, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "God" as opposed to "Gods"

"By not using Yahweh's name and using, instead, the generic word "God," we are contributing to the deception that we all worship the same God and that Allah is just another word for God."[1]--71.108.2.69 (talk) 10:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

What does the term 'God' mean to you? Ilkali (talk) 10:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Any immortal being.--71.108.2.69 (talk) 10:32, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
That is not what the term means to the majority of speakers. Wikipedia has to use language that conforms to established conventions, not just the impressions of a single person. Ilkali (talk) 10:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Likewise, the article gives the impression that (1) there is one supreme god in the universe, and (2) we simply have different ways of thinking about this same God. It is inaccurate because it doesn't provide sources to attribute the belief that it is in fact the same God. I don't want proof, rather attribution of statements to sources.--71.108.2.69 (talk) 10:41, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
It does not give that impression. Ilkali (talk) 11:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
You say it doesn't give the impression of the same God (singular). Then why isn't "Gods" if it gives the impression of different gods?--71.108.2.69 (talk) 11:23, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
It doesn't give either impression. It says nothing about what gods might exist. It talks about God rather than gods in general because it is an article about God. Ilkali (talk) 11:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
If you genuinely mean this, then the article's name should be Conceptions of divinity.--71.108.2.69 (talk) 11:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
It is an article about God. It is not an article about divinity. Ilkali (talk) 11:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Then it is either singular or plural.--71.108.2.69 (talk) 11:57, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
'God' is a singular proper noun. Ilkali (talk) 12:00, 21 May 2008 (UTC)