Schroedinger's God

Good then. This means that you're getting away from all the preconceived notions of what God supposedly is about.
 
But not getting away from a working definition of such things, since it conveys an exact description, semantically, of any specific deity which thematically works in every case, logically and objectively.

You don't seem to realize that there are vast differences between the deities of monotheisms. Do you? Can you name the top gods, of say, the largest three monotheisms around the world?
 
Ugh. Of course there are vast differences between the deities of monotheisms!

But not getting away from a working definition of such things, since it conveys an exact description, semantically, of any specific deity which thematically works in every case, logically and objectively.

What makes you think that there can be such a definition?
 
The objective fact that people adopt religious memes from literature and other people means there is something which is linguistically communicated; among those sets of [something] one usually finds references to powerful deities; gods and goddesses.

All such deities objectively have some common characteristics.

...

The practical desire, and ongoing search for- abstract meaning, linguistic precision and rational certainty makes me think that.

I won't trouble you for reciprocity.
 
water said:
What makes you think that there can be such a definition?

If there was a god, god is an atheist so that means all religions including extraterrestrial religions are wrong. :D

No religion is right = Glory to atheists
 
Back
Top