Religion in America: How many Gods do we have?

[NMMNG]

This helps explain much, and might help believers understand why atheists react with such skepticism to people's proclamations about "God" and "God's Word".


PDF of full report

snip

Four Gods live in the American religious pantheon, based on how Americans answered 29 different questions about God’s character and behavior. Analysts at Baylor distilled these answers into four images of God. Which one is closest to your view of God?

AUTHORITARIAN GOD: The Authoritarian God is highly engaged in our daily lives and world affairs. This God keeps a close eye on what we do. The Authoritarian God helps people make decisions and has a hand in the economy and natural disasters.

BENEVOLENT GOD: Believers in the Benevolent God also see God’s hand in our daily lives and world affairs. But they believe God is “mainly a force of positive influence in the world and is less willing to condemn or punish individuals.”

CRITICAL GOD: The Critical God is not actively engaged in our lives. He is a distant observer who doesn’t like the world he sees. Divine reward or punishment will be made in the afterlife.

DISTANT GOD: The Distant God is not engaged and not angry. This God is more of “a cosmic force which set the laws of nature in motion.”

snip

[baldguy]

1. Only one.

[NMMNG]

2. That's a sad reality

If you have it, you're worthy. If not then you're obviously pathetic, lazy scum and you deserve to die.

[Kurmudgeon]

3. That god is Mammon, and a very big part of the people's lives in this country and elsewhere.

As for being authoritarian, benevolent, critical or distant, humans can do that range of emotions too.
It says we are made in God's image, so expecting God to only have one reaction to every situation is ludicrous.

[NMMNG]

4. God was created in man's image

Which is why he hates or loves all the same people, and shares the same attitudes, the individual believer does.

[Kurmudgeon]

7. That's like, just your opinion, man...or your statement of faith.

You weren't there, either.

[NMMNG]

14. I don't have any faith

That's, like what makes me an atheist, man.

[Kurmudgeon]

22. You rely on faith every day, even if only the mail is delivered or someone won't run a red light.

Your decisions are what make you, not the handy little label you've placed on yourself.
Your decision that there is nothing is based on faith, because it's unprovable.
You live in faith every day. How correct that faith is, is a whole other matter.

[NMMNG]

29. That's not faith

Faith is belief that is not based on evidence or proof.

I don't have "faith" that the mail will be delivered every day. I have a reasonable expectation that it will based on past experience and the USPS schedule. I know not to expect mail on Sundays because the USPS does not deliver on Sundays.

I don't have "faith" that somebody will stop at a red light. I have a reasonable expectation that drivers will stop at red lights given that in all the years I've been driving they typically have, and that drivers are trained to obey laws/rules of the road. If I see somebody speeding toward a red light and they fail to reduce their speed I prepare for the possibility that they're not going to stop, likely pausing or even stopping myself to avoid a potential crash. If I were acting on "faith" I'd just keep going then whine "why me" when a crash occurred.


You must have an interesting life, just wandering through it making random decisions based on "faith" that something will happen. When's the last time you opened your oven taking it on "faith" that a million dollars would fall out? When did you last step out of your house with the "faith" that your neighbors would have been replaced with aliens?

If you think everyday events are all about "faith" you're further around the bend than I thought.

[deacon_sephiroth]

32. so observation is now faith?

lack of faith is faith?
expectation is faith?

Faith has a REALLY broad definition for you.

[darkstar3]

5. So you're dismissing the work done at Baylor out of hand

by claiming that your chosen fifth god is the only true one?

[NMMNG]

6. Thereby proving the point of the whole thing

Amusing, isn't it?

[Kurmudgeon]

8. I believe there is only One. You believe otherwise. We are both relying on faith this is so.

I don't know who Wayne Baker is and I don't see why I should give his analysis any more or less seriousness than I do anyone else.

[trotsky]

11. What a tired old chestnut.

http://atheism.about.com/od/definitionofatheism/a/FaithBelief.htm

[Kurmudgeon]

16. What an even more tired excuse when you have no answer.

[trotsky]

20. The answer was given to you.

You just didn't bother to read it.

[deacon_sephiroth]

34. answer? To a blatant misrepresentation? It's not worthy of one

Once again you (as so many theists over the years have done) tried to claim that Atheism = faith, or as you claimed earlier EVERYTHING is faith. Faith may be all you have, but it's NOT everything, and a LACK of faith, is not FAITH. Yet you want answers to that? ok here it is. "No, you're wrong there, that's actually the opposite, it's called an antonym, you should have learned about it in school."

[cleanhippie]

15. Sorry, you are the only one relying on "faith".

I rely on evidence, of which there is none to support your "faith".

[Kurmudgeon]

17. Ok, give me some proof positive there are no deities or beings higher than mankind.

Too bad there's no evidence for that, all you have is your "faith" that there is nothing beyond man's senses.
If it didn't happen in your lifetime right in front of you, you don't believe it.
I can understand why you choose the easy course though. If you actually considered Christ's Words instead of excuses,
you'd may have to reconsider some of your biases.

[trotsky]

21. Find someone who claimed that first.

We just don't believe in your god. The burden of proof is on you to prove 1) that it exists, and 2) that it is definitely the exact same god you believe in (i.e., has all its attributes).

Can't blame you for taking the easy course and trying to make it the doubter's burden to prove something they never claimed in the first place.

[Kurmudgeon]

24. So you believe in gods, just not mine, and you like to shift the burden of proof.

None of you have every proven that there is no God either. Enjoy your faith, now proclaim victory for yourself.
It's easier than actually looking at what you are professing.

[trotsky]

25. You just need to prove yours before any further dialog can happen.

I'll be here waiting.

[NMMNG]

30. The burden of proof lies on the person making the affirmative claim

Not on the person who does not believe it. It's the same way the burden of proof lies on the prosecution in a case (the ones who are saying "he did it") rather than the defense (the ones who are saying "that isn't true"). If you're positing something exists, it is up to you to prove it. We don't have to disprove the existence of your god (or any god) just as we don't have to disprove Bigfoot, the Lochness Monster, the Tooth Fairy or any other such mythical being.

[dmallind]

23. Did he make that claim? Most atheists don't.

I don't have to bet on the fairly high probability that no gods exist (which, however probable, is still not quite a certainty) to be an atheist. I just have to lack any belief that any do. It's a very big but often ignored (either through intentional marginalization or honest ignorance) distinction.

I once bought a new Mercedes with a personal check. The dealer, quite appropriately, wanted to verify it would clear. I did not and do not look or dress like the typical MB customer, most of whom lease and few of whom pay immediately, and these few usually overtly upper class or overtly nouveaux-riches. At that time did he wholeheartedly believe the check would clear (no - or he would not have delayed and even risked a sure sale to verify)? Did he wholeheartedly believe it was impossible (no - or he would have refused to waste his time with me and sought commisssions elsewhere)? Did he instead simply not believe until he had verified with evidence from an objective source - the bank (yes - because after calling them he apologized for the need to verify and handed me the keys)?

When it comes to gods, I fall like most atheidtd into the third category. Given objective evidence and verification I'd believe with nary a backward glance - but I'm not handing over my keys to religion until I get to see their bank balance. To need to supply you the proof you seek, an atheist would have to clsim he thought it impossible that any and all gods could possibly exist. Such atheists do exist - but explicit atheists are far far less common than implicit atheists like me who just need to get some proof firdt.

[Kurmudgeon]

26. He claimed I was "the only one relying on faith"., and yet his whole assertion is unprovable.

Don't drag your car purchases in here, this discussion is already cluttered as it is.

[dmallind]

27. It's an open thread, Pumpkin, so keep your dogma to yourself. and what "assertion" do you mean?

[cleanhippie]

28. I will do that, just as soon as I CLAIM that there are none.

Until then, how about YOU provide some proof positive that there IS the god you believe in.

But we both know you won't do that, because you can't. 5 bucks says you will not even return to reply, and if you do, you will completely ignore everything that has been said. Yes, you are THAT predictable.

[deacon_sephiroth]

35. done

I just asked the invisble dieties, whomever and however many there may or may not be to call my phone and check in with me for a quick role call. My phone is silent. My "faith" stands proven.

your turn

[tama]

9. Is god a countable set?

Can godly level of infinity be found also between the set of rational numbers and the set of real numbers?

[trotsky]

10. There is an upper bound on the set of gods.

It is no greater than the number of gods humans can imagine.

[tama]

13. What is the upper bound

of the infinities that humans can imagine?

[Kurmudgeon]

18. Same as the amount of excuses humans can find for anything...or nothing.

If nothing else, you should be able to understand the limits of man's perception, so saying that conclusively that something doesn't exist can be a logical fallacy. I expect you've heard the term, "you can't prove a negative".
I expect there will be the typical excuses about that too.

[tama]

33. Am I correct to assume

you are looking for an amount of excuses of limits of man's perception - even though you know that you can't prove a negative but you can prove the limits of provability.

[trotsky]

19. That's a separate question.

You'll have to figure it out yourself.

[tama]

31. No it's not nt

[trotsky]

36. Think of the number of gods that have been imagined to date.

1) Is that number finite or infinite?

2) Is it possible for one person to imagine an infinite number of gods?

Answer those two questions and you'll have the original answer you wanted.

[NMMNG]

37. More than 3,000 gods are listed on Godchecker

http://www.godchecker.com/

Humans are a very imaginative species.

[trotsky]

38. Yet 3000 < infinity, right? n/t

[NMMNG]

39. Last I'd heard it was n/t

[Iggo]

12. Zero.