God as All or Nothing

6/23/2023

I don’t believe in the classical abstract conceptualization of the Omnigod – omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, omnipresent, and so forth – but my disbelief does not entail that God is nothing.

Those who adhere to the Omnigod conceptualization approach God from an all-or-nothing perspective. God is either Omni, or He is not a god at all. Moreover, they accuse those who do not accept the Omnigod idea of committing a category error stemming from anthropomorphism.

God is God, and man is man. One is the supreme, absolute, self-sufficient Creator capable of anything; the other is a mere creature, finite, mortal, utterly contingent, with limited capabilities.

Considering these two disparate natures, it is readily evident that God and man are not and cannot be in the same category of being. Furthermore, those who suggest that God and man are in the same category think far too highly of man and far too little of God. Non-omni God is just hyper-anthropomorphism -- excessive projection of human traits and characteristics onto the Divine.

Those who subscribe to Omnigod theology declare that only Omnigod is worthy of worship. Put another way, if God is not omni in every conceivable way, He is just a being among beings and essentially unworthy of reverence, devotion, exaltation, praise, etc.

If He is just a being among beings, He cannot expect us to obey Him or feel duty-bound to Him. Nor can he expect us to love Him. If God is not Omni, He cannot command such things and should not expect to receive such things from us.

Omnigod believers accuse those who do not believe in the Omnigod philosophy of errant, arrogant, hubristic anthropomorphism that elevates man far beyond his station in Creation; however, they rarely stop to consider that their vehement refusal to consider relations with a non-Omni God might mark the very pinnacle of human error, arrogance, and hubris.

3 Comments

bruce g charlton

6/23/2023 11:55:22

Indeed. What I personally find astonishing, is that most of the gods throughout human history and many cultures have been non-onmi - 'yet' they were regarded and treated as gods, without any psychological problem! This is just a fact.

So why should it be assumed that only an omni God is a 'real' god, or could motivate Men sufficiently - in the face of so much counter-evidence?

Or, to take a modern example, until fairly recently the Mormons were as devout a group of Christians as could be found in the modern world - and far more rigorous in their apparent devotion than nearly all Protestants or Catholics. yet, the Mormon understanding of God is non-omni and indeed pluralistic.

In sum - while one can legitiamely argue against non-omni metaphysics on various rational grounds - the idea that an omni-God is necessary psychologically for Men *really* to respect, worship, obey God etc is empirically nonsense.

There is a further argument about whether it is *genuinely Christian* to insist *so much* and *with such primacy* on the authority/ majesty/ power/ differentness/ incomprehensibility etc. of God - given the vital role of Jesus Christ - but that is another matter.

As I have often said, and believe, if you identify as Christian but the omni-God is the most important thing in your faith - then you are probably in the wrong faith - there is another (equally large, growing faster) much better suited to your fundamental assumption.

Francis Berger

6/24/2023 08:48:17

@ Bruce - Causality is biggest argument in favor of Omnigod or Supergod, in that every being has a cause that preceded it, which when traced back far enough points to an original uncaused cause that anchors all being. Since that uncaused cause anchors all being, it is "being" and all other creatures are contingent upon it for their existence.

It's all very neat and tidy and logical and allows one to get back to their coffee and poached eggs in the morning without too much fuss.

The *best* summary definition of Omnigod that I've read recently is that "God is a verb." I have to say, that's really something.

lea

6/24/2023 07:00:51

The question you might ask is, do these purported qualities and capabilities really matter anyway?
Let's head out into the wild with a thought experiment; what if God is, beyond further description, the 'coordinating element' across (living) beings all around, and what if, very much along the lines of multiple older philosophies, also basically the 'ideal fragmentation of itself, represented throughout reality as such'? - So if we were to assume this fragmentation is indeed our current universe, the variables of all that proceeds far surpass computational capabilities of any kind, including the wildest options suggested in Sci-Fi.

What im getting at is this concept of some sort of central planner working on every angle of every seemingly important sequence of events seems a bit absurd to me, from multiple vantage points. At the usual risk of heresy, i see God as the essence we all come from, which then leaves a perennial choice of moving closer to that, integrating with it, or going in the opposite direction by celebrating the self, ignoring synchronicity and taking nature for granted as if not being part of it.

Whatever the deeper structure of our world entails that adds further complexity to this might not be as important as we may like to think, apart from intent and attitude always being crucial.

Facilitating instead of providing or even steering/ coordinating is the key imho.

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.

God as All or Nothing

Leave a Reply.

Archives