The meaninglessness of the Christian god concept

[fr0d0]

But if you do know for sure then i'm all ears, tell me how you know. Or have I got to tell you that as well?

I've just told you captain but you ignored it. I'm sorry I don't understand your points at all. If you don't want to try and explain it that's fine. I've tried several ways too eek it out of you but you seem intent on calling fallacy without explaining in any way at all that means a thing to me.

Those points again, made easy for you:
5 equivellent (A=B) statements about Gods nature:
God is one. (Deut. 6:4, Romans 3:30, Galatians 3:20, James 2:19)
God is holy. (Psalm 99:9)
God is spirit. (John 4:24)
God is light. (1 John 1:5)
God is love. (1 John 4:8, 1 John 4:16)

---

God is One

Of the four, the first is clearly the most important. I say this not only because it is repeated the most times, but because Deut 6:4 is known to Jews as the Shema. The Shema is the most frequently spoken verse in the Torah. In fact, repeating it is an obligation.

In light of the Christian doctrine of the trinity, this may seem like an easy target of opportunity for the atheist. However, that would be a case of reading the scripture too literally. As Aquinas put it:

“[O]ne” the principle of number belongs to the “genus” of mathematics, which are material in being, and abstracted from matter only in idea.

In other words, the numerical reading does not apply. And in any case, neither the New Testament nor the Old can support a numerical reading. The meaning here bespeaks primacy, singularity and unity. As Aquinas said (sounding a bit like Yoda in this translation):

Therefore, in the very same way God is God, and He is this God. Impossible is it therefore that many Gods should exist…Hence also the ancient philosophers, constrained as it were by truth, when they asserted an infinite principle, asserted likewise that there was only one such principle.

Finally, we must note that in the Greek, the words actually are arranged to say “God (is) one Lord.” One is used as an adjective. In other words, it is a descriptor and not a true equivalence as it first appears in English. Take out the adjective and you are right back to “God is God” above.

God is Holy

Looking into the Greek we again find that the word holy in Psalm 99:9 is an adjective, meaning sacred or set apart. So saying God is holy is similar to saying God is merciful. It is a quality, not an equivalence.

God is Spirit

Finally, we come to what appears to be a true equivalence statement. God is not “spritual” he is spirit. Spirit is a noun (pneuma in Greek from which we get pneumatic). One definition of pneuma is wind.

If this is a definition of God (as I believe it is) what does it tell us? Like wind, God is invisible and yet sensual. One can not see or grasp God, but one can see His effects and experience Him directly, “in the garden” as it were.

God is Light

The Greek word for light is phos. Like pneuma, phos is a noun so this would appear to be a genuine equivalence statement. In the context of 1 John 1:5, the meaning is clearly that God is pure. We might even say that this is just a different way of saying that God is holy, only here it is made emphatic.

The nature of light of course is that it banishes darkness, darkness being merely the absence of light. This defines God as having an absolute nature. God is all light and thus can not help but dispel darkness. This is consistent with statements throughout the Bible, such as when God tells Moses no man can see Him and live.

God is Love

The Greek word here is agape. Agape is a noun, so once again we have a real equivalence which constitutes a kind of definition: God is agape.

---