All powerful? Creator of the world/universe/everything-we-know? I want to argue that something less than each one of these would be compatible with most religions.

How about most powerful instead of all powerful? Any significant drop off? Can kick the ass of any other being (including the hulk) but cannot do absolutely anything. We wouldn't have any less reason to fear. Meh.

Creator of the universe .. fine. I'll give you that one (for all I know). But how do you know that the universe represents a piece of skilled craftsmanship on God's part? Not only might it not be His best work ever, creation may not even be a conscious effect of God. How do we know creation isn't a natural, inevitable function for God in exactly the same way excretion is for us? Perhaps He never turns around to see how it came out. Could be.

Of course when we tell the story, go figure, we're always his special ones .. made in his image .. yada yada. But when theists get all abstract arguing for God they usually base everything on His being the creator. Unless we know more about the link between God and His 'creation', even if He did 'make us' .. perhaps He had no choice. Perhaps making shit is just what he does. We'd like to feel special but being God's handiwork need not be a bragging point.

So argue all you like that nothing can come from nothing and there had to be a maker. That doesn't mean God gave a shit.

Quote:Seriously, what's it take to be a god?

Gullible followers.

Facisit world view! And a deep seated hatred for a pluralistic democratic sociaty.
Every single deity is a dictator who imposes a strickt set of laws which cannot be broken, and every single deity rejects every kind of opposition.
To be a god you have to be a fashist.

Be able to do things that people can't understand. Have a disgusting code for people to follow. Demand they give you money to "support" the message you are preaching. On your way to being a god.

(November 4, 2012 at 2:13 pm)Utracia Wrote: Be able to do things that people can't understand. Have a disgusting code for people to follow. Demand they give you money to "support" the message you are preaching. On your way to being a god.

Sounds like Mitt Romney!

Dawkins sums it up well

“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."
He lists a number of characteristics that it takes to be a god.

(November 4, 2012 at 1:13 pm)The_Germans_are_coming Wrote: Facisit world view! And a deep seated hatred for a pluralistic democratic sociaty.
Every single deity is a dictator who imposes a strickt set of laws which cannot be broken, and every single deity rejects every kind of opposition.
To be a god you have to be a fashist.

Justitia? Libertas? Dionysis? The FSM? Dysnomia? Bob?

Non-existence.

Non

(November 15, 2012 at 2:46 pm)Napoléon Wrote: Non-existence.

That's a recent requirement pushed mainly by uptight Muslims and anal retentive Judeo Christains. Romans like Julius Caesar and Augustus never face this highly discriminatory requirement before becoming gods.

It was a more open, inclusive and tolerant heaven back before the dark ages.

I don't really have a good way to explain this, but here's what I think.

In Islam, God is called many things such as the All-Aware, the Most High, the Alive, the Eternal, the Preserver, the Wise, the Hidden, the Perceiver, the Resurrector, and the Watcher, for example, among a bunch of other names in Arabic mentioned in the Quran. Since we do not know God's primary attribute, all of his secondary attributes are considered to be "mutashabih" (implicit or unclear) which means that they cannot be literally understood from the words themselves.

For example, God describes Himself with the attribute of "knowledge." The meaning of the word "knowledge" is well-known and understood by all of us. When this attribute is applied to God, we know and understand the meaning of this attribute, but the actuality and the how-ness of this "knowledge" can never be understood.

Similarly, when God describes Himself as "All-Hearing" and "All-Watchful," we understand the meaning of the words themselves, but we do not understand the hown-ess of those attributes when applied to God because He does not possess any eyes or ears as we humans possess.