How is a personal god different from an anthropomorphic god?

[Delicate]

But this doesn't seem to be how it happened in Christianity. It didn't have such a process, if you look at its origins.

So how can you lump them together like this? I'd say, based on their difference, they are in different categories.

This is so far as anthropomorphism.

So far as anthropocentrisms, I wonder what you make of the non-anthropocentric data in Christianity: We obey God's commands, not ours. God is worshipped not humans. God dictates morality not humans.

This doesn't fit with the anthropocentrism thesis, right?

I would disagree that Christianity "didn't have such a process." Its origins lie in the theology of the Old Testament following the integration of Greek philosophy, particularly Platonism and Stoicism, into Jewish thought. There are countless examples of anthropomorphization in the character and behavior of Yahweh, just as there in the pagan accounts of Father Zeus (granted that their moral concerns don't always overlap). After the turn of the Axial age, as monotheism became more popular, Yahweh came to be seen as transcendent and people found ways to interpret the records describing his attributes and passions in a non-literal manner. The same thing happened with the philosophizing done in the context of the pagan traditions. If anything, Christianity was regressive in that regards, as it turned God into a human being, one "Person" of a trinity that included an "Abba" whose son died a criminal's death as an act of friendship on behalf of mankind. As Paul declared, this was seen as foolishness to the Greek intellectuals and idolatry to the self-righteous Jews; in both instances, highly impious, a new and vulgar interpretation of the divine. So, I don't see what it is that you think exempts Christianity from my criticism. 

As to your question about "non-anthropocentric data," the notion that God has communicated a plan to a specific group of men, perceived by converts as the "elect" of which they are, obviously, providentially chosen participants, and that it includes a particular set of rituals and practices that, if not followed, result in individuals (those in the out-group) suffering punishment after death, is, of course, anthropocentric through and through.

Once again, I'm saying that the way people anthropomorphize natural entities is not the same way people anthropomorphize God.

With nature, people look at phenomena (like rain) and infer its the physical result of divine action.

Can you point to a shred of evidence where this happened with Christianity? What physical phenomena led to invoking a God?