Difference between revisions of "God"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Reverted edits by Totallaly not cool (talk) to last revision by RobSmith)
(username removed)
Line 1: Line 1:
<small>''This article is about the biblical God.  For the term as used to refer to any divine being, see [[Other gods]]''</small>
+
{{about|the concept of a supreme "God" in the context of [[monotheism]]|the general concept of a being superior to humans that is worshipped as "a god"|Deity|and|God (male deity)|God in specific religions|Conceptions of God|8=other uses of the term|9=God (disambiguation)}}
[[Image:Alphaomega.jpg|thumb|200px|God is the Alpha and Omega, the first and last, the beginning and the ending <ref>Revelation 22:13</ref>]]
+
{{use dmy dates|date=May 2019}}
{{trinity}}
+
{{short description|Supreme being, creator deity, and principal object of faith in monotheism}}
{{cquote|'''Genesis 1:1'''<br />In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.}}
+
{{multiple image
'''God''' is the sovereign creator and eternal ruler of all things and beings that exist, whether in the physical [[universe]] or in the spiritual realm ([[Heaven]]). Not only is God the creator and ruler of the things and beings within those two realms, but He is also the creator of the realms themselves. God created the physical universe, and before He acted in this creation, the universe did not exist. Likewise God did with the spiritual realm.
+
| footer = Representation (for the purpose of art or worship) of God in (from upper left, clockwise) [[Christianity]], [[Atenism]], [[Zoroastrianism]], and [[Balinese Hinduism]].
 +
| perrow = 2
 +
| total_width=300
 +
| image1 = Michelangelo, Creation of Adam 06.jpg
 +
| image2 = Aten.svg
 +
| image3 = Acintya Bali.jpg
 +
| image4 = Naqshe Rostam Darafsh Ordibehesht 93 (35).JPG
 +
}}
 +
{{God}}
 +
'''God''', in [[monotheism|monotheistic]] thought, is conceived of as the supreme being, [[creator deity]], and principal object of [[Faith#Religious views|faith]].<ref name=Swinburne>[[Richard Swinburne|Swinburne, R.G.]] "God" in [[Ted Honderich|Honderich, Ted]]. (ed)''The Oxford Companion to Philosophy'', [[Oxford University Press]], 1995.</ref> God is usually [[conceptions of God|conceived]] as being [[omnipotent]] (all-powerful), [[omniscient]] (all-knowing), [[omnipresent]] (all-present) and [[omnibenevolent]] (all-good) as well as having an [[Eternal existence|eternal]] and [[Metaphysical necessity|necessary existence]]. These attributes are used either in way of [[analogy]] or are taken literally. God is most often held to be [[incorporeality|incorporeal]] (immaterial).<ref name="Swinburne" /><ref>David Bordwell (2002). ''Catechism of the Catholic Church'', Continuum International Publishing {{ISBN|978-0-86012-324-8}} p. 84</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P17.HTM|title=Catechism of the Catholic Church – IntraText|accessdate=30 December 2016|url-status=dead|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130303003725/https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P17.HTM|archivedate=3 March 2013}}</ref> Incorporeality and corporeality of God are related to conceptions of [[transcendence (religion)|transcendence]] (being outside nature) and [[immanence]] (being in nature) of God, with positions of synthesis such as the "[[Chinese theology|immanent transcendence]]".
  
== God is Revealed: How we know about God ==
+
Some religions describe God without reference [[Gender of God |to gender]], while others use terminology that is gender-specific and {{nowrap|gender-biased}}. God has been conceived as either [[personal god|personal]] or impersonal. In [[theism]], God is the creator and [[God the Sustainer|sustainer]] of the [[universe]], while in [[deism]], God is the creator, but not the sustainer, of the universe. In [[pantheism]], God is the universe itself. [[Atheism]] is an absence of belief in God, while [[agnosticism]] deems the existence of God unknown or unknowable. God has also been conceived as the source of all [[moral obligation]], and the "greatest conceivable existent".<ref name="Swinburne"/> Many notable philosophers have developed arguments for and against the [[existence of God]].<ref name="Platinga"/>
  
Other than creation itself, God is revealed in several ways, including [[theological correlates]], conscience, and special revelation (the [[Bible]], and prophets). Most importantly though, God is revealed in [[Jesus Christ]], who is the Son of God.
+
Monotheistic religions refer to their god using various [[Names of God|names]], some referring to cultural ideas about their god's identity and attributes. In ancient Egyptian [[Atenism]], possibly the earliest recorded monotheistic religion, this [[deity]] was called [[Aten]]<ref>Jan Assmann, ''Religion and Cultural Memory: Ten Studies'', Stanford University Press 2005, p. 59</ref> and proclaimed to be the one "true" Supreme Being and creator of the universe.<ref>M. Lichtheim, ''Ancient Egyptian Literature'', Vol. 2, 1980, p. 96</ref> In the [[Hebrew Bible]] and [[Judaism]], the names of God include [[Elohim]], [[Adonai]], [[tetragrammation|YHWH]] ({{Lang-he|יהוה}}) and [[Names of God in Judaism|others]]. [[Yahweh]] and [[Jehovah]], possible vocalizations of YHWH, are used in [[Christianity]]. In the Christian doctrine of the [[Trinity]], one God coexists in three "persons" called the [[God the Father|Father]], the [[God the Son|Son]], and the [[Holy Spirit (Christianity)|Holy Spirit]]. In [[Islam]], the name [[Allah]] is used, while [[Muslims]] also use a [[Names of God in Islam|multitude of titles]] for God. In [[Hinduism]], [[Brahman]] is often considered a [[Monism|monistic]] concept of God.<ref>Pantheism: A Non-Theistic Concept of Deity – p. 136, Michael P. Levine – 2002</ref> In [[Chinese folk religion|Chinese religion]], [[Shangdi]] is conceived as the [[progenitor]] (first ancestor) of the universe, intrinsic to it and constantly bringing [[cosmos|order]] to it. Other names for God include [[God in the Baháʼí Faith|Baha]] in the [[Baháʼí Faith]],<ref>A Feast for the Soul: Meditations on the Attributes of God : ... – p. x, Baháʾuʾlláh, Joyce Watanabe – 2006</ref> [[Waheguru]] in [[Sikhism]],<ref>Philosophy and Faith of Sikhism – p. ix, Kartar Singh Duggal – 1988</ref> [[Ahura Mazda]] in [[Zoroastrianism]],<ref>The Intellectual Devotional: Revive Your Mind, Complete Your Education, and Roam confidently with the cultured class, David S. Kidder, Noah D. Oppenheim, p. 364</ref> and [[Sang Hyang Widhi Wasa]] in [[Balinese Hinduism]].<ref>McDaniel, June (2013), A Modern Hindu Monotheism: Indonesian Hindus as ‘People of the Book’. The Journal of Hindu Studies, Oxford University Press, {{doi|10.1093/jhs/hit030}}</ref>
  
[[File:Mezquita Catedral Cordoba.jpg|frame|center|[[Cathedral]] Cordoba, Spain.]]
+
==Etymology and usage==
 +
[[File:Mesha Stele (511142469) (cropped).jpg|thumb|The [[Mesha Stele]] bears the earliest known reference (840&nbsp;BCE) to the Israelite God Yahweh]]
 +
{{pp-semi-indef}}{{pp-move-indef}}
 +
{{Main|God (word)}}
 +
The earliest written form of the Germanic word ''God'' comes from the 6th-century [[Christianity|Christian]] ''[[Codex Argenteus]]''. The English word itself is derived from the [[Proto-Germanic]] * ǥuđan. The reconstructed [[Proto-Indo-European language|Proto-Indo-European]] form {{PIE|* ǵhu-tó-m}} was likely based on the root {{PIE|* ǵhau(ə)-}}, which meant either "to call" or "to invoke".<ref>The ulterior etymology is disputed. Apart from the unlikely hypothesis of adoption from a foreign tongue, the OTeut. "ghuba" implies as its preTeut-type either "*ghodho-m" or "*ghodto-m". The former does not appear to admit of explanation; but the latter would represent the neut. pple. of a root "gheu-". There are two Aryan roots of the required form ("*g,heu-" with palatal aspirate) one with meaning 'to invoke' (Skr. "hu") the other 'to pour, to offer sacrifice' (Skr "hu", Gr. χεηi;ν, OE "geotàn" Yete v). [[Oxford English Dictionary|OED Compact Edition, G, p. 267]]</ref> The Germanic words for ''God'' were originally [[Grammatical gender|neuter]]—applying to both genders—but during the process of the [[Christianization]] of the [[Germanic people]]s from their indigenous [[Germanic paganism]], the words became a [[Grammatical gender|masculine syntactic form]].<ref name=BARNHART323>Barnhart, Robert K. (1995). ''The Barnhart Concise Dictionary of Etymology: the Origins of American English Words'', p. 323. [[HarperCollins]]. {{ISBN|0-06-270084-7}}</ref>
  
== Attributes or Character of God ==
+
In the [[English language]], capitalization is used for names by which a god is known, including 'God'.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/god|title='God' in Merriam-Webster (online)|publisher=Merriam-Webster, Inc.|accessdate=19 July 2012}}</ref> Consequently, the capitalized form of ''god'' is not used for multiple gods ([[polytheism]]) or when used to refer to the generic idea of a [[deity]].<ref>[[Webster's New World Dictionary]]; "God n. ME < OE, akin to Ger gott, Goth guth, prob. < IE base * ĝhau-, to call out to, invoke > Sans havaté, (he) calls upon; 1. any of various beings conceived of as supernatural, immortal, and having special powers over the lives and affairs of people and the course of nature; deity, esp. a male deity: typically considered objects of worship; 2. an image that is worshiped; idol 3. a person or thing deified or excessively honored and admired; 4. [G-] in monotheistic religions, the creator and ruler of the universe, regarded as eternal, infinite, all-powerful, and all-knowing; Supreme Being; the Almighty"
[[File:Rembrandt Ascension.jpg|thumb|[[Rembrandt]], Ascension.]]
+
</ref><ref>
The attributes of God are things that describe who He is. Similar to the way one might describe a close friend to another individual, so too do these attributes describe God's character and nature. Attributes of God include but are not limited to [[Wisdom]], [[Infinitude]], [[Sovereignty]], [[Holiness]], [[Trinity]], [[Omniscience]], [[Faithfulness]], [[Love]], [[Omnipotence]], Self-existence, Self-sufficiency, [[Justice]], [[Immutability]], [[Mercy]], [[Eternal]], [[Goodness]], Graciousness, and [[Omnipresence]]. These attributes all work in complete and perfect harmony with one another.
+
[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/God Dictionary.com]; "God /gɒd/ noun: 1. the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe. 2. the Supreme Being considered with reference to a particular attribute. 3. (lowercase) one of several deities, esp. a male deity, presiding over some portion of worldly affairs. 4. (often lowercase) a supreme being according to some particular conception: the God of mercy. 5. Christian Science. the Supreme Being, understood as Life, Truth, Love, Mind, Soul, Spirit, Principle. 6. (lowercase) an image of a deity; an idol. 7. (lowercase) any deified person or object. 8. (often lowercase) Gods, Theater. 8a. the upper balcony in a theater. 8b. the spectators in this part of the balcony."</ref>
 +
The English word ''God'' and its counterparts in other languages are normally used for any and all conceptions and, in spite of significant differences between religions, the term remains an English translation common to all. The same holds for Hebrew ''[[El (god)|El]]'', but [[names of God in Judaism|in Judaism]], God is also given a proper name, the [[tetragrammaton]] YHWH, in origin possibly the name of an [[Edomite]] or [[Midianite]] deity, [[Yahweh (Canaanite deity)|Yahweh]]. In many English translations of the [[Bible]], when the word ''LORD'' is in all capitals, it signifies that the word represents the tetragrammaton.<ref name=Barton2006>{{cite book
 +
|author = Barton, G.A.
 +
|year = 2006
 +
|title = A Sketch of Semitic Origins: Social and Religious
 +
|publisher = Kessinger Publishing
 +
|isbn = 978-1-4286-1575-5
 +
}}</ref>
  
God exercises eternal and righteous judgment of the wicked in [[hell]], because of an inherent problem in the human heart, namely [[Sin]]. According to the [[Bible]], the sacrifice of [[Jesus Christ]] on the cross of [[Calvary]] and then [[resurrection]], is God's merciful and gracious response to the problem of the human heart.
+
[[File:Allah3.svg|thumb|right|The word 'Allah' in [[Islamic calligraphy|Arabic calligraphy]]]]
 +
''[[Allāh]]'' ({{lang-ar|الله}}) is the [[Arabic]] term with no [[plural]] used by Muslims and Arabic speaking Christians and Jews meaning "The God", while ''[[ʾilāh]]'' ({{lang-ar|إِلَٰه}} plural ''`āliha''  آلِهَة) is the term used for a deity or a god in general.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.pbs.org/empires/islam/faithgod.html |title=God |work=Islam: Empire of Faith |publisher=PBS|accessdate=18 December 2010}}</ref><ref>"Islam and Christianity", ''Encyclopedia of Christianity'' (2001): Arabic-speaking [[Christians]] and [[Jew]]s also refer to God as ''Allāh''.</ref><ref>{{Cite encyclopedia | title=Allah | encyclopedia=Encyclopaedia of Islam Online | author=L. Gardet}}</ref>
  
=== God is Triune ===
+
God may also be given a proper name in monotheistic currents of Hinduism which emphasize the [[personal god|personal nature of God]], with early references to his name as [[Krishna]]-[[Vasudeva]] in [[Bhagavata]] or later [[Vishnu]] and [[Hari]].<ref name="Hastings541">{{Harvnb|Hastings|2003|p=540|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Kaz58z--NtUC&pg=PA540&vq=Krishna&cad=1_1}}</ref>
{{main|Trinity}}
+
  
Although the Bible does not use the term, it is clear that God is a triune God, or three in one.
+
[[Ahura Mazda]] is the name for God used in [[Zoroastrianism]]. "Mazda", or rather the Avestan stem-form ''Mazdā-'', nominative ''Mazdå'', reflects Proto-Iranian ''*Mazdāh (female)''. It is generally taken to be the proper name of the spirit, and like its [[Sanskrit]] cognate ''medhā'', means "intelligence" or "wisdom". Both the Avestan and Sanskrit words reflect [[Proto-Indo-Iranian language|Proto-Indo-Iranian]] ''*mazdhā-'', from [[Proto-Indo-European language|Proto-Indo-European]] mn̩sdʰeh<sub>1</sub>, literally meaning "placing (''dʰeh<sub>1</sub>'') one's mind (''*mn̩-s'')", hence "wise".{{Sfn|Boyce|1983|p=685}}
These are sometimes referred to as ''God the Father'', ''God the Son'' ([[Jesus Christ|Jesus]]), and the ''[[Holy Spirit]]''.
+
  
The first hint of the Trinity is in {{Bible ref|Genesis|1|26}} which relates God saying, "Let us make man in our image", indicating that God is a plurality.
+
[[Waheguru]] (''{{lang-pa|{{IAST|vāhigurū}}}}'') is a term most often used in [[Sikhism]] to refer to God. It means "Wonderful Teacher" in the Punjabi language. ''Vāhi'' (a [[Middle Persian]] borrowing) means "wonderful" and ''[[guru]]'' (''{{lang-sa|{{IAST|guru}}}}'') is a term denoting "teacher". Waheguru is also described by some as an experience of ecstasy which is beyond all descriptions. The most common usage of the word "Waheguru" is in the greeting Sikhs use with each other:
 +
<blockquote><poem>''Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh''
 +
Wonderful Lord's [[Khalsa]], Victory is to the Wonderful Lord.</poem></blockquote>
  
The three persons of God are treated as equivalents in these words of Jesus shortly after His resurrection:
+
''Baha'', the "greatest" name for God in the [[Baháʼí Faith]], is Arabic for "All-Glorious".
{{Bible quote|Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.|book=Matthew|chap=28|verses=19|version=NIV}}
+
  
==== Jesus is God ====
+
==General conceptions==
[[Image:Pieta.jpg|thumb|270px|[[Pieta]], [[Michelangelo]].]]
+
{{Main|Conceptions of God}}
 +
The philosophy of religion recognizes the following as essential attributes of God:
 +
* Omnipotence (limitless power)
 +
* Omniscience (limitless knowledge)
 +
* Eternity (God is not bound by time)
 +
* Goodness (God is wholly benevolent)
 +
* Unity (God cannot be divided)
 +
* Simplicity (God is not composite)
 +
* Incorporeality (God is not material)
 +
* Immutability (God is not subject to change)
 +
* Impassability (God is not affected){{sfn|Bunnin|Yu|2008|188}}
  
The first verse of the [[Gospel of John]], in which Jesus is referred to as the "Word", makes clear that Jesus is synonymous with God:
+
There is no clear consensus on the nature or the [[existence of God]].<ref>{{cite journal|last=Froese|first=Paul|author2=Christopher Bader|title=Does God Matter? A Social-Science Critique|journal=Harvard Divinity Bulletin|date=Fall–Winter 2004|volume=32|series=4}}</ref> The [[God in Abrahamic religions|Abrahamic conceptions of God]] include the [[monotheistic]] definition of God in [[Judaism]], the [[trinity|trinitarian]] view of [[Christians]], and the [[Islamic concept of God]].  
{{Bible quote|In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.|book=John|chap=1|verses=1|version=NIV}}
+
This verse not only says that "the Word" (Jesus) is synonymous with God, but also says that the Word was "in the beginning", which means that He existed before all else existed, something that is only true of God.
+
  
This is reinforced two verses later, in which Jesus is described as the creator.
+
There were also various conceptions of God in the ancient [[Greco-Roman world]], such as [[Aristotelian theology|Aristotle's view of an unmoved mover]], the [[Neoplatonism|Neoplatonic concept of the One]] and the pantheistic God of [[Stoic physics|Stoic Physics]].
[[Genesis]] refers to God as being the Creator.
+
{{Bible quote|Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.|book=John|chap=1|verses=3|version=NIV}}
+
  
==== The Holy Spirit is God ====
+
The [[dharmic religions]] differ in their view of the divine: views of [[God in Hinduism]] vary by region, sect, and caste, ranging from monotheistic to polytheistic. Many polytheistic religions share the idea of a [[creator deity]], although having a name other than "God" and without all of the other roles attributed to a singular God by monotheistic religions. [[God in Sikhism|Sikhism]] is sometimes seen as being pantheistic about God.
  
In the following passage, the [[Holy Spirit]] is referred to as God:
+
[[Śramaṇa]] religions are generally [[non-creationist]], while also holding that there are divine beings (called ''Devas'' in [[Deva (Buddhism)|Buddhism]] and [[Deva (Jainism)|Jainism]]) of limited power and lifespan. [[Jainism]] has [[Jainism and non-creationism|generally rejected creationism]], holding that soul substances ([[Jīva (Jainism)|Jīva]]) are uncreated and that time is beginningless.<ref>Nayanar, Prof. A. Chakravarti (2005). ''Samayasāra of Ācārya Kundakunda''. p.190, Gāthā 10.310, New Delhi: Today & Tomorrows Printer and Publisher.</ref> Depending on one's interpretation and tradition, [[Buddhism]] can be conceived as being either [[non-theistic]], [[Transtheism|trans-theistic]], [[pantheistic]], or [[polytheistic]]. However, [[Creator in Buddhism|Buddhism has generally rejected]] the specific monotheistic view of a [[Creator deity|Creator God]]. The Buddha criticizes the theory of creationism in the [[Early Buddhist Texts|early Buddhist texts]].<ref>Narada Thera (2006) ''"The Buddha and His Teachings,"'' pp. 268-269, Jaico Publishing House.</ref><ref>Hayes, Richard P., "Principled Atheism in the Buddhist Scholastic Tradition", ''Journal of Indian Philosophy'', 16:1 (1988:Mar) p. 2.</ref> Also, major Indian Buddhist philosophers, such as [[Nagarjuna]], [[Vasubandhu]], [[Dharmakirti]] and [[Buddhaghosa]], consistently critiqued Creator God views put forth by Hindu thinkers.<ref>Hsueh-Li Cheng. "Nāgārjuna's Approach to the Problem of the Existence of God" in Religious Studies, Vol. 12, No. 2 (Jun., 1976), pp. 207-216 (10 pages), Cambridge University Press.</ref><ref>Hayes, Richard P., "Principled Atheism in the Buddhist Scholastic Tradition", ''Journal of Indian Philosophy'', 16:1 (1988:Mar.).</ref><ref>Harvey, Peter (2019). ''"Buddhism and Monotheism",'' p. 1. Cambridge University Press.</ref>
{{Bible quote|Then Peter said, "Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? Didn't it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn't the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God."|book=Acts|chap=5|verses=3-4|version=NIV}}
+
  
=== God is omniscient ===
+
===Oneness===
{{main|omniscience}}
+
{{Main|Monotheism|Henotheism}}
 +
[[File:Shield-Trinity-Scutum-Fidei-English.svg|thumb|Trinitarians believe that God is composed of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.]]
 +
Monotheists believe that there is only one god, and may also believe this god is worshipped in different religions under different names. The view that all theists actually worship the same god, whether they know it or not, is especially emphasized in the Baháʼí Faith, Hinduism<ref>See Swami Bhaskarananda, ''Essentials of Hinduism'' (Viveka Press 2002) {{ISBN|1-884852-04-1}}</ref> and Sikhism.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.srigranth.org/servlet/gurbani.gurbani?Action=Page&Param=1350&english=t&id=57718 |title=Sri Guru Granth Sahib |publisher=Sri Granth |accessdate=30 June 2011}}</ref>
  
God knows everything:
+
In Christianity, the [[doctrine of the Trinity]] describes God as one God in three divine Persons (each of the three Persons is God himself). The Most Holy Trinity comprises<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.whataboutjesus.com/grace/actions-god-series/what-trinity?page=0,0 |title=What Is the Trinity? |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20140219020335/http://www.whataboutjesus.com/grace/actions-god-series/what-trinity?page=0%2C0 |archivedate=19 February 2014}}</ref> [[God the Father]], [[God the Son]] ([[Jesus]]), and [[Holy Spirit (Christianity)|God the Holy Spirit]]. In the past centuries, this fundamental mystery of the Christian faith was also summarized by the Latin formula ''Sancta Trinitas, Unus Deus'' (Holy Trinity, Unique God), reported in the ''[[Litany of the Blessed Virgin Mary|Litanias Lauretanas]]''.
{{Bible quote|This then is how we know that we belong to the truth, and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence whenever our hearts condemn us. For God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything.|book=1_John|chap=3|verses=19-20|version=NIV}}
+
  
Because God is outside of [[time]], He can see and knows the [[past]] and the [[future]] as well as the present.
+
Islam's most fundamental concept is ''[[tawhid]]'' meaning "oneness" or "uniqueness". God is described in the [[Quran]] as: "He is Allah, the One and Only; Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him."<ref>{{Cite quran|112|1|end=4|style=ref}}</ref><ref>{{Cite encyclopedia | title=Allah, Tawhid | encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica Online | author=D. Gimaret}}</ref> Muslims repudiate the Christian doctrine of the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus, comparing it to polytheism. In Islam, God is transcendent and does not resemble any of his creations in any way. Thus, Muslims are not [[iconodules]], and are not expected to visualize God.<ref name=":3">{{cite book
 +
|author = Robyn Lebron
 +
|year = 2012
 +
|title = Searching for Spiritual Unity...Can There Be Common Ground?
 +
|publisher =
 +
|isbn = 978-1-4627-1262-5
 +
|page = 117
 +
}}</ref>
  
== "God" sometimes used to refer to God the Father ==
+
[[Henotheism]] is the belief and worship of a single god while accepting the existence or possible existence of other deities.<ref>Müller, Max. (1878) ''Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion: As Illustrated by the Religions of India.'' London: Longmans, Green and Co.</ref>
[[Image:Velasco Padre Eterno.jpg|thumb|left|180px|God the Father by [[Jose Maria Velasco]] (1840-1912).]]
+
In the Bible, the word "God" (θεός) does not always refer to God's being as a whole, but more specifically refers to the Person of the Father (God the Father). Here are some verses which demonstrate this:
+
{{cquote|'''John 3:16''' (NASB)<br />For <u>God</u> so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten <u>Son</u>, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.}}
+
{{cquote|'''1 John 4:10''' (NASB)<br />In this is love, not that we loved <u>God</u>, but that He loved us and sent <u>His Son</u> to be the propitiation for our sins.}}
+
Notice how in each case, "Father" can be substituted for "God." For example, "For the ''Father'' so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son," and "not that we loved the ''Father'', but that He loved us and sent His Son."
+
{{Clear}}
+
  
== Terminology ==
+
===Theism, deism, and pantheism===
 +
{{Main|Theism|Deism|Pantheism}}
 +
Theism generally holds that God exists realistically, objectively, and independently of human thought; that God created and sustains everything; that God is omnipotent and eternal; and that God is personal and interacting with the universe through, for example, [[religious experience]] and the prayers of humans.<ref name="smart">{{cite book|last=Smart|first=Jack|authorlink= J. J. C. Smart|author2=John Haldane|title=Atheism and Theism|publisher=Blackwell Publishing|year=2003|isbn=978-0-631-23259-9|page=8}}</ref> Theism holds that God is both transcendent and immanent; thus, God is simultaneously [[Infinity (philosophy)|infinite]] and, in some way, present in the affairs of the world.<ref name="lemos">{{cite book|last=Lemos|first=Ramon M.|title=A Neomedieval Essay in Philosophical Theology|publisher=Lexington Books|year=2001|isbn=978-0-7391-0250-3|page=34}}</ref> Not all theists subscribe to all of these propositions, but each usually subscribes to some of them (see, by way of comparison, [[family resemblance]]).<ref name="smart" /> Catholic theology holds that God is infinitely [[divine simplicity|simple]] and is not involuntarily subject to time. Most theists hold that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent, although this belief raises questions about [[Problem of evil|God's responsibility for evil and suffering in the world]]. Some theists ascribe to God a self-conscious or purposeful limiting of omnipotence, omniscience, or benevolence. [[Open Theism]], by contrast, contends that, due to the nature of time, God's omniscience does not mean the deity can predict the future. ''Theism'' is sometimes used to refer in general to any belief in a god or gods, i.e., monotheism or [[polytheism]].<ref name="philosofrelGlossthe">{{cite web|url=http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/definitions.html|title=Philosophy of Religion.info – Glossary – Theism, Atheism, and Agonisticism|publisher=Philosophy of Religion.info|accessdate=16 July 2008|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080424071443/http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/definitions.html|archivedate=24 April 2008}}</ref><ref name="TFDtheism">{{cite web|url=http://www.thefreedictionary.com/theism|title=Theism – definition of theism by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia|publisher=[[TheFreeDictionary.com]]|accessdate=16 July 2008}}</ref>
 +
[[File:Blake God Blessing.jpg|thumb|upright=0.9|''God Blessing the Seventh Day'', 1805 watercolor painting by [[William Blake]]]]
 +
Deism holds that God is wholly [[Transcendence (religion)|transcendent]]: God exists, but does not intervene in the world beyond what was necessary to create it.<ref name=lemos /> In this view, God is not [[anthropomorphic]], and neither answers prayers nor produces miracles. Common in Deism is a belief that God has no interest in humanity and may not even be aware of humanity. [[Pandeism]] combines Deism with Pantheistic beliefs.<ref name="Dawe">{{cite book
 +
|title= The God Franchise: A Theory of Everything
 +
|author = Alan H. Dawe
 +
|year = 2011
 +
|isbn = 978-0-473-20114-2
 +
|page = 48
 +
|quote = Pandeism: This is the belief that God created the universe, is now one with it, and so, is no longer a separate conscious entity. This is a combination of pantheism (God is identical to the universe) and deism (God created the universe and then withdrew Himself).
 +
}}
 +
</ref><ref>{{cite book |title = The History of Science: A Beginner's Guide |author = Sean F. Johnston |year = 2009 |isbn = 978-1-85168-681-0 |page = [https://archive.org/details/historyofscience0000john/page/90 90] |quote = In its most abstract form, deism may not attempt to describe the characteristics of such a non-interventionist creator, or even that the universe is identical with God (a variant known as pandeism). |url = https://archive.org/details/historyofscience0000john/page/90 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |title= This Strange Eventful History: A Philosophy of Meaning |author = Paul Bradley |year = 2011 |isbn = 978-0-87586-876-9 |page = 156 |quote = Pandeism combines the concepts of Deism and Pantheism with a god who creates the universe and then becomes it.}}</ref> Pandeism is proposed to explain as to Deism why God would create a universe and then abandon it,<ref name="Fuller">{{cite book |title= Thought: The Only Reality |author = Allan R. Fuller |year = 2010 |isbn = 978-1-60844-590-5 |page = 79 |quote = Pandeism is another belief that states that God is identical to the universe, but God no longer exists in a way where He can be contacted; therefore, this theory can only be proven to exist by reason. Pandeism views the entire universe as being from God and now the universe is the entirety of God, but the universe at some point in time will fold back into one single being which is God Himself that created all. Pandeism raises the question as to why would God create a universe and then abandon it? As this relates to pantheism, it raises the question of how did the universe come about what is its aim and purpose?}}</ref> and as to Pantheism, the origin and purpose of the universe.<ref name="Fuller"/><ref>{{cite book |title= Ultimate Truth, Book 1 |author = Peter C. Rogers |year = 2009 |isbn = 978-1-4389-7968-7 |page = 121 |quote = As with [[Panentheism]], [[Pantheism]] is derived from the Greek: 'pan'= all and 'theos' = God, it literally means "God is All" and "All is God." Pantheist purports that everything is part of an all-inclusive, indwelling, intangible God; or that the Universe, or nature, and God are the same. Further review helps to accentuate the idea that natural law, existence, and the Universe which is the sum total of all that is, was, and shall be, is represented in the theological principle of an abstract 'god' rather than an individual, creative Divine Being or Beings of any kind. This is the key element that distinguishes them from Panentheists and Pandeists. As such, although many religions may claim to hold [[Pantheistic]] elements, they are more commonly [[Panentheistic]] or Pandeistic in nature.}}</ref>
  
The Bible uses several different words to refer to God.
+
Pantheism holds that God is the universe and the universe is God, whereas [[Panentheism]] holds that God contains, but is not identical to, the Universe.<ref>John Culp (2013). [http://plato.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/encyclopedia/archinfo.cgi?entry=panentheism "Panentheism,"] ''Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy'', Spring.</ref> It is also the view of the [[Liberal Catholic Church]]; [[Theosophy (Blavatskian)|Theosophy]]; some views of Hinduism except [[Vaishnavism]], which believes in panentheism; Sikhism; some divisions of [[Neopaganism]] and [[Taoism]], along with many varying denominations and individuals within denominations. [[Kabbalah]], Jewish mysticism, paints a pantheistic/panentheistic view of God—which has wide acceptance in [[Hasidic Judaism]], particularly from their founder [[Israel ben Eliezer|The Baal Shem Tov]]—but only as an addition to the Jewish view of a personal god, not in the original pantheistic sense that denies or limits persona to God.{{Citation needed|date=March 2012}}
"God" itself is not a name, but an [[Old English]] word meaning ''supreme being, deity'',<ref>[http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=god God] Online Etymology Dictionary.</ref> which the translators who translated the Bible in to English chose as the appropriate English word for the [[Hebrew]] ''elohim'' and the [[Greek]] ''theos'' used in the [[Old Testament]] and [[New Testament]] respectively.<ref name="DPK">Kruse, Dale P.,[http://www.layevangelism.com/advtxbk/sections/sect-10/sec10-9.htm More on the ''Names'' of God In the Bible], Advanced Training Program of Evangelism.</ref>
+
  
The other main term for God is the Hebrew ''adonai'', usually translated ''Lord''.
+
===Other concepts===
There are various compound words also used in the Bible, such as ''el shaddai'', which means ''God Almighty'' ("''el''" is a short version of ''elohim'').<ref name="DPK" />
+
[[Dystheism]], which is related to [[theodicy]], is a form of theism which holds that God is either not wholly good or is fully malevolent as a consequence of the [[problem of evil]]. One such example comes from [[Dostoevsky]]'s ''[[The Brothers Karamazov]]'', in which Ivan Karamazov rejects God on the grounds that he allows children to suffer.<ref>[http://www.gutenberg.org/files/28054/28054-h/28054-h.html The Project Gutenberg EBook of ''The Brothers Karamazov'' by Fyodor Dostoyevsky] pp. 259–61</ref>
  
''YHWH'' is given in the Bible as God's actual name.  In most English Bibles it is translated as <span style="font-variant:small-caps">''Lord''</span>, in small capitals. The name has various other English versions, including Yehovah, Jehovah, and Yahweh.<ref>McHyde, Tim, [http://www.escapeallthesethings.com/yahweh.htm God’s Name: LORD, Yahweh, Yahveh, YHWH, YHVH, Jehovah or Yehovah?]</ref>
+
In modern times, some more abstract concepts have been developed, such as [[process theology]] and [[open theism]]. The contemporaneous French philosopher [[Michel Henry]] has however proposed a [[Phenomenological definition of God|phenomenological approach and definition of God]] as [[Phenomenology (religion)|phenomenological]] essence of [[Phenomenological life|Life]].<ref>{{cite book|last=Henry|first=Michel|title=I am the Truth. Toward a philosophy of Christianity|publisher=Stanford University Press|year=2003|isbn=978-0-8047-3780-7|others=Translated by Susan Emanuel}}</ref>
  
== Resources on becoming a Christian ==
+
God has also been conceived as being [[Incorporeality|incorporeal]] (immaterial), a [[personal god|personal]] being, the source of all [[moral obligation]], and the "greatest conceivable existent".<ref name=Swinburne/> These attributes were all supported to varying degrees by the early Jewish, Christian and Muslim theologian philosophers, including [[Maimonides]],<ref name=Edwards /> [[Augustine of Hippo]],<ref name="Edwards">[[Paul Edwards (philosopher)|Edwards, Paul]]. "God and the philosophers" in [[Ted Honderich|Honderich, Ted]]. (ed)''The Oxford Companion to Philosophy'', [[Oxford University Press]], 1995. {{ISBN|978-1-61592-446-2}}.</ref> and [[Al-Ghazali]],<ref name=Platinga>[[Alvin Plantinga|Platinga, Alvin]]. "God, Arguments for the Existence of", ''Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy'', Routledge, 2000.</ref> respectively.
[[File:Hoffman Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane.jpg|thumbnail|170px||Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane by Heinrich Hofmann.]]
+
  
''see also:'' [[Resources on becoming a Christian]]
+
==Non-theistic views==
 +
{{See also|Evolutionary origin of religions|Evolutionary psychology of religion}}
 +
[[Nontheism|Non-theist]] views about God also vary. Some non-theists avoid the concept of God, whilst accepting that it is significant to many; other non-theists understand God as a symbol of human values and aspirations. The nineteenth-century English [[atheism|atheist]] [[Charles Bradlaugh]] declared that he refused to say "There is no God", because "the word 'God' is to me a sound conveying no clear or distinct affirmation";<ref>"A Plea for Atheism. By 'Iconoclast{{'"}}, London, Austin & Co., 1876, p. 2.</ref> he said more specifically that he disbelieved in the Christian god. [[Stephen Jay Gould]] proposed an approach dividing the world of philosophy into what he called "[[non-overlapping magisteria]]" (NOMA). In this view, questions of the [[supernatural]], such as those relating to the [[existence]] and [[nature]] of God, are [[metaphysics|non]]-[[empirical]] and are the proper domain of [[theology]]. The methods of science should then be used to answer any empirical question about the natural world, and theology should be used to answer questions about ultimate meaning and moral value. In this view, the perceived lack of any empirical footprint from the magisterium of the supernatural onto natural events makes science the sole player in the natural world.<ref name="Dawkins-Delusion">{{cite book |title=The God Delusion |last=Dawkins |first=Richard |authorlink=Richard Dawkins |year=2006 |publisher=Bantam Press |location=Great Britain |isbn=978-0-618-68000-9}}</ref>
  
'''Below are some resources on becoming a [[Christian]]:'''
+
Another view, advanced by [[Richard Dawkins]], is that the existence of God is an empirical question, on the grounds that "a universe with a god would be a completely different kind of universe from one without, and it would be a scientific difference."<ref name="Dawkins">{{cite news
 +
|last = Dawkins|first = Richard|authorlink = Richard Dawkins|title = Why There Almost Certainly Is No God|url = http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-dawkins/why-there-almost-certainl_b_32164.html|accessdate = 10 January 2007|work = The Huffington Post|date = 23 October 2006}}</ref> [[Carl Sagan]] argued that the doctrine of a Creator of the Universe was difficult to prove or disprove and that the only conceivable scientific discovery that could disprove the existence of a Creator (not necessarily a God) would be the discovery that the universe is infinitely old.<ref>{{cite book |title=The Demon Haunted World |page=278 |last=Sagan |first=Carl |authorlink=Carl Sagan |year=1996 |publisher=Ballantine Books |location=New York |isbn=978-0-345-40946-1}}</ref>
  
*[http://www.jesusfilm.org/film-and-media/watch-the-film  Jesus film - free access]
+
[[Stephen Hawking]] and co-author [[Leonard Mlodinow]] state in their book, ''[[The Grand Design (book)|The Grand Design]]'', that it is reasonable to ask who or what created the universe, but if the answer is God, then the question has merely been deflected to that of who created God. Both authors claim however, that it is possible to answer these questions purely within the realm of science, and without invoking any divine beings.<ref>{{cite book|page=[https://archive.org/details/granddesign0000hawk/page/172 172]|title=The Grand Design|url=https://archive.org/details/granddesign0000hawk|url-access=registration|author=Stephen Hawking|author2=Leonard Mlodinow|publisher=Bantam Books|year=2010|isbn=978-0-553-80537-6}}</ref>
  
*[http://www.thewordfortoday.org/?page=C2000 Free audio Bible and Bible audio streaming]
+
===Agnosticism and atheism===
 +
Agnosticism is the view that the [[truth value]]s of certain claims—especially [[Metaphysics|metaphysical]] and religious claims such as [[Existence of God|whether God]], the [[Divinity|divine]] or the [[supernatural]] exist—are unknown and perhaps unknowable.<ref name="Hepburn">{{cite encyclopedia|year=2005|title=Agnosticism|encyclopedia=[[Encyclopedia of Philosophy|The Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]|publisher=MacMillan Reference USA (Gale)|last=Hepburn|first=Ronald W.|origyear=1967|edition=2nd|volume=1|page=92|isbn=978-0-02-865780-6|quote=In the most general use of the term, agnosticism is the view that we do not know whether there is a God or not.|editor=Donald M. Borchert}} (p. 56 in 1967 edition)</ref><ref name="RoweRoutledge">{{cite encyclopedia|year=1998|title=Agnosticism|encyclopedia=[[Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]|publisher=Taylor & Francis|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=VQ-GhVWTH84C&q=agnosticism&pg=PA122|last=Rowe|first=William L.|authorlink=William L. Rowe|isbn=978-0-415-07310-3|quote=In the popular sense, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in God, whereas an atheist disbelieves in God. In the strict sense, however, agnosticism is the view that human reason is incapable of providing sufficient rational grounds to justify either the belief that God exists or the belief that God does not exist. In so far as one holds that our beliefs are rational only if they are sufficiently supported by human reason, the person who accepts the philosophical position of agnosticism will hold that neither the belief that God exists nor the belief that God does not exist is rational.|editor=Edward Craig}}</ref><ref>{{cite dictionary|dictionary=OED Online, 3rd ed.|entry=agnostic, agnosticism|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=2012 <!--|accessdate=22 July 2013-->|quote='''agnostic'''. : '''A'''. n[oun]. :# A person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of immaterial things, especially of the existence or nature of God. :# In extended use: a person who is not persuaded by or committed to a particular point of view; a sceptic. Also: person of indeterminate ideology or conviction; an equivocator. : '''B.''' adj[ective]. :# Of or relating to the belief that the existence of anything beyond and behind material phenomena is unknown and (as far as can be judged) unknowable. Also: holding this belief. :# a. In extended use: not committed to or persuaded by a particular point of view; sceptical. Also: politically or ideologically unaligned; non-partisan, equivocal. '''agnosticism''' n. The doctrine or tenets of agnostics with regard to the existence of anything beyond and behind material phenomena or to knowledge of a First Cause or God.}}</ref>
  
*[https://www.gotquestions.org/repentance.html Repentance]
+
Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of [[belief]] in the existence of [[Deity|deities]].<ref>Nielsen 2013: "Instead of saying that an atheist is someone who believes that it is false or probably false that there is a God, a more adequate characterization of atheism consists in the more complex claim that to be an atheist is to be someone who rejects belief in God for the following reasons ... : for an anthropomorphic God, the atheist rejects belief in God because it is false or probably false that there is a God; for a nonanthropomorphic God ... because the concept of such a God is either meaningless, unintelligible, contradictory, incomprehensible, or incoherent; for the God portrayed by some modern or contemporary theologians or philosophers ... because the concept of God in question is such that it merely masks an atheistic substance—e.g., "God" is just another name for love, or ... a symbolic term for moral ideals."</ref><ref>Edwards 2005: "On our definition, an 'atheist' is a person who rejects belief in God, regardless of whether or not his reason for the rejection is the claim that 'God exists' expresses a false proposition. People frequently adopt an attitude of rejection toward a position for reasons other than that it is a false proposition. It is common among contemporary philosophers, and indeed it was not uncommon in earlier centuries, to reject positions on the ground that they are meaningless. Sometimes, too, a theory is rejected on such grounds as that it is sterile or redundant or capricious, and there are many other considerations which in certain contexts are generally agreed to constitute good grounds for rejecting an assertion."</ref> In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities, although it can be defined as a lack of belief in the existence of any deities, rather than a positive belief in the nonexistence of any deities.<ref>Rowe 1998: "As commonly understood, atheism is the position that affirms the nonexistence of God. So an atheist is someone who disbelieves in God, whereas a theist is someone who believes in God. Another meaning of 'atheism' is simply nonbelief in the existence of God, rather than positive belief in the nonexistence of God. ... an atheist, in the broader sense of the term, is someone who disbelieves in every form of deity, not just the God of traditional Western theology."</ref>
  
*[http://www.allaboutgod.com/ AllAboutGod.com]
+
===Anthropomorphism===
 +
{{Main|Anthropomorphism}}
 +
[[Pascal Boyer]] argues that while there is a wide array of supernatural concepts found around the world, in general, supernatural beings tend to behave much like people. The construction of gods and spirits like persons is one of the best known traits of religion. He cites examples from [[Greek mythology]], which is, in his opinion, more like a modern [[soap opera]] than other religious systems.<ref name="boyer">{{cite book
 +
|title=Religion Explained
 +
|isbn=978-0-465-00696-0
 +
|year=2001
 +
|last=Boyer
 +
|first=Pascal
 +
|authorlink=Pascal Boyer
 +
|url=https://archive.org/details/religionexplaine00boye
 +
|url-access=registration
 +
|quote=boyer modern soap opera.
 +
|pages=[https://archive.org/details/religionexplaine00boye/page/142 142]–243
 +
|publisher=Basic Books
 +
|location=New York
 +
}}</ref>
 +
[[Bertrand du Castel]] and Timothy Jurgensen demonstrate through formalization that Boyer's explanatory model matches physics' [[epistemology]] in positing not directly observable entities as intermediaries.<ref name="ducasteljurgensen">{{cite book
 +
|title=Computer Theology
 +
|isbn=978-0-9801821-1-8
 +
|publisher= Midori Press
 +
|location= Austin, Texas
 +
|year=2008
 +
|last= du Castel
 +
|first= Bertrand
 +
|author2=Jurgensen, Timothy M.
 +
|authorlink=Bertrand du Castel
 +
|pages=221–22
 +
}}</ref>
 +
[[Anthropology|Anthropologist]] Stewart Guthrie contends that people project human features onto non-human aspects of the world because it makes those aspects more familiar. [[Sigmund Freud]] also suggested that god concepts are projections of one's father.<ref>{{cite journal|url=http://commonsenseatheism.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Barrett-Conceptualizing-a-Nonnatural-Entity.pdf
 +
|title=Conceptualizing a Nonnatural Entity: Anthropomorphism in God Concepts
 +
|year=1996
 +
|last=Barrett
 +
|first=Justin
 +
|journal=Cognitive Psychology
 +
|volume=31
 +
|issue=3
 +
|pages=219–47
 +
|doi=10.1006/cogp.1996.0017
 +
|pmid=8975683
 +
|s2cid=7646340
 +
}}</ref>
  
*[[Video testimonies of Christians]]
+
Likewise, [[Émile Durkheim]] was one of the earliest to suggest that gods represent an extension of human social life to include supernatural beings. In line with this reasoning, psychologist Matt Rossano contends that when humans began living in larger groups, they may have created gods as a means of enforcing morality. In small groups, morality can be enforced by social forces such as gossip or reputation. However, it is much harder to enforce morality using social forces in much larger groups. Rossano indicates that by including ever-watchful gods and spirits, humans discovered an effective strategy for restraining selfishness and building more cooperative groups.<ref name="supernature">{{cite journal
 +
|last=Rossano
 +
|first=Matt
 +
|title=Supernaturalizing Social Life: Religion and the Evolution of Human Cooperation
 +
|journal=Human Nature (Hawthorne, N.Y.)
 +
|year=2007
 +
|volume=18
 +
|issue=3
 +
|pages=272–94
 +
|doi=10.1007/s12110-007-9002-4
 +
|pmid=26181064
 +
|s2cid=1585551
 +
|url=http://www2.selu.edu/Academics/Faculty/mrossano/recentpubs/Supernaturalizing.pdf|accessdate=25 June 2009}}
 +
</ref>
  
'''Tips on choosing a Christian church:'''
+
==Existence==
 +
{{Main|Existence of God}}[[File:St-thomas-aquinas.jpg|thumb|upright=0.9|[[Thomas Aquinas|St. Thomas Aquinas]] summed up [[Quinque viae|five main arguments]] as proofs for God's existence. Painting by [[Carlo Crivelli]], 1476)]]
 +
[[File:Sir Isaac Newton (1643-1727).jpg|thumb|upright=0.9|[[Isaac Newton]] saw the existence of a Creator necessary in the movement of astronomical objects. Painting by [[Godfrey Kneller]], 1689]]
 +
Arguments about the existence of God typically include empirical, deductive, and inductive types. Different views include that: "God does not exist" ([[Weak and strong atheism|strong atheism]]); "God almost certainly does not exist" (''de facto'' [[atheism]]); "no one knows whether God exists" ([[agnosticism]]);<ref>[[Thomas Henry Huxley]], an English biologist, was the first to come up with the word ''agnostic'' in 1869 {{Cite book| last = Dixon| first = Thomas| title = Science and Religion: A Very Short Introduction| publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2008 |location=Oxford |page=63 |isbn=978-0-19-929551-7}} However, earlier authors and published works have promoted an agnostic points of view. They include [[Protagoras]], a 5th-century [[Before Common Era|BCE]] Greek philosopher. {{cite web|url=http://www.iep.utm.edu/p/protagor.htm|title=The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy – Protagoras (c. 490 – c. 420 BCE)|accessdate=6 October 2008|quote=While the pious might wish to look to the gods to provide absolute moral guidance in the relativistic universe of the Sophistic Enlightenment, that certainty also was cast into doubt by philosophic and sophistic thinkers, who pointed out the absurdity and immorality of the conventional epic accounts of the gods. Protagoras' prose treatise about the gods began 'Concerning the gods, I have no means of knowing whether they exist or not or of what sort they may be. Many things prevent knowledge including the obscurity of the subject and the brevity of human life.'|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20081014181706/http://www.iep.utm.edu/p/protagor.htm|archivedate=14 October 2008 |url-status=live}}</ref> "God exists, but this cannot be proven or disproven" (''de facto'' [[theism]]); and that "God exists and this can be proven" ([[theism|strong theism]]).<ref name="Dawkins-Delusion" />
  
*[http://www.allaboutreligion.org/choosing-a-christian-church-faq.htm Choosing a Christian Church]
+
Countless arguments have been proposed to prove the existence of God.<ref>{{cite book|editor-last=Kreeft|editor-first=Peter|title=Summa of the Summa|year=1990|publisher=Ignatius Press |page=63 |first=Thomas |last=Aquinas}}</ref> Some of the most notable arguments are the [[Five Ways (Aquinas)|Five Ways of Aquinas]], the [[Argument from desire]] proposed by [[C.S. Lewis]], and the [[Ontological Argument]] formulated both by [[St. Anselm]] and [[Descartes|René Descartes]].<ref>{{cite book|editor-last=Kreeft|editor-first=Peter |title=Summa of the Summa|year=1990|publisher=Ignatius Press |pages=65–69 |first=Thomas |last=Aquinas}}</ref>
  
'''Spiritual growth as a Christian:'''
+
St. Anselm's approach was to define God as, "that than which nothing greater can be conceived". Famed pantheist philosopher [[Baruch Spinoza]] would later carry this idea to its extreme: "By God I understand a being absolutely infinite, i.e., a substance consisting of infinite attributes, of which each one expresses an eternal and infinite essence." For Spinoza, the whole of the natural universe is made of one substance, God, or its equivalent, Nature.<ref>{{cite book|last=Curley|first=Edwin M.|year=1985|title=The Collected Works of Spinoza|publisher=Princeton University Press|isbn=978-0-691-07222-7}}</ref> His proof for the existence of God was a variation of the Ontological argument.<ref>{{cite journal |url= http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2012/entries/spinoza/ |title=Baruch Spinoza|date=29 June 2001|last1=Nadler|first1=Steven}}</ref>
  
*[http://www.navpress.com/product/9781576839324/The-Pursuit-of-Holiness-Jerry-Bridges The Pursuit of Holiness] by Jerry Bridges
+
[[Scientist]] [[Isaac Newton]] saw [[Nontrinitarianism|the nontrinitarian God]]<ref name="heretic">{{cite journal |last=Snobelen |first=Stephen D. |authorlink=Stephen Snobelen |title=Isaac Newton, heretic : the strategies of a Nicodemite |journal=British Journal for the History of Science |volume=32 |pages=381–419 |year=1999 |url=http://www.toriah.org/articles/snobelen-1999-1.pdf |doi=10.1017/S0007087499003751 |issue=4 |access-date=7 September 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140908043029/http://www.toriah.org/articles/snobelen-1999-1.pdf |archive-date=8 September 2014 |url-status=dead}}</ref> as the masterful creator whose existence could not be denied in the face of the grandeur of all creation.<ref>Webb, R.K. ed. Knud Haakonssen. "The emergence of Rational Dissent." Enlightenment and Religion: Rational Dissent in eighteenth-century Britain. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 1996. p19.</ref> Nevertheless, he rejected polymath [[Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz|Leibniz]]' thesis that God would necessarily make a perfect world which requires no intervention from the creator. In Query 31 of the ''Opticks'', Newton simultaneously made an argument from design and for the necessity of intervention:{{quote| For while comets move in very eccentric orbs in all manner of positions, blind fate could never make all the planets move one and the same way in orbs concentric, some inconsiderable irregularities excepted which may have arisen from the mutual actions of comets and planets on one another, and which will be apt to increase, till this system wants a reformation.<ref>Newton, 1706 ''Opticks'' (2nd Edition), quoted in H.G. Alexander 1956 (ed): ''The Leibniz-Clarke correspondence'', University of Manchester Press.</ref>}}St. Thomas believed that the [[existence of God]] is self-evident in itself, but not to us. "Therefore I say that this proposition, "God exists", of itself is self-evident, for the predicate is the same as the subject.... Now because we do not know the essence of God, the proposition is not self-evident to us; but needs to be demonstrated by things that are more known to us, though less known in their nature—namely, by effects."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1002.htm#article1|title=SUMMA THEOLOGIAE: The existence of God (Prima Pars, Q. 2)|accessdate=30 December 2016}}</ref>
*[http://www.navpress.com/product/9780891099413/The-Practice-of-Godliness-Jerry-Bridges The Practice of Godliness] by Jerry Bridges
+
 
*[http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/529785.The_Complete_Book_of_Discipleship The Complete Book of Discipleship: On Being and Making Followers of Christ]
+
St. Thomas believed that the existence of God can be demonstrated. Briefly in the ''[[Summa Theologica|Summa theologiae]]'' and more extensively in the ''[[Summa contra Gentiles]]'', he considered in great detail five arguments for the existence of God, widely known as the ''[[quinque viae]]'' (Five Ways).{{Hatnote|For the original text of the five proofs, see [[quinque viae]]}}
 +
# Motion: Some things undoubtedly move, though cannot cause their own motion. Since there can be no infinite chain of causes of motion, there must be a [[Unmoved mover|First Mover]] not moved by anything else, and this is what everyone understands by God.
 +
# Causation: As in the case of motion, nothing can cause itself, and an infinite chain of causation is impossible, so there must be a [[Prima causa|First Cause]], called God.
 +
# Existence of necessary and the unnecessary: Our experience includes things certainly existing but apparently unnecessary. Not everything can be unnecessary, for then once there was nothing and there would still be nothing. Therefore, we are compelled to suppose something that exists necessarily, having this necessity only from itself; in fact itself the cause for other things to exist.
 +
# Gradation: If we can notice a gradation in things in the sense that some things are more hot, good, etc., there must be a superlative that is the truest and noblest thing, and so most fully existing. This then, we call God (Note: Thomas does not ascribe actual qualities to God Himself).
 +
# Ordered tendencies of nature: A direction of actions to an end is noticed in all bodies following natural laws. Anything without awareness tends to a goal under the guidance of one who is aware. This we call God (Note that even when we guide objects, in Thomas's view, the source of all our knowledge comes from God as well).<ref>Summa of Theology I, q. 2, The Five Ways Philosophers Have Proven God's Existence</ref>
 +
 
 +
Some theologians, such as the scientist and theologian [[Alister McGrath|A.E. McGrath]], argue that the existence of God is not a question that can be answered using the [[scientific method]].<ref name="mcgrath2005">{{cite book|author=Alister E. McGrath|title=Dawkins' God: genes, memes, and the meaning of life|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=V9dr6167AJ8C|year=2005|publisher=Wiley-Blackwell|isbn=978-1-4051-2539-0}}</ref><ref name="barackman2001">{{cite book|author=Floyd H. Barackman|title=Practical Christian Theology: Examining the Great Doctrines of the Faith|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Jb5aRB7OxWsC|year=2001|publisher=Kregel Academic|isbn=978-0-8254-2380-2}}</ref> [[Agnostic]] [[Stephen Jay Gould]] argues that science and religion are not in conflict and do not [[Non-overlapping magisteria|overlap]].<ref>{{cite book|title=Leonardo's Mountain of Clams and the Diet of Worms|last=Gould|first=Stephen J.|page=274|publisher=Jonathan Cape|year=1998|isbn=978-0-224-05043-2}}</ref>
 +
 
 +
Some findings in the fields of [[cosmology]], [[evolutionary biology]] and [[neuroscience]] are interpreted by some atheists (including [[Lawrence M. Krauss]] and [[Sam Harris]]) as evidence that God is an imaginary entity only, with no basis in reality.<ref>Krauss L. ''A Universe from Nothing''. Free Press, New York. 2012. {{ISBN|978-1-4516-2445-8}}</ref><ref name="Harris, S 2005">Harris, S. The end of faith. W.W. Norton and Company, New York. 2005. {{ISBN|0-393-03515-8}}</ref> These atheists claim that a single, omniscient God who is imagined to have created the universe and is particularly attentive to the lives of humans has been imagined, embellished and promulgated in a trans-generational manner.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Culotta | first1 = E | year = 2009 | title = The origins of religion | url = | journal = Science | volume = 326 | issue = 5954| pages = 784–87 | doi=10.1126/science.326_784| pmid = 19892955 | bibcode = 2009Sci...326..784C }}</ref> [[Richard Dawkins]] interprets such findings not only as a lack of evidence for the material existence of such a God, but as extensive evidence to the contrary.<ref name="Dawkins-Delusion" /> However, his views are opposed by some theologians and scientists including [[Alister McGrath]], who argues that existence of God is compatible with science.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.rzim.org/resources/audio_visuals.php |title=Audio Visual Resources |publisher=[[Ravi Zacharias|Ravi Zacharias International Ministries]] |accessdate=7 April 2007 |archiveurl = https://web.archive.org/web/20070329053738/http://www.rzim.org/resources/audio_visuals.php <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = 29 March 2007}}, includes sound recording of the Dawkins-McGrath debate</ref>
 +
 
 +
==Specific attributes==
 +
Different religious traditions assign differing (though often similar) attributes and characteristics to God, including expansive powers and abilities, psychological characteristics, gender characteristics, and preferred nomenclature. The assignment of these attributes often differs according to the [[conceptions of God]] in the culture from which they arise. For example, [[attributes of God in Christianity]], attributes of [[God in Islam]], and [[Thirteen Attributes of Mercy|the Thirteen Attributes of Mercy in Judaism]] share certain similarities arising from their common roots.
 +
 
 +
===Names===
 +
{{Main|Names of God}}
 +
[[File:Allah Names in Chinese Arabic Script.jpg|thumb|upright=0.7|99 names of [[Allah]], in [[Chinese language|Chinese]] [[Sini (script)]]]]
 +
The word ''God'' is "one of the most complex and difficult in the English language." In the [[Judeo-Christian]] tradition, "the Bible has been the principal source of the conceptions of God". That the Bible "includes many different images, concepts, and ways of thinking about" God has resulted in perpetual "disagreements about how God is to be conceived and understood".<ref>Francis Schüssler Fiorenza and Gordon D. Kaufman, "God", Ch 6, in Mark C. Taylor, ed, ''Critical Terms for Religious Studies'' (University of Chicago, 1998/2008), 136–40.</ref>
 +
 
 +
Many traditions see God as incorporeal and eternal, and regard him as a point of living light like human souls, but without a physical body, as he does not enter the cycle of birth, death and rebirth. God is seen as the perfect and constant embodiment of all virtues, powers and values and that he is the unconditionally loving Father of all souls, irrespective of their religion, gender, or culture.<ref name="Ramsay_Custodians of Purity4">{{cite journal|last=Ramsay|first=Tamasin|date=September 2010|title=Custodians of Purity An Ethnography of the Brahma Kumaris|journal=Monash University|issue=|pages=107–08}}</ref>
 +
 
 +
Throughout the Hebrew and Christian Bibles there are many names for God. One of them is Elohim. Another one is ''El Shaddai'', translated "God Almighty".<ref>Gen. 17:1; 28:3; 35:11; Ex. 6:31; Ps. 91:1, 2</ref> A third notable name is ''El Elyon'', which means "The High God".<ref>Gen. 14:19; Ps. 9:2; Dan. 7:18, 22, 25</ref> Also noted in the Hebrew and Christian Bibles is the name "[[I Am that I Am]]".<ref>Exodus 3:13-15</ref>
 +
 
 +
God is described and referred in the [[Quran]] and [[hadith]] by certain names or attributes, the most common being ''[[R-Ḥ-M|Al-Rahman]]'', meaning "Most Compassionate" and ''Al-Rahim'', meaning "Most Merciful" (See [[Names of God in Islam]]).<ref name="Ben">{{Cite book|last=Bentley |first=David |title=The 99 Beautiful Names for God for All the People of the Book |publisher=William Carey Library |year= 1999 |isbn=978-0-87808-299-5}}</ref> Many of these names are also used in the scriptures of the [[Baháʼí Faith]].
 +
 
 +
[[Vaishnavism]], a tradition in Hinduism, has a [[list of titles and names of Krishna]].
 +
 
 +
===Gender===
 +
{{Main|Gender of God}}
 +
The gender of God may be viewed as either a literal or an [[allegory|allegorical]] aspect of a [[deity]] who, in classical western philosophy, transcends bodily form.<ref>{{cite book|last=Aquinas|first=Thomas|title=Summa Theologica|year=1274|location=Part 1, Question 3, Article 1|url=http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1003.htm}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author=Augustine of Hippo|title=Confessions|url=https://archive.org/details/confessionsaugu00shedgoog|year=397|location=Book 7|publisher=Warren F. Draper}}</ref> [[Polytheistic]] religions commonly attribute to each of ''the gods'' a gender, allowing each to interact with any of the others, and perhaps with humans, sexually. In most [[monotheistic]] religions, God has no counterpart with which to relate sexually. Thus, in classical western philosophy the [[gender]] of this one-and-only deity is most likely to be an [[analogical]] statement of how humans and God address, and relate to, each other. Namely, God is seen as begetter of the world and revelation which corresponds to the active (as opposed to the receptive) role in sexual intercourse.<ref name=":1">{{cite book|last1=Lang|first1=David|title=Why Matter Matters: Philosophical and Scriptural Reflections on the Sacraments|year=2002|publisher=Our Sunday Visitor|location=Chapter Five: Why Male Priests?|isbn=978-1-931709-34-7|first2=Peter |last2=Kreeft}}</ref>
 +
 
 +
Biblical sources usually refer to God using male words, except {{Bibleverse|Genesis||1:26–27|KJV}},<ref>Elaine H. Pagels [http://holyspirit-shekinah.org/_/what_became_of_god_the_mother-1.htm "What Became of God the Mother? Conflicting Images of God in Early Christianity"] Signs, Vol. 2, No. 2 (Winter, 1976), pp. 293–303</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Coogan|first=Michael|title=God and Sex. What the Bible Really Says|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2_gPKQEACAAJ&q=god+and+sex|accessdate=5 May 2011|edition=1st|year=2010|publisher=Twelve. Hachette Book Group|location=New York, Boston|isbn=978-0-446-54525-9|page=[https://archive.org/details/godsexwhatbi00coog/page/175 175]|chapter=6. Fire in Divine Loins: God's Wives in Myth and Metaphor|quote=humans are modeled on ''elohim'', specifically in their sexual differences.|url=https://archive.org/details/godsexwhatbi00coog/page/175}}</ref> {{Bibleverse|Psalm||123:2–3|KJV}}, and {{Bibleverse|Luke||15:8–10|KJV}} (female); {{Bibleverse|Hosea||11:3–4|KJV}}, {{Bibleverse|Deuteronomy||32:18|KJV}}, {{Bibleverse|Isaiah||66:13|KJV}}, {{Bibleverse|Isaiah||49:15|KJV}}, {{Bibleverse|Isaiah||42:14|KJV}}, {{Bibleverse|Psalm||131:2|KJV}} (a mother); {{Bibleverse|Deuteronomy||32:11–12|KJV}} (a mother eagle); and {{Bibleverse|Matthew||23:37|KJV}} and {{Bibleverse|Luke||13:34|KJV}} (a mother hen).
 +
 
 +
===Relationship with creation===
 +
{{See also|Creator deity|Prayer|Worship}}
 +
[[File:William Blake 008.jpg|thumb|''And Elohim Created Adam'' by [[William Blake]], c. 1795]]
 +
[[Prayer]] plays a significant role among many believers. Muslims believe that the [[purpose of life|purpose of existence]] is to [[worship]] God.<ref name="patheos1">{{cite web|url=http://www.patheos.com/Library/Islam/Beliefs/Human-Nature-and-the-Purpose-of-Existence.html|title=Human Nature and the Purpose of Existence|publisher=Patheos.com|accessdate=29 January 2011}}</ref><ref>{{Cite quran|51|56|style=ref}}</ref> He is viewed as a personal God and there are no intermediaries, such as [[clergy]], to contact God. Prayer often also includes [[supplication]] and [[Forgiveness#Religious views|asking forgiveness]]. God is often believed to be forgiving. For example, a [[hadith]] states God would replace a sinless people with one who sinned but still asked repentance.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.islamtoday.net/artshow-426-3787.htm|title=Allah would replace you with a people who sin|publisher=islamtoday.net|accessdate=13 October 2013|url-status=dead|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20131014174102/http://en.islamtoday.net/artshow-426-3787.htm|archivedate=14 October 2013}}</ref> Christian theologian [[Alister McGrath]] writes that there are good reasons to suggest that a "personal god" is integral to the Christian outlook, but that one has to understand it is an analogy. "To say that God is like a person is to affirm the divine ability and willingness to relate to others. This does not imply that God is human, or located at a specific point in the universe."<ref>{{Cite book|first=Alister|last=McGrath|authorlink=Alister McGrath|title=Christian Theology: An Introduction|publisher=Blackwell Publishing|year=2006|isbn=978-1-4051-5360-7|page=205}}</ref>
 +
 
 +
Adherents of different religions generally disagree as to how to best [[worship]] God and what is [[divine providence|God's plan]] for mankind, if there is one. There are different approaches to reconciling the contradictory claims of monotheistic religions. One view is taken by exclusivists, who believe they are the [[chosen people]] or have exclusive access to [[absolute truth]], generally through [[revelation]] or encounter with the Divine, which adherents of other religions do not. Another view is [[religious pluralism]]. A pluralist typically believes that his religion is the right one, but does not deny the partial truth of other religions. An example of a pluralist view in Christianity is [[supersessionism]], i.e., the belief that one's religion is the fulfillment of previous religions. A third approach is [[inclusivism|relativistic inclusivism]], where everybody is seen as equally right; an example being [[universalism]]: the doctrine that [[salvation]] is eventually available for everyone. A fourth approach is [[syncretic|syncretism]], mixing different elements from different religions. An example of syncretism is the [[New Age]] movement.
 +
 
 +
Jews and Christians believe that humans are created in the [[image of God]], and are the center, crown and key to God's creation, [[Stewardship (theology)|stewards]] for God, supreme over everything else God had made ({{Bibleref2|Gen|1:26|NRSV}}); for this reason, humans are in Christianity called the "Children of God".{{citation needed|date=September 2020}}
 +
 
 +
==Depiction==
 +
===Zoroastrianism===
 +
[[File:Naqsh_i_Rustam._Investiture_d'Ardashir_1.jpg|thumb|Ahura Mazda (depiction is on the right, with high crown) presents [[Ardashir I]] (left) with the ring of kingship. (Relief at [[Naqsh-e Rustam]], 3rd century CE)]]
 +
During the early Parthian Empire, Ahura Mazda was visually represented for worship. This practice ended during the beginning of the Sassanid empire. Zoroastrian [[iconoclasm]], which can be traced to the end of the Parthian period and the beginning of the Sassanid, eventually put an end to the use of all images of Ahura Mazda in worship. However, Ahura Mazda continued to be symbolized by a dignified male figure, standing or on horseback which is found in Sassanian investiture.{{Sfn|Boyce|1983|p=686}}
 +
 
 +
===Judaism===
 +
At least some Jews do not use any image for God, since God is the unimaginable Being who cannot be represented in material forms.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.britannica.com/biography/Moses-Hebrew-prophet|title=Moses – Hebrew prophet|website=Encyclopædia Britannica|access-date=19 March 2016}}</ref>
 +
 
 +
The [[Burning bush|burning bush that was not consumed by the flames]] is described in [[Book of Exodus]] as a symbolic representation of God when he appeared to [[Moses]].<ref>[http://bible.oremus.org/?passage=Exodus+3:1%E2%80%934:5&version=nrsv Exodus 3:1–4:5]</ref>
 +
 
 +
=== Christianity ===
 +
{{Further|God in Christianity|God in Catholicism}}
 +
{{See also|God the Father in Western art}}
 +
Early Christians believed that the words of the [[Gospel of John]] 1:18: "No man has seen God at any time" and numerous other statements were meant to apply not only to God, but to all attempts at the depiction of God.<ref name="James Cornwell page 24">James Cornwell, 2009 ''Saints, Signs, and Symbols: The Symbolic Language of Christian Art'' {{ISBN|0-8192-2345-X}} p. 2</ref>
 +
 
 +
[[File:Ascension, sacramentaire de Drogon.jpg|thumb|Use of the symbolic [[Hand of God (art)|Hand of God]] in the [[Ascension of Christ|Ascension]] from the [[Drogo Sacramentary]], c. 850]]
 +
However, later depictions of God are found. Some, like the [[Hand of God (art)|Hand of God]], are depiction borrowed from Jewish art.
 +
 
 +
The beginning of the 8th century witnessed the suppression and destruction of religious icons as the period of [[Byzantine iconoclasm]] (literally ''image-breaking'') started. The [[Second Council of Nicaea]] in 787 effectively ended the first period of [[Byzantine iconoclasm]] and restored the honouring of icons and holy images in general.<ref>Edward Gibbon, 1995 ''The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'' {{ISBN|0-679-60148-1}} p. 1693</ref> However, this did not immediately translate into large scale depictions of God the Father. Even supporters of the use of icons in the 8th century, such as Saint [[John of Damascus]], drew a distinction between images of God the Father and those of Christ.
 +
 
 +
Prior to the 10th century no attempt was made to use a human to symbolize [[God the Father]] in [[Western art]].<ref name="James Cornwell page 24" /> Yet, Western art eventually required some way to illustrate the presence of the Father, so through successive representations a set of artistic styles for symbolizing the Father using a man gradually emerged around the 10th century AD. A rationale for the use of a human is the belief that God created the soul of Man in the image of his own (thus allowing Human to transcend the other animals).
 +
 
 +
It appears that when early artists designed to represent God the Father, fear and awe restrained them from a usage of the whole human figure. Typically only a small part would be used as the image, usually the hand, or sometimes the face, but rarely a whole human. In many images, the figure of the Son supplants the Father, so a smaller portion of the person of the Father is depicted.<ref name="Adolphe Napoléon Didron pages 169">Adolphe Napoléon Didron, 2003 ''Christian iconography: or The history of Christian art in the middle ages'' {{ISBN|0-7661-4075-X}} p. 169</ref>
 +
 
 +
By the 12th century depictions of God the Father had started to appear in French [[illuminated manuscript]]s, which as a less public form could often be more adventurous in their iconography, and in [[stained glass]] church windows in England. Initially the head or bust was usually shown in some form of frame of clouds in the top of the picture space, where the Hand of God had formerly appeared; the [[Baptism of Jesus|Baptism of Christ]] on the famous [[Baptismal font at St Bartholomew's Church, Liège|baptismal font in Liège]] of [[Rainer of Huy]] is an example from 1118 (a Hand of God is used in another scene). Gradually the amount of the human symbol shown can increase to a half-length figure, then a full-length, usually enthroned, as in [[Giotto]]'s [[fresco]] of c. 1305 in [[Padua]].<ref name="ReferenceA">[[Arena Chapel]], at the top of the triumphal arch, ''God sending out the angel of the Annunciation''. See Schiller, I, fig 15</ref> In the 14th century the [[Naples Bible]] carried a depiction of God the Father in the [[Burning bush]]. By the early 15th century, the [[Très Riches Heures du Duc de Berry]] has a considerable number of symbols, including an elderly but tall and elegant full-length figure walking in the [[Garden of Eden]], which show a considerable diversity of apparent ages and dress. The [[Battistero di San Giovanni (Florence)#Lorenzo Ghiberti|"Gates of Paradise" of the Florence Baptistry]] by [[Lorenzo Ghiberti]], begun in 1425 use a similar tall full-length symbol for the Father. The [[Rohan Book of Hours]] of about 1430 also included depictions of God the Father in half-length human form, which were now becoming standard, and the Hand of God becoming rarer. At the same period other works, like the large Genesis [[altarpiece]] by the Hamburg painter [[Meister Bertram]], continued to use the old depiction of Christ as ''Logos'' in Genesis scenes. In the 15th century there was a brief fashion for depicting all three persons of the Trinity as [[Trinity#Less common types of depiction|similar or identical figures with the usual appearance of Christ]].
 +
 
 +
In an early Venetian school ''[[Coronation of the Virgin]]'' by [[Giovanni d'Alemagna]] and [[Antonio Vivarini]] (c. 1443), The Father is depicted using the symbol consistently used by other artists later, namely a patriarch, with benign, yet powerful countenance and with long white hair and a beard, a depiction largely derived from, and justified by, the near-physical, but still figurative, description of the [[Ancient of Days]].<ref>Bigham Chapter 7</ref>
 +
 
 +
. ...the Ancient of Days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. ([[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] 7:9)
 +
 
 +
[[File:The Baptism of Christ (Verrocchio & Leonardo).jpg|left|thumb|Usage of two Hands of God (relatively unusual) and the [[Holy Spirit]] as a dove in ''[[The Baptism of Christ (Verrocchio)|Baptism of Christ]]'' by Verrocchio and Leonardo da Vinci, {{circa|1472–1475}}.]]
 +
 
 +
In the ''Annunciation'' by [[Benvenuto di Giovanni]] in 1470, God the Father is portrayed in the red robe and a hat that resembles that of a Cardinal. However, even in the later part of the 15th century, the symbolic representation of the Father and the Holy Spirit as "hands and dove" continued, e.g. in [[Andrea del Verrocchio]] and [[Leonardo da Vinci|Leonardo da Vinci's]] [[The Baptism of Christ (Verrocchio)|''Baptism of Christ'']] in {{circa|1472–1475}}.<ref>Arthur de Bles, 2004 ''How to Distinguish the Saints in Art by Their Costumes, Symbols and Attributes'' {{ISBN|1-4179-0870-X}} p. 32</ref>
 +
 
 +
[[File:God_the_Father_with_His_Right_Hand_Raised_in_Blessing.jpg|thumb|''God the Father with His Right Hand Raised in Blessing'', with a triangular halo representing the Trinity, [[Girolamo dai Libri]], c. 1555]]
 +
In Renaissance paintings of the adoration of the Trinity, God may be depicted in two ways, either with emphasis on The Father, or the three elements of the Trinity. The most usual depiction of the Trinity in Renaissance art depicts God the Father using an old man, usually with a long beard and patriarchal in appearance, sometimes with a triangular halo (as a reference to the Trinity), or with a papal crown, specially in Northern Renaissance painting. In these depictions The Father may hold a globe or book (to symbolize God's knowledge and as a reference to how knowledge is deemed divine). He is behind and above Christ on the Cross in the [[Throne of Mercy]] iconography. A dove, the symbol of the [[Holy Spirit]] may hover above. Various people from different classes of society, e.g. kings, popes or martyrs may be present in the picture. In a Trinitarian [[Pietà]], God the Father is often symbolized using a man wearing a papal dress and a papal crown, supporting the dead Christ in his arms. They are depicted as floating in heaven with angels who carry the [[instruments of the Passion]].<ref>Irene Earls, 1987 ''Renaissance art: a topical dictionary'' {{ISBN|0-313-24658-0}} pp. 8, 283</ref>
 +
 
 +
Representations of God the Father and the Trinity were attacked both by Protestants and within Catholicism, by the [[Jansenist]] and [[Baianist]] movements as well as more orthodox theologians. As with other attacks on Catholic imagery, this had the effect both of reducing Church support for the less central depictions, and strengthening it for the core ones. In the [[Western Church]], the pressure to restrain religious imagery resulted in the highly influential decrees of the final session of the [[Council of Trent]] in 1563. The Council of Trent decrees confirmed the traditional Catholic doctrine that images only represented the person depicted, and that veneration to them was paid to the person, not the image.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct25.html|title=CT25|accessdate=30 December 2016}}</ref>
 +
 
 +
Artistic depictions of God the Father were uncontroversial in Catholic art thereafter, but less common depictions of the [[Trinity]] were condemned. In 1745 [[Pope Benedict XIV]] explicitly supported the [[Throne of Mercy]] depiction, referring to the "Ancient of Days", but in 1786 it was still necessary for [[Pope Pius VI]] to issue a [[papal bull]] condemning the decision of an Italian church council to remove all images of the Trinity from churches.<ref>Bigham, 73–76</ref>
 +
 
 +
[[File:The Creation of Adam.jpg|thumb|upright=2.25|The famous ''[[The Creation of Adam]]'' on the [[Sistine Chapel ceiling]], by [[Michelangelo]] c. 1512]]
 +
God the Father is symbolized in several Genesis scenes in [[Michelangelo]]'s [[Sistine Chapel ceiling]], most famously ''[[The Creation of Adam]]'' (whose image of near touching hands of God and Adam is iconic of humanity, being a reminder that Man is created in the Image and Likeness of God ({{Bibleref2|Gen|1:26|NRSV}})).God the Father is depicted as a powerful figure, floating in the clouds in [[Assumption of the Virgin (Titian)|Titian's ''Assumption of the Virgin'']] in the [[Frari of Venice]], long admired as a masterpiece of [[High Renaissance]] art.<ref>Louis Lohr Martz, 1991 ''From Renaissance to baroque: essays on literature and art'' {{ISBN|0-8262-0796-0}} p. 222</ref> The [[Church of the Gesù]] in Rome includes a number of 16th-century depictions of [[God the Father]]. In some of these paintings the [[Trinity]] is still alluded to in terms of three angels, but [[Giovanni Battista Fiammeri]] also depicted God the Father as a man riding on a cloud, above the scenes.<ref>[[Gauvin Alexander Bailey]], 2003 ''Between Renaissance and Baroque: Jesuit art in Rome'' {{ISBN|0-8020-3721-6}} p. 233</ref>
 +
 
 +
In both the ''Last Judgment'' and the ''Coronation of the Virgin'' paintings by [[Rubens]] he depicted God the Father using the image that by then had become widely accepted, a bearded patriarchal figure above the fray. In the 17th century, the two Spanish artists [[Diego Velázquez]] (whose father-in-law [[Francisco Pacheco]] was in charge of the approval of new images for the Inquisition) and [[Bartolomé Esteban Murillo]] both depicted God the Father using a patriarchal figure with a white beard in a purple robe.
 +
 
 +
While representations of God the Father were growing in Italy, Spain, Germany and the Low Countries, there was resistance elsewhere in Europe, even during the 17th century. In 1632 most members of the [[Star Chamber]] court in England (except the [[Archbishop of York]]) condemned the use of the images of the Trinity in church windows, and some considered them illegal.<ref>Charles Winston, 1847 ''An Inquiry Into the Difference of Style Observable in Ancient Glass Paintings, Especially in England'' {{ISBN|1-103-66622-3}}, (2009) p. 229</ref> Later in the 17th century [[Sir Thomas Browne]] wrote that he considered the representation of God the Father using an old man "a dangerous act" that might lead to Egyptian symbolism.<ref name=":2">Sir Thomas Browne's Works, 1852, {{ISBN|0-559-37687-1}}, 2006 p. 156</ref> In 1847, Charles Winston was still critical of such images as a "''[[Romish|Romish trend]]''" (a term used to refer to [[Roman Catholic (term)|Roman Catholics]]) that he considered best avoided in England.<ref>Charles Winston, 1847 ''An Inquiry Into the Difference of Style Observable in Ancient Glass Paintings, Especially in England'' {{ISBN|1-103-66622-3}}, (2009) p. 230</ref>
 +
 
 +
In 1667 the 43rd chapter of the [[Moscow Sobor of 1666–1667|Great Moscow Council]] specifically included a ban on a number of symbolic depictions of God the Father and the Holy Spirit, which then also resulted in a whole range of other icons being placed on the forbidden list,<ref>Oleg Tarasov, 2004 ''Icon and devotion: sacred spaces in Imperial Russia'' {{ISBN|1-86189-118-0}} p. 185</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://genuineorthodoxchurch.com/moscow_1666.htm|title=Council of Moscow – 1666–1667|accessdate=30 December 2016}}</ref> mostly affecting Western-style depictions which had been gaining ground in Orthodox icons. The Council also declared that the person of the Trinity who was the "Ancient of Days" was Christ, as ''Logos'', not God the Father. However some icons continued to be produced in Russia, as well as [[Greece]], [[Romania]], and other Orthodox countries.
 +
 
 +
===Islam===
 +
[[File:Istanbul 027 (6445021161).jpg|thumb|The Arabic script of "Allah" in the [[Hagia Sophia]], [[Istanbul]]]]
 +
{{Further|God in Islam}}
 +
Muslims believe that God ([[Allah]]) is beyond all comprehension and equal, and does not resemble any of his creations in any way. Thus, [[Muslim]]s are not [[Iconodulism|iconodules]], are not expected to visualize God, and instead of having pictures of Allah in their [[mosque]]s, typically have religious calligraphy written on the wall.<ref name=":3" />
 +
 
 +
In the [[Isma'ilism|Ismaili]] interpretation of Islam, assigning attributes to [[Allah|God]] as well as negating any attributes from [[Allah|God]] (''[[Apophatic theology|via negativa]]'') both qualify as [[anthropomorphism]] and are rejected, as God cannot be understood by either assigning attributes to Him or taking attributes away from Him. Therefore, [[Abu Yaqub al-Sijistani|Abu Yaqub Al-Sijistani]], a renowned [[Isma'ilism|Ismaili]] thinker, suggested the method of [[double negation]]; for example: “God is not existent” followed by “God is not non-existent”. This glorifies God from any understanding or human comprehension.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Virani|first=Shafique N.|date=2010|title=The Right Path: A Post-Mongol Persian Ismaili Treatise|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00210860903541988|journal=Iranian Studies|volume=43|issue=2|pages=197–221|doi=10.1080/00210860903541988|issn=0021-0862|via=}}</ref>
 +
 
 +
===Baháʼí Faith===
 +
{{Further|Manifestation of God (Baháʼí Faith)}}
 +
 
 +
In the [[Kitáb-i-Íqán]], the primary theological work of the [[Baháʼí Faith]], God is described as “Him Who is the central Orb of the universe, its Essence and ultimate Purpose.” [[Bahá'u'lláh]] taught that God is directly unknowable to common mortals, but that his attributes and qualities can be indirectly known by learning from and imitating his divine Manifestations, which in Baháʼí theology are somewhat comparable to Hindu avatars or Abrahamic prophets. These Manifestations are the great prophets and teachers of many of the major religious traditions. These include Krishna, Buddha, Jesus, Zoroaster, Muhammad, Bahá'ú'lláh, and others. Although the faith is strictly monotheistic, it also preaches the unity of all religions and focuses on these multiple epiphanies as necessary for meeting the needs of humanity at different points in history and for different cultures, and as part of a scheme of [[Progressive revelation (Baháʼí)|progressive revelation]] and education of humanity.
 +
 
 +
==Theological approaches==
 +
{{See also|Classical theism|Theistic Personalism}}
 +
Classical theists (such as ancient Greco-Medieval philosophers, [[Roman Catholics]], [[Eastern Orthodox Christians]], many [[Jews]] and [[Muslims]], and some [[Protestants]]){{efn|The attributes of the God of classical theism{{what|reason=What attributes? Those mentioned in this paragraph or some others?|date=October 2019}} were all claimed to varying degrees by early Jewish, Christian and Muslim scholars, including [[Maimonides]],<ref name="Edwards" /> [[Augustine of Hippo|St Augustine]],<ref name="Edwards" /> and [[Al-Ghazali]].<ref name="autogenerated1">[[Alvin Plantinga|Plantinga, Alvin]]. "God, Arguments for the Existence of", ''Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy'', Routledge, 2000.</ref>}} speak of God as a [[Divine simplicity|divinely simple]] '[[Incorporeality|nothing]]' that is completely [[transcendence (religion)|transcendent]] (totally independent of all else), and having attributes such as [[Immutability (theology)|immutability]], [[impassibility]], and timelessness.<ref name="Craig98">1998, God, concepts of, Edward Craig, Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Taylor & Francis, [https://books.google.com/books?id=5m5z_ca-qDkC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage]</ref> [[Theology|Theologians]] of theistic personalism (the view held by [[Rene Descartes]], [[Isaac Newton]], [[Alvin Plantinga]], [[Richard Swinburne]], [[William Lane Craig]], and most [[Evangelicalism|modern evangelicals]]) argue that God is most generally the ground of all being, immanent in and transcendent over the whole world of reality, with immanence and transcendence being the contrapletes of personality.<ref>[http://www.ditext.com/runes/t.html www.ditext.com]</ref> [[Carl Jung]] equated [[Jungian interpretation of religion|religious ideas of God]] with transcendental metaphors of [[higher consciousness]], in which God can be just as easily be imagined "as an eternally flowing current of vital energy that endlessly changes shape ... as an eternally unmoved, unchangeable essence."<ref name=jung>{{cite book|last=Jung|first=Carl|year=1976|origyear=1971|chapter=[[Answer to Job]]|title=The Portable Jung|editor=[[Joseph Campbell]]|publisher=[[Penguin Books]]|isbn=978-0-14-015070-4|pages=522–23}}</ref>
 +
 
 +
Many [[philosopher]]s developed arguments for the existence of God,<ref name="Platinga" /> while attempting to comprehend the precise implications of God's attributes. Reconciling some of those attributes—particularly the attributes of the God of theistic personalism—generated important philosophical problems and debates. For example, God's omniscience may seem to imply that God knows how free agents will choose to act. If God does know this, their ostensible [[free will]] might be illusory, or foreknowledge does not imply predestination, and if God does not know it, God may not be omniscient.<ref name="Wierenga">Wierenga, Edward R. "Divine foreknowledge" in [[Robert Audi|Audi, Robert]]. ''The Cambridge Companion to Philosophy''. [[Cambridge University Press]], 2001.</ref>
 +
 
 +
The last centuries of philosophy have seen vigorous questions regarding the [[Arguments for the existence of God|arguments for God's existence]] raised by such philosophers as [[Immanuel Kant]], [[David Hume]] and [[Antony Flew]], although Kant held that the [[argument from morality]] was valid. The [[Theism|theist]] response has been either to contend, as does [[Alvin Plantinga]], that [[faith]] is "[[reformed epistemology|properly basic]]", or to take, as does [[Richard Swinburne]], the [[evidentialist]] position.<ref>{{Cite journal |first=Michael |last=Beaty |year=1991 |title=God Among the Philosophers |url=http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=53 |journal=The Christian Century |accessdate=20 February 2007 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20070109162529/http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=53 |archivedate=9 January 2007}}</ref> Some theists agree that only some of the arguments for God's existence are compelling, but argue that faith is not a product of [[reason]], but requires risk. There would be no risk, they say, if the arguments for God's existence were as solid as the laws of logic, a position summed up by [[Blaise Pascal|Pascal]] as "the heart has reasons of which reason does not know."<ref>[[Blaise Pascal|Pascal, Blaise]]. ''[[Pensées]]'', 1669.</ref>
 +
 
 +
Many religious believers allow for the existence of other, less powerful [[spiritual being]]s such as [[angel]]s, [[saint]]s, [[jinn]], [[demon]]s, and [[Deva (New Age)|devas]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/more_americans_believe_in_angels_than_global_warming/|title=More Americans Believe in Angels than Global Warming|publisher=Outsidethebeltway.com|date=8 December 2009|accessdate=4 December 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine|last=Van |first=David |url=http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1842179,00.html|title=Guardian Angels Are Here, Say Most Americans|magazine=Time |date=18 September 2008 |accessdate=4 December 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57347634/poll-nearly-8-in-10-americans-believe-in-angels/ |title=Poll: Nearly 8 in 10 Americans believe in angels |publisher=CBS News|date=23 December 2011|accessdate=4 December 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/23/ST2008062300818.html|title=Most Americans Believe in Higher Power, Poll Finds|newspaper=washingtonpost.com|accessdate=4 December 2012|first=Jacqueline L.|last=Salmon}}</ref><ref>Qur'an 15:27</ref>
 +
 
 +
==See also==
 +
{{Portal|Mythology|Philosophy|Religion}}
 +
* {{look from|God}}
 +
* [[Absolute (philosophy)]]
 +
* [[Apeiron (cosmology)]]
 +
* [[Demigod]]
 +
* [[God complex]]
 +
* [[God (disambiguation)]]
 +
* [[God (male deity)]]
 +
* [[Goddess]]
 +
* [[List of deities]]
 +
* [[Logos]]
 +
* [[Logos (Christianity)]]
 +
* [[Monad (philosophy)]]
 +
* [[Relationship between religion and science]]
 +
* [[Satan]]
 +
** [[Demon]]
 +
** [[Devil]]
  
 
== References ==
 
== References ==
{{Reflist}}
+
'''Footnotes'''
 +
{{notelist}}
 +
 
 +
'''Citations'''
 +
{{reflist|20em}}
 +
 
 +
==Bibliography==
 +
{{Library resources box}}{{refbegin}}
 +
 
 +
{{refbegin}}
 +
 
 +
* {{cite book
 +
| last1            = Bunnin
 +
| first1          = Nicholas
 +
| last2            = Yu
 +
| first2          = Jiyuan
 +
| title            = The Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy
 +
| year            = 2008
 +
| publisher        = Blackwells
 +
| isbn            = 9780470997215
 +
| url              = https://books.google.com/books?id=LdbxabeToQYC
 +
}}
 +
* [[Cliff Pickover|Pickover, Cliff]], ''The Paradox of God and the Science of Omniscience'', Palgrave/St Martin's Press, 2001. {{ISBN|1-4039-6457-2}}
 +
* [[Francis Collins (geneticist)|Collins, Francis]], ''The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief'', Free Press, 2006. {{ISBN|0-7432-8639-1}}
 +
* [[Jack Miles|Miles, Jack]], ''God: A Biography'', Vintage, 1996. {{ISBN|0-679-74368-5}}
 +
* [[Karen Armstrong|Armstrong, Karen]], ''A History of God: The 4,000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity and Islam'', Ballantine Books, 1994. {{ISBN|0-434-02456-2}}
 +
* [[Paul Tillich]], ''Systematic Theology'', Vol. 1 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951). {{ISBN|0-226-80337-6}}
 +
* {{cite book
 +
|author= Hastings, James Rodney
 +
|authorlink=James Hastings
 +
|editor=
 +
|others=John A Selbie
 +
|title=Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics
 +
|edition=Volume 4 of 24 (Behistun (continued) to Bunyan.)
 +
|language=
 +
|publisher=Kessinger Publishing, LLC
 +
|location=Edinburgh
 +
|year=1925–2003
 +
|origyear=1908–26
 +
|quote=The encyclopedia will contain articles on all the religions of the world and on all the great systems of ethics. It will aim at containing articles on every religious belief or custom, and on every ethical movement, every philosophical idea, every moral practice.
 +
|isbn=978-0-7661-3673-1
 +
|oclc=
 +
|doi=
 +
|url=<!--
 +
|accessdate=5 March 2008-->
 +
|page=476
 +
}}
 +
{{refend}}
  
== See also ==
+
==External links==
*[[Other gods]]
+
{{Sister project links|s=no |b=no}}
*[[Atheism]]
+
{{Spoken Wikipedia|God_Article_Spoken_2008.ogg|2008-01-06}}
*[[Christianity in Conservapedia]]
+
* [http://www.armatabianca.org/eng/padre.php?sottomenu=4 Concept of God in Christianity]
*[[Bible Art Gallery]]
+
* [http://www.islam-info.ch/en/Who_is_Allah.htm Concept of God in Islam]
 +
* [http://www.allaboutgod.com/ God Christian perspective]
 +
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20030504073425/http://www.shaivam.org/hipgodco.htm Hindu Concept of God]
 +
* [http://www.aish.com/literacy/concepts/Understanding_God.asp Jewish Literacy]
  
== External links ==
+
{{Theism}}
*[https://www.gotquestions.org/who-is-God.html Who is God?], at [[GotQuestions]]
+
{{Religion topics|hide}}
*[https://www.gotquestions.org/what-is-God.html What is God?], at [[GotQuestions]]
+
{{Theology}}
*[https://www.gotquestions.org/is-there-a-God.html Is there a God?], at [[GotQuestions]]
+
{{Names of God}}
*[https://answersingenesis.org/jesus-christ/jesus-is-god/10-biblical-reasons-jesus-is-god/ 10 Biblical Reasons Jesus Is God], by Simon Turpin at [[Answers in Genesis]], August 8, 2017
+
*[http://www.theopedia.com/God Theopedia - God]
+
*[http://christiananswers.net/dictionary/god.html ChristianAnswers.net - God]
+
*[http://wikible.org/en/God Wikible.org - God]
+
  
{{Conservatism}}
+
{{Authority control}}
  
[[Category:Christianity]]
+
[[Category:God| ]]
[[Category:Divine Beings]]
+
[[Category:Singular God| ]]
 +
[[Category:Creator gods]]
 +
[[Category:Deities]]

Revision as of 20:56, 18 November 2020

Template:About Template:Use dmy dates Template:Short description Template:Multiple image Template:God God, in monotheistic thought, is conceived of as the supreme being, creator deity, and principal object of faith.[1] God is usually conceived as being omnipotent (all-powerful), omniscient (all-knowing), omnipresent (all-present) and omnibenevolent (all-good) as well as having an eternal and necessary existence. These attributes are used either in way of analogy or are taken literally. God is most often held to be incorporeal (immaterial).[1][2][3] Incorporeality and corporeality of God are related to conceptions of transcendence (being outside nature) and immanence (being in nature) of God, with positions of synthesis such as the "immanent transcendence".

Some religions describe God without reference to gender, while others use terminology that is gender-specific and gender-biased. God has been conceived as either personal or impersonal. In theism, God is the creator and sustainer of the universe, while in deism, God is the creator, but not the sustainer, of the universe. In pantheism, God is the universe itself. Atheism is an absence of belief in God, while agnosticism deems the existence of God unknown or unknowable. God has also been conceived as the source of all moral obligation, and the "greatest conceivable existent".[1] Many notable philosophers have developed arguments for and against the existence of God.[4]

Monotheistic religions refer to their god using various names, some referring to cultural ideas about their god's identity and attributes. In ancient Egyptian Atenism, possibly the earliest recorded monotheistic religion, this deity was called Aten[5] and proclaimed to be the one "true" Supreme Being and creator of the universe.[6] In the Hebrew Bible and Judaism, the names of God include Elohim, Adonai, YHWH (Template:Lang-he) and others. Yahweh and Jehovah, possible vocalizations of YHWH, are used in Christianity. In the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, one God coexists in three "persons" called the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. In Islam, the name Allah is used, while Muslims also use a multitude of titles for God. In Hinduism, Brahman is often considered a monistic concept of God.[7] In Chinese religion, Shangdi is conceived as the progenitor (first ancestor) of the universe, intrinsic to it and constantly bringing order to it. Other names for God include Baha in the Baháʼí Faith,[8] Waheguru in Sikhism,[9] Ahura Mazda in Zoroastrianism,[10] and Sang Hyang Widhi Wasa in Balinese Hinduism.[11]

Etymology and usage

File:Mesha Stele (511142469) (cropped).jpg
The Mesha Stele bears the earliest known reference (840 BCE) to the Israelite God Yahweh

Template:Pp-semi-indefTemplate:Pp-move-indef For a more detailed treatment, see God (word).
The earliest written form of the Germanic word God comes from the 6th-century Christian Codex Argenteus. The English word itself is derived from the Proto-Germanic * ǥuđan. The reconstructed Proto-Indo-European form Template:PIE was likely based on the root Template:PIE, which meant either "to call" or "to invoke".[12] The Germanic words for God were originally neuter—applying to both genders—but during the process of the Christianization of the Germanic peoples from their indigenous Germanic paganism, the words became a masculine syntactic form.[13]

In the English language, capitalization is used for names by which a god is known, including 'God'.[14] Consequently, the capitalized form of god is not used for multiple gods (polytheism) or when used to refer to the generic idea of a deity.[15][16] The English word God and its counterparts in other languages are normally used for any and all conceptions and, in spite of significant differences between religions, the term remains an English translation common to all. The same holds for Hebrew El, but in Judaism, God is also given a proper name, the tetragrammaton YHWH, in origin possibly the name of an Edomite or Midianite deity, Yahweh. In many English translations of the Bible, when the word LORD is in all capitals, it signifies that the word represents the tetragrammaton.[17]

Allāh (Template:Lang-ar) is the Arabic term with no plural used by Muslims and Arabic speaking Christians and Jews meaning "The God", while ʾilāh (Template:Lang-ar plural `āliha آلِهَة) is the term used for a deity or a god in general.[18][19][20]

God may also be given a proper name in monotheistic currents of Hinduism which emphasize the personal nature of God, with early references to his name as Krishna-Vasudeva in Bhagavata or later Vishnu and Hari.[21]

Ahura Mazda is the name for God used in Zoroastrianism. "Mazda", or rather the Avestan stem-form Mazdā-, nominative Mazdå, reflects Proto-Iranian *Mazdāh (female). It is generally taken to be the proper name of the spirit, and like its Sanskrit cognate medhā, means "intelligence" or "wisdom". Both the Avestan and Sanskrit words reflect Proto-Indo-Iranian *mazdhā-, from Proto-Indo-European mn̩sdʰeh1, literally meaning "placing (dʰeh1) one's mind (*mn̩-s)", hence "wise".Template:Sfn

Waheguru (Template:Lang-pa) is a term most often used in Sikhism to refer to God. It means "Wonderful Teacher" in the Punjabi language. Vāhi (a Middle Persian borrowing) means "wonderful" and guru (Template:Lang-sa) is a term denoting "teacher". Waheguru is also described by some as an experience of ecstasy which is beyond all descriptions. The most common usage of the word "Waheguru" is in the greeting Sikhs use with each other:

<poem>Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh Wonderful Lord's Khalsa, Victory is to the Wonderful Lord.</poem>

Baha, the "greatest" name for God in the Baháʼí Faith, is Arabic for "All-Glorious".

General conceptions

For a more detailed treatment, see Conceptions of God.
The philosophy of religion recognizes the following as essential attributes of God:

  • Omnipotence (limitless power)
  • Omniscience (limitless knowledge)
  • Eternity (God is not bound by time)
  • Goodness (God is wholly benevolent)
  • Unity (God cannot be divided)
  • Simplicity (God is not composite)
  • Incorporeality (God is not material)
  • Immutability (God is not subject to change)
  • Impassability (God is not affected)Template:Sfn

There is no clear consensus on the nature or the existence of God.[22] The Abrahamic conceptions of God include the monotheistic definition of God in Judaism, the trinitarian view of Christians, and the Islamic concept of God.

There were also various conceptions of God in the ancient Greco-Roman world, such as Aristotle's view of an unmoved mover, the Neoplatonic concept of the One and the pantheistic God of Stoic Physics.

The dharmic religions differ in their view of the divine: views of God in Hinduism vary by region, sect, and caste, ranging from monotheistic to polytheistic. Many polytheistic religions share the idea of a creator deity, although having a name other than "God" and without all of the other roles attributed to a singular God by monotheistic religions. Sikhism is sometimes seen as being pantheistic about God.

Śramaṇa religions are generally non-creationist, while also holding that there are divine beings (called Devas in Buddhism and Jainism) of limited power and lifespan. Jainism has generally rejected creationism, holding that soul substances (Jīva) are uncreated and that time is beginningless.[23] Depending on one's interpretation and tradition, Buddhism can be conceived as being either non-theistic, trans-theistic, pantheistic, or polytheistic. However, Buddhism has generally rejected the specific monotheistic view of a Creator God. The Buddha criticizes the theory of creationism in the early Buddhist texts.[24][25] Also, major Indian Buddhist philosophers, such as Nagarjuna, Vasubandhu, Dharmakirti and Buddhaghosa, consistently critiqued Creator God views put forth by Hindu thinkers.[26][27][28]

Oneness

For more detailed treatments, see Monotheism and Henotheism.

File:Shield-Trinity-Scutum-Fidei-English.svg
Trinitarians believe that God is composed of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Monotheists believe that there is only one god, and may also believe this god is worshipped in different religions under different names. The view that all theists actually worship the same god, whether they know it or not, is especially emphasized in the Baháʼí Faith, Hinduism[29] and Sikhism.[30]

In Christianity, the doctrine of the Trinity describes God as one God in three divine Persons (each of the three Persons is God himself). The Most Holy Trinity comprises[31] God the Father, God the Son (Jesus), and God the Holy Spirit. In the past centuries, this fundamental mystery of the Christian faith was also summarized by the Latin formula Sancta Trinitas, Unus Deus (Holy Trinity, Unique God), reported in the Litanias Lauretanas.

Islam's most fundamental concept is tawhid meaning "oneness" or "uniqueness". God is described in the Quran as: "He is Allah, the One and Only; Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him."[32][33] Muslims repudiate the Christian doctrine of the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus, comparing it to polytheism. In Islam, God is transcendent and does not resemble any of his creations in any way. Thus, Muslims are not iconodules, and are not expected to visualize God.[34]

Henotheism is the belief and worship of a single god while accepting the existence or possible existence of other deities.[35]

Theism, deism, and pantheism

For more detailed treatments, see Theism and Deism.
Theism generally holds that God exists realistically, objectively, and independently of human thought; that God created and sustains everything; that God is omnipotent and eternal; and that God is personal and interacting with the universe through, for example, religious experience and the prayers of humans.[36] Theism holds that God is both transcendent and immanent; thus, God is simultaneously infinite and, in some way, present in the affairs of the world.[37] Not all theists subscribe to all of these propositions, but each usually subscribes to some of them (see, by way of comparison, family resemblance).[36] Catholic theology holds that God is infinitely simple and is not involuntarily subject to time. Most theists hold that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent, although this belief raises questions about God's responsibility for evil and suffering in the world. Some theists ascribe to God a self-conscious or purposeful limiting of omnipotence, omniscience, or benevolence. Open Theism, by contrast, contends that, due to the nature of time, God's omniscience does not mean the deity can predict the future. Theism is sometimes used to refer in general to any belief in a god or gods, i.e., monotheism or polytheism.[38][39]

File:Blake God Blessing.jpg
God Blessing the Seventh Day, 1805 watercolor painting by William Blake

Deism holds that God is wholly transcendent: God exists, but does not intervene in the world beyond what was necessary to create it.[37] In this view, God is not anthropomorphic, and neither answers prayers nor produces miracles. Common in Deism is a belief that God has no interest in humanity and may not even be aware of humanity. Pandeism combines Deism with Pantheistic beliefs.[40][41][42] Pandeism is proposed to explain as to Deism why God would create a universe and then abandon it,[43] and as to Pantheism, the origin and purpose of the universe.[43][44]

Pantheism holds that God is the universe and the universe is God, whereas Panentheism holds that God contains, but is not identical to, the Universe.[45] It is also the view of the Liberal Catholic Church; Theosophy; some views of Hinduism except Vaishnavism, which believes in panentheism; Sikhism; some divisions of Neopaganism and Taoism, along with many varying denominations and individuals within denominations. Kabbalah, Jewish mysticism, paints a pantheistic/panentheistic view of God—which has wide acceptance in Hasidic Judaism, particularly from their founder The Baal Shem Tov—but only as an addition to the Jewish view of a personal god, not in the original pantheistic sense that denies or limits persona to God.[Citation Needed]

Other concepts

Dystheism, which is related to theodicy, is a form of theism which holds that God is either not wholly good or is fully malevolent as a consequence of the problem of evil. One such example comes from Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov, in which Ivan Karamazov rejects God on the grounds that he allows children to suffer.[46]

In modern times, some more abstract concepts have been developed, such as process theology and open theism. The contemporaneous French philosopher Michel Henry has however proposed a phenomenological approach and definition of God as phenomenological essence of Life.[47]

God has also been conceived as being incorporeal (immaterial), a personal being, the source of all moral obligation, and the "greatest conceivable existent".[1] These attributes were all supported to varying degrees by the early Jewish, Christian and Muslim theologian philosophers, including Maimonides,[48] Augustine of Hippo,[48] and Al-Ghazali,[4] respectively.

Non-theistic views

See also: Evolutionary origin of religions and Evolutionary psychology of religion

Non-theist views about God also vary. Some non-theists avoid the concept of God, whilst accepting that it is significant to many; other non-theists understand God as a symbol of human values and aspirations. The nineteenth-century English atheist Charles Bradlaugh declared that he refused to say "There is no God", because "the word 'God' is to me a sound conveying no clear or distinct affirmation";[49] he said more specifically that he disbelieved in the Christian god. Stephen Jay Gould proposed an approach dividing the world of philosophy into what he called "non-overlapping magisteria" (NOMA). In this view, questions of the supernatural, such as those relating to the existence and nature of God, are non-empirical and are the proper domain of theology. The methods of science should then be used to answer any empirical question about the natural world, and theology should be used to answer questions about ultimate meaning and moral value. In this view, the perceived lack of any empirical footprint from the magisterium of the supernatural onto natural events makes science the sole player in the natural world.[50]

Another view, advanced by Richard Dawkins, is that the existence of God is an empirical question, on the grounds that "a universe with a god would be a completely different kind of universe from one without, and it would be a scientific difference."[51] Carl Sagan argued that the doctrine of a Creator of the Universe was difficult to prove or disprove and that the only conceivable scientific discovery that could disprove the existence of a Creator (not necessarily a God) would be the discovery that the universe is infinitely old.[52]

Stephen Hawking and co-author Leonard Mlodinow state in their book, The Grand Design, that it is reasonable to ask who or what created the universe, but if the answer is God, then the question has merely been deflected to that of who created God. Both authors claim however, that it is possible to answer these questions purely within the realm of science, and without invoking any divine beings.[53]

Agnosticism and atheism

Agnosticism is the view that the truth values of certain claims—especially metaphysical and religious claims such as whether God, the divine or the supernatural exist—are unknown and perhaps unknowable.[54][55][56]

Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.[57][58] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities, although it can be defined as a lack of belief in the existence of any deities, rather than a positive belief in the nonexistence of any deities.[59]

Anthropomorphism

For a more detailed treatment, see Anthropomorphism.
Pascal Boyer argues that while there is a wide array of supernatural concepts found around the world, in general, supernatural beings tend to behave much like people. The construction of gods and spirits like persons is one of the best known traits of religion. He cites examples from Greek mythology, which is, in his opinion, more like a modern soap opera than other religious systems.[60] Bertrand du Castel and Timothy Jurgensen demonstrate through formalization that Boyer's explanatory model matches physics' epistemology in positing not directly observable entities as intermediaries.[61] Anthropologist Stewart Guthrie contends that people project human features onto non-human aspects of the world because it makes those aspects more familiar. Sigmund Freud also suggested that god concepts are projections of one's father.[62]

Likewise, Émile Durkheim was one of the earliest to suggest that gods represent an extension of human social life to include supernatural beings. In line with this reasoning, psychologist Matt Rossano contends that when humans began living in larger groups, they may have created gods as a means of enforcing morality. In small groups, morality can be enforced by social forces such as gossip or reputation. However, it is much harder to enforce morality using social forces in much larger groups. Rossano indicates that by including ever-watchful gods and spirits, humans discovered an effective strategy for restraining selfishness and building more cooperative groups.[63]

Existence

For a more detailed treatment, see Existence of God.
File:St-thomas-aquinas.jpg
St. Thomas Aquinas summed up five main arguments as proofs for God's existence. Painting by Carlo Crivelli, 1476)
File:Sir Isaac Newton (1643-1727).jpg
Isaac Newton saw the existence of a Creator necessary in the movement of astronomical objects. Painting by Godfrey Kneller, 1689

Arguments about the existence of God typically include empirical, deductive, and inductive types. Different views include that: "God does not exist" (strong atheism); "God almost certainly does not exist" (de facto atheism); "no one knows whether God exists" (agnosticism);[64] "God exists, but this cannot be proven or disproven" (de facto theism); and that "God exists and this can be proven" (strong theism).[50]

Countless arguments have been proposed to prove the existence of God.[65] Some of the most notable arguments are the Five Ways of Aquinas, the Argument from desire proposed by C.S. Lewis, and the Ontological Argument formulated both by St. Anselm and René Descartes.[66]

St. Anselm's approach was to define God as, "that than which nothing greater can be conceived". Famed pantheist philosopher Baruch Spinoza would later carry this idea to its extreme: "By God I understand a being absolutely infinite, i.e., a substance consisting of infinite attributes, of which each one expresses an eternal and infinite essence." For Spinoza, the whole of the natural universe is made of one substance, God, or its equivalent, Nature.[67] His proof for the existence of God was a variation of the Ontological argument.[68]

Scientist Isaac Newton saw the nontrinitarian God[69] as the masterful creator whose existence could not be denied in the face of the grandeur of all creation.[70] Nevertheless, he rejected polymath Leibniz' thesis that God would necessarily make a perfect world which requires no intervention from the creator. In Query 31 of the Opticks, Newton simultaneously made an argument from design and for the necessity of intervention: For while comets move in very eccentric orbs in all manner of positions, blind fate could never make all the planets move one and the same way in orbs concentric, some inconsiderable irregularities excepted which may have arisen from the mutual actions of comets and planets on one another, and which will be apt to increase, till this system wants a reformation.[71]

~ {{{2}}} St. Thomas believed that the existence of God is self-evident in itself, but not to us. "Therefore I say that this proposition, "God exists", of itself is self-evident, for the predicate is the same as the subject.... Now because we do not know the essence of God, the proposition is not self-evident to us; but needs to be demonstrated by things that are more known to us, though less known in their nature—namely, by effects."[72]

St. Thomas believed that the existence of God can be demonstrated. Briefly in the Summa theologiae and more extensively in the Summa contra Gentiles, he considered in great detail five arguments for the existence of God, widely known as the quinque viae (Five Ways).Template:Hatnote

  1. Motion: Some things undoubtedly move, though cannot cause their own motion. Since there can be no infinite chain of causes of motion, there must be a First Mover not moved by anything else, and this is what everyone understands by God.
  2. Causation: As in the case of motion, nothing can cause itself, and an infinite chain of causation is impossible, so there must be a First Cause, called God.
  3. Existence of necessary and the unnecessary: Our experience includes things certainly existing but apparently unnecessary. Not everything can be unnecessary, for then once there was nothing and there would still be nothing. Therefore, we are compelled to suppose something that exists necessarily, having this necessity only from itself; in fact itself the cause for other things to exist.
  4. Gradation: If we can notice a gradation in things in the sense that some things are more hot, good, etc., there must be a superlative that is the truest and noblest thing, and so most fully existing. This then, we call God (Note: Thomas does not ascribe actual qualities to God Himself).
  5. Ordered tendencies of nature: A direction of actions to an end is noticed in all bodies following natural laws. Anything without awareness tends to a goal under the guidance of one who is aware. This we call God (Note that even when we guide objects, in Thomas's view, the source of all our knowledge comes from God as well).[73]

Some theologians, such as the scientist and theologian A.E. McGrath, argue that the existence of God is not a question that can be answered using the scientific method.[74][75] Agnostic Stephen Jay Gould argues that science and religion are not in conflict and do not overlap.[76]

Some findings in the fields of cosmology, evolutionary biology and neuroscience are interpreted by some atheists (including Lawrence M. Krauss and Sam Harris) as evidence that God is an imaginary entity only, with no basis in reality.[77][78] These atheists claim that a single, omniscient God who is imagined to have created the universe and is particularly attentive to the lives of humans has been imagined, embellished and promulgated in a trans-generational manner.[79] Richard Dawkins interprets such findings not only as a lack of evidence for the material existence of such a God, but as extensive evidence to the contrary.[50] However, his views are opposed by some theologians and scientists including Alister McGrath, who argues that existence of God is compatible with science.[80]

Specific attributes

Different religious traditions assign differing (though often similar) attributes and characteristics to God, including expansive powers and abilities, psychological characteristics, gender characteristics, and preferred nomenclature. The assignment of these attributes often differs according to the conceptions of God in the culture from which they arise. For example, attributes of God in Christianity, attributes of God in Islam, and the Thirteen Attributes of Mercy in Judaism share certain similarities arising from their common roots.

Names

For a more detailed treatment, see Names of God.

The word God is "one of the most complex and difficult in the English language." In the Judeo-Christian tradition, "the Bible has been the principal source of the conceptions of God". That the Bible "includes many different images, concepts, and ways of thinking about" God has resulted in perpetual "disagreements about how God is to be conceived and understood".[81]

Many traditions see God as incorporeal and eternal, and regard him as a point of living light like human souls, but without a physical body, as he does not enter the cycle of birth, death and rebirth. God is seen as the perfect and constant embodiment of all virtues, powers and values and that he is the unconditionally loving Father of all souls, irrespective of their religion, gender, or culture.[82]

Throughout the Hebrew and Christian Bibles there are many names for God. One of them is Elohim. Another one is El Shaddai, translated "God Almighty".[83] A third notable name is El Elyon, which means "The High God".[84] Also noted in the Hebrew and Christian Bibles is the name "I Am that I Am".[85]

God is described and referred in the Quran and hadith by certain names or attributes, the most common being Al-Rahman, meaning "Most Compassionate" and Al-Rahim, meaning "Most Merciful" (See Names of God in Islam).[86] Many of these names are also used in the scriptures of the Baháʼí Faith.

Vaishnavism, a tradition in Hinduism, has a list of titles and names of Krishna.

Gender

For a more detailed treatment, see Gender of God.
The gender of God may be viewed as either a literal or an allegorical aspect of a deity who, in classical western philosophy, transcends bodily form.[87][88] Polytheistic religions commonly attribute to each of the gods a gender, allowing each to interact with any of the others, and perhaps with humans, sexually. In most monotheistic religions, God has no counterpart with which to relate sexually. Thus, in classical western philosophy the gender of this one-and-only deity is most likely to be an analogical statement of how humans and God address, and relate to, each other. Namely, God is seen as begetter of the world and revelation which corresponds to the active (as opposed to the receptive) role in sexual intercourse.[89]

Biblical sources usually refer to God using male words, except Genesis 1:26–27,[90][91] Psalm 123:2–3, and Luke 15:8–10 (female); Hosea 11:3–4, Deuteronomy 32:18, Isaiah 66:13, Isaiah 49:15, Isaiah 42:14, Psalm 131:2 (a mother); Deuteronomy 32:11–12 (a mother eagle); and Matthew 23:37 and Luke 13:34 (a mother hen).

Relationship with creation

See also: Creator deity, Prayer, and Worship
File:William Blake 008.jpg
And Elohim Created Adam by William Blake, c. 1795

Prayer plays a significant role among many believers. Muslims believe that the purpose of existence is to worship God.[92][93] He is viewed as a personal God and there are no intermediaries, such as clergy, to contact God. Prayer often also includes supplication and asking forgiveness. God is often believed to be forgiving. For example, a hadith states God would replace a sinless people with one who sinned but still asked repentance.[94] Christian theologian Alister McGrath writes that there are good reasons to suggest that a "personal god" is integral to the Christian outlook, but that one has to understand it is an analogy. "To say that God is like a person is to affirm the divine ability and willingness to relate to others. This does not imply that God is human, or located at a specific point in the universe."[95]

Adherents of different religions generally disagree as to how to best worship God and what is God's plan for mankind, if there is one. There are different approaches to reconciling the contradictory claims of monotheistic religions. One view is taken by exclusivists, who believe they are the chosen people or have exclusive access to absolute truth, generally through revelation or encounter with the Divine, which adherents of other religions do not. Another view is religious pluralism. A pluralist typically believes that his religion is the right one, but does not deny the partial truth of other religions. An example of a pluralist view in Christianity is supersessionism, i.e., the belief that one's religion is the fulfillment of previous religions. A third approach is relativistic inclusivism, where everybody is seen as equally right; an example being universalism: the doctrine that salvation is eventually available for everyone. A fourth approach is syncretism, mixing different elements from different religions. An example of syncretism is the New Age movement.

Jews and Christians believe that humans are created in the image of God, and are the center, crown and key to God's creation, stewards for God, supreme over everything else God had made (Template:Bibleref2); for this reason, humans are in Christianity called the "Children of God".[Citation Needed]

Depiction

Zoroastrianism

File:Naqsh i Rustam. Investiture d'Ardashir 1.jpg
Ahura Mazda (depiction is on the right, with high crown) presents Ardashir I (left) with the ring of kingship. (Relief at Naqsh-e Rustam, 3rd century CE)

During the early Parthian Empire, Ahura Mazda was visually represented for worship. This practice ended during the beginning of the Sassanid empire. Zoroastrian iconoclasm, which can be traced to the end of the Parthian period and the beginning of the Sassanid, eventually put an end to the use of all images of Ahura Mazda in worship. However, Ahura Mazda continued to be symbolized by a dignified male figure, standing or on horseback which is found in Sassanian investiture.Template:Sfn

Judaism

At least some Jews do not use any image for God, since God is the unimaginable Being who cannot be represented in material forms.[96]

The burning bush that was not consumed by the flames is described in Book of Exodus as a symbolic representation of God when he appeared to Moses.[97]

Christianity

Further: God in Christianity and God in Catholicism
See also: God the Father in Western art

Early Christians believed that the words of the Gospel of John 1:18: "No man has seen God at any time" and numerous other statements were meant to apply not only to God, but to all attempts at the depiction of God.[98]

However, later depictions of God are found. Some, like the Hand of God, are depiction borrowed from Jewish art.

The beginning of the 8th century witnessed the suppression and destruction of religious icons as the period of Byzantine iconoclasm (literally image-breaking) started. The Second Council of Nicaea in 787 effectively ended the first period of Byzantine iconoclasm and restored the honouring of icons and holy images in general.[99] However, this did not immediately translate into large scale depictions of God the Father. Even supporters of the use of icons in the 8th century, such as Saint John of Damascus, drew a distinction between images of God the Father and those of Christ.

Prior to the 10th century no attempt was made to use a human to symbolize God the Father in Western art.[98] Yet, Western art eventually required some way to illustrate the presence of the Father, so through successive representations a set of artistic styles for symbolizing the Father using a man gradually emerged around the 10th century AD. A rationale for the use of a human is the belief that God created the soul of Man in the image of his own (thus allowing Human to transcend the other animals).

It appears that when early artists designed to represent God the Father, fear and awe restrained them from a usage of the whole human figure. Typically only a small part would be used as the image, usually the hand, or sometimes the face, but rarely a whole human. In many images, the figure of the Son supplants the Father, so a smaller portion of the person of the Father is depicted.[100]

By the 12th century depictions of God the Father had started to appear in French illuminated manuscripts, which as a less public form could often be more adventurous in their iconography, and in stained glass church windows in England. Initially the head or bust was usually shown in some form of frame of clouds in the top of the picture space, where the Hand of God had formerly appeared; the Baptism of Christ on the famous baptismal font in Liège of Rainer of Huy is an example from 1118 (a Hand of God is used in another scene). Gradually the amount of the human symbol shown can increase to a half-length figure, then a full-length, usually enthroned, as in Giotto's fresco of c. 1305 in Padua.[101] In the 14th century the Naples Bible carried a depiction of God the Father in the Burning bush. By the early 15th century, the Très Riches Heures du Duc de Berry has a considerable number of symbols, including an elderly but tall and elegant full-length figure walking in the Garden of Eden, which show a considerable diversity of apparent ages and dress. The "Gates of Paradise" of the Florence Baptistry by Lorenzo Ghiberti, begun in 1425 use a similar tall full-length symbol for the Father. The Rohan Book of Hours of about 1430 also included depictions of God the Father in half-length human form, which were now becoming standard, and the Hand of God becoming rarer. At the same period other works, like the large Genesis altarpiece by the Hamburg painter Meister Bertram, continued to use the old depiction of Christ as Logos in Genesis scenes. In the 15th century there was a brief fashion for depicting all three persons of the Trinity as similar or identical figures with the usual appearance of Christ.

In an early Venetian school Coronation of the Virgin by Giovanni d'Alemagna and Antonio Vivarini (c. 1443), The Father is depicted using the symbol consistently used by other artists later, namely a patriarch, with benign, yet powerful countenance and with long white hair and a beard, a depiction largely derived from, and justified by, the near-physical, but still figurative, description of the Ancient of Days.[102]

. ...the Ancient of Days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. (Daniel 7:9)

File:The Baptism of Christ (Verrocchio & Leonardo).jpg
Usage of two Hands of God (relatively unusual) and the Holy Spirit as a dove in Baptism of Christ by Verrocchio and Leonardo da Vinci, Template:Circa.

In the Annunciation by Benvenuto di Giovanni in 1470, God the Father is portrayed in the red robe and a hat that resembles that of a Cardinal. However, even in the later part of the 15th century, the symbolic representation of the Father and the Holy Spirit as "hands and dove" continued, e.g. in Andrea del Verrocchio and Leonardo da Vinci's Baptism of Christ in Template:Circa.[103]

File:God the Father with His Right Hand Raised in Blessing.jpg
God the Father with His Right Hand Raised in Blessing, with a triangular halo representing the Trinity, Girolamo dai Libri, c. 1555

In Renaissance paintings of the adoration of the Trinity, God may be depicted in two ways, either with emphasis on The Father, or the three elements of the Trinity. The most usual depiction of the Trinity in Renaissance art depicts God the Father using an old man, usually with a long beard and patriarchal in appearance, sometimes with a triangular halo (as a reference to the Trinity), or with a papal crown, specially in Northern Renaissance painting. In these depictions The Father may hold a globe or book (to symbolize God's knowledge and as a reference to how knowledge is deemed divine). He is behind and above Christ on the Cross in the Throne of Mercy iconography. A dove, the symbol of the Holy Spirit may hover above. Various people from different classes of society, e.g. kings, popes or martyrs may be present in the picture. In a Trinitarian Pietà, God the Father is often symbolized using a man wearing a papal dress and a papal crown, supporting the dead Christ in his arms. They are depicted as floating in heaven with angels who carry the instruments of the Passion.[104]

Representations of God the Father and the Trinity were attacked both by Protestants and within Catholicism, by the Jansenist and Baianist movements as well as more orthodox theologians. As with other attacks on Catholic imagery, this had the effect both of reducing Church support for the less central depictions, and strengthening it for the core ones. In the Western Church, the pressure to restrain religious imagery resulted in the highly influential decrees of the final session of the Council of Trent in 1563. The Council of Trent decrees confirmed the traditional Catholic doctrine that images only represented the person depicted, and that veneration to them was paid to the person, not the image.[105]

Artistic depictions of God the Father were uncontroversial in Catholic art thereafter, but less common depictions of the Trinity were condemned. In 1745 Pope Benedict XIV explicitly supported the Throne of Mercy depiction, referring to the "Ancient of Days", but in 1786 it was still necessary for Pope Pius VI to issue a papal bull condemning the decision of an Italian church council to remove all images of the Trinity from churches.[106]

God the Father is symbolized in several Genesis scenes in Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel ceiling, most famously The Creation of Adam (whose image of near touching hands of God and Adam is iconic of humanity, being a reminder that Man is created in the Image and Likeness of God (Template:Bibleref2)).God the Father is depicted as a powerful figure, floating in the clouds in Titian's Assumption of the Virgin in the Frari of Venice, long admired as a masterpiece of High Renaissance art.[107] The Church of the Gesù in Rome includes a number of 16th-century depictions of God the Father. In some of these paintings the Trinity is still alluded to in terms of three angels, but Giovanni Battista Fiammeri also depicted God the Father as a man riding on a cloud, above the scenes.[108]

In both the Last Judgment and the Coronation of the Virgin paintings by Rubens he depicted God the Father using the image that by then had become widely accepted, a bearded patriarchal figure above the fray. In the 17th century, the two Spanish artists Diego Velázquez (whose father-in-law Francisco Pacheco was in charge of the approval of new images for the Inquisition) and Bartolomé Esteban Murillo both depicted God the Father using a patriarchal figure with a white beard in a purple robe.

While representations of God the Father were growing in Italy, Spain, Germany and the Low Countries, there was resistance elsewhere in Europe, even during the 17th century. In 1632 most members of the Star Chamber court in England (except the Archbishop of York) condemned the use of the images of the Trinity in church windows, and some considered them illegal.[109] Later in the 17th century Sir Thomas Browne wrote that he considered the representation of God the Father using an old man "a dangerous act" that might lead to Egyptian symbolism.[110] In 1847, Charles Winston was still critical of such images as a "Romish trend" (a term used to refer to Roman Catholics) that he considered best avoided in England.[111]

In 1667 the 43rd chapter of the Great Moscow Council specifically included a ban on a number of symbolic depictions of God the Father and the Holy Spirit, which then also resulted in a whole range of other icons being placed on the forbidden list,[112][113] mostly affecting Western-style depictions which had been gaining ground in Orthodox icons. The Council also declared that the person of the Trinity who was the "Ancient of Days" was Christ, as Logos, not God the Father. However some icons continued to be produced in Russia, as well as Greece, Romania, and other Orthodox countries.

Islam

File:Istanbul 027 (6445021161).jpg
The Arabic script of "Allah" in the Hagia Sophia, Istanbul
Further: God in Islam

Muslims believe that God (Allah) is beyond all comprehension and equal, and does not resemble any of his creations in any way. Thus, Muslims are not iconodules, are not expected to visualize God, and instead of having pictures of Allah in their mosques, typically have religious calligraphy written on the wall.[34]

In the Ismaili interpretation of Islam, assigning attributes to God as well as negating any attributes from God (via negativa) both qualify as anthropomorphism and are rejected, as God cannot be understood by either assigning attributes to Him or taking attributes away from Him. Therefore, Abu Yaqub Al-Sijistani, a renowned Ismaili thinker, suggested the method of double negation; for example: “God is not existent” followed by “God is not non-existent”. This glorifies God from any understanding or human comprehension.[114]

Baháʼí Faith

Further: Manifestation of God (Baháʼí Faith)

In the Kitáb-i-Íqán, the primary theological work of the Baháʼí Faith, God is described as “Him Who is the central Orb of the universe, its Essence and ultimate Purpose.” Bahá'u'lláh taught that God is directly unknowable to common mortals, but that his attributes and qualities can be indirectly known by learning from and imitating his divine Manifestations, which in Baháʼí theology are somewhat comparable to Hindu avatars or Abrahamic prophets. These Manifestations are the great prophets and teachers of many of the major religious traditions. These include Krishna, Buddha, Jesus, Zoroaster, Muhammad, Bahá'ú'lláh, and others. Although the faith is strictly monotheistic, it also preaches the unity of all religions and focuses on these multiple epiphanies as necessary for meeting the needs of humanity at different points in history and for different cultures, and as part of a scheme of progressive revelation and education of humanity.

Theological approaches

See also: Classical theism and Theistic Personalism

Classical theists (such as ancient Greco-Medieval philosophers, Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox Christians, many Jews and Muslims, and some Protestants)Template:Efn speak of God as a divinely simple 'nothing' that is completely transcendent (totally independent of all else), and having attributes such as immutability, impassibility, and timelessness.[115] Theologians of theistic personalism (the view held by Rene Descartes, Isaac Newton, Alvin Plantinga, Richard Swinburne, William Lane Craig, and most modern evangelicals) argue that God is most generally the ground of all being, immanent in and transcendent over the whole world of reality, with immanence and transcendence being the contrapletes of personality.[116] Carl Jung equated religious ideas of God with transcendental metaphors of higher consciousness, in which God can be just as easily be imagined "as an eternally flowing current of vital energy that endlessly changes shape ... as an eternally unmoved, unchangeable essence."[117]

Many philosophers developed arguments for the existence of God,[4] while attempting to comprehend the precise implications of God's attributes. Reconciling some of those attributes—particularly the attributes of the God of theistic personalism—generated important philosophical problems and debates. For example, God's omniscience may seem to imply that God knows how free agents will choose to act. If God does know this, their ostensible free will might be illusory, or foreknowledge does not imply predestination, and if God does not know it, God may not be omniscient.[118]

The last centuries of philosophy have seen vigorous questions regarding the arguments for God's existence raised by such philosophers as Immanuel Kant, David Hume and Antony Flew, although Kant held that the argument from morality was valid. The theist response has been either to contend, as does Alvin Plantinga, that faith is "properly basic", or to take, as does Richard Swinburne, the evidentialist position.[119] Some theists agree that only some of the arguments for God's existence are compelling, but argue that faith is not a product of reason, but requires risk. There would be no risk, they say, if the arguments for God's existence were as solid as the laws of logic, a position summed up by Pascal as "the heart has reasons of which reason does not know."[120]

Many religious believers allow for the existence of other, less powerful spiritual beings such as angels, saints, jinn, demons, and devas.[121][122][123][124][125]

See also

Template:Portal

References

Footnotes Template:Notelist

Citations

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Swinburne, R.G. "God" in Honderich, Ted. (ed)The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, Oxford University Press, 1995.
  2. David Bordwell (2002). Catechism of the Catholic Church, Continuum International Publishing ISBN 978-0-86012-324-8 p. 84
  3. Catechism of the Catholic Church – IntraText. Archived from the original on 3 March 2013. Retrieved on 30 December 2016.
  4. 4.0 4.1 4.2 Platinga, Alvin. "God, Arguments for the Existence of", Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Routledge, 2000.
  5. Jan Assmann, Religion and Cultural Memory: Ten Studies, Stanford University Press 2005, p. 59
  6. M. Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, Vol. 2, 1980, p. 96
  7. Pantheism: A Non-Theistic Concept of Deity – p. 136, Michael P. Levine – 2002
  8. A Feast for the Soul: Meditations on the Attributes of God : ... – p. x, Baháʾuʾlláh, Joyce Watanabe – 2006
  9. Philosophy and Faith of Sikhism – p. ix, Kartar Singh Duggal – 1988
  10. The Intellectual Devotional: Revive Your Mind, Complete Your Education, and Roam confidently with the cultured class, David S. Kidder, Noah D. Oppenheim, p. 364
  11. McDaniel, June (2013), A Modern Hindu Monotheism: Indonesian Hindus as ‘People of the Book’. The Journal of Hindu Studies, Oxford University Press, doi:10.1093/jhs/hit030
  12. The ulterior etymology is disputed. Apart from the unlikely hypothesis of adoption from a foreign tongue, the OTeut. "ghuba" implies as its preTeut-type either "*ghodho-m" or "*ghodto-m". The former does not appear to admit of explanation; but the latter would represent the neut. pple. of a root "gheu-". There are two Aryan roots of the required form ("*g,heu-" with palatal aspirate) one with meaning 'to invoke' (Skr. "hu") the other 'to pour, to offer sacrifice' (Skr "hu", Gr. χεηi;ν, OE "geotàn" Yete v). OED Compact Edition, G, p. 267
  13. Barnhart, Robert K. (1995). The Barnhart Concise Dictionary of Etymology: the Origins of American English Words, p. 323. HarperCollins. ISBN 0-06-270084-7
  14. 'God' in Merriam-Webster (online). Merriam-Webster, Inc.. Retrieved on 19 July 2012.
  15. Webster's New World Dictionary; "God n. ME < OE, akin to Ger gott, Goth guth, prob. < IE base * ĝhau-, to call out to, invoke > Sans havaté, (he) calls upon; 1. any of various beings conceived of as supernatural, immortal, and having special powers over the lives and affairs of people and the course of nature; deity, esp. a male deity: typically considered objects of worship; 2. an image that is worshiped; idol 3. a person or thing deified or excessively honored and admired; 4. [G-] in monotheistic religions, the creator and ruler of the universe, regarded as eternal, infinite, all-powerful, and all-knowing; Supreme Being; the Almighty"
  16. Dictionary.com; "God /gɒd/ noun: 1. the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe. 2. the Supreme Being considered with reference to a particular attribute. 3. (lowercase) one of several deities, esp. a male deity, presiding over some portion of worldly affairs. 4. (often lowercase) a supreme being according to some particular conception: the God of mercy. 5. Christian Science. the Supreme Being, understood as Life, Truth, Love, Mind, Soul, Spirit, Principle. 6. (lowercase) an image of a deity; an idol. 7. (lowercase) any deified person or object. 8. (often lowercase) Gods, Theater. 8a. the upper balcony in a theater. 8b. the spectators in this part of the balcony."
  17. Barton, G.A. (2006). A Sketch of Semitic Origins: Social and Religious. Kessinger Publishing. ISBN 978-1-4286-1575-5. 
  18. God. Islam: Empire of Faith. PBS. Retrieved on 18 December 2010.
  19. "Islam and Christianity", Encyclopedia of Christianity (2001): Arabic-speaking Christians and Jews also refer to God as Allāh.
  20. Template:Cite encyclopedia
  21. Hastings 2003, p. 540
  22. Froese, Paul; Christopher Bader (Fall–Winter 2004). "Does God Matter? A Social-Science Critique". Harvard Divinity Bulletin. 4 32. 
  23. Nayanar, Prof. A. Chakravarti (2005). Samayasāra of Ācārya Kundakunda. p.190, Gāthā 10.310, New Delhi: Today & Tomorrows Printer and Publisher.
  24. Narada Thera (2006) "The Buddha and His Teachings," pp. 268-269, Jaico Publishing House.
  25. Hayes, Richard P., "Principled Atheism in the Buddhist Scholastic Tradition", Journal of Indian Philosophy, 16:1 (1988:Mar) p. 2.
  26. Hsueh-Li Cheng. "Nāgārjuna's Approach to the Problem of the Existence of God" in Religious Studies, Vol. 12, No. 2 (Jun., 1976), pp. 207-216 (10 pages), Cambridge University Press.
  27. Hayes, Richard P., "Principled Atheism in the Buddhist Scholastic Tradition", Journal of Indian Philosophy, 16:1 (1988:Mar.).
  28. Harvey, Peter (2019). "Buddhism and Monotheism", p. 1. Cambridge University Press.
  29. See Swami Bhaskarananda, Essentials of Hinduism (Viveka Press 2002) ISBN 1-884852-04-1
  30. Sri Guru Granth Sahib. Sri Granth. Retrieved on 30 June 2011.
  31. What Is the Trinity?. Archived from the original on 19 February 2014.
  32. Template:Cite quran
  33. Template:Cite encyclopedia
  34. 34.0 34.1 Robyn Lebron (2012). Searching for Spiritual Unity...Can There Be Common Ground?. ISBN 978-1-4627-1262-5. 
  35. Müller, Max. (1878) Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion: As Illustrated by the Religions of India. London: Longmans, Green and Co.
  36. 36.0 36.1 Smart, Jack (2003). Atheism and Theism. Blackwell Publishing. ISBN 978-0-631-23259-9. 
  37. 37.0 37.1 Lemos, Ramon M. (2001). A Neomedieval Essay in Philosophical Theology. Lexington Books. ISBN 978-0-7391-0250-3. 
  38. Philosophy of Religion.info – Glossary – Theism, Atheism, and Agonisticism. Philosophy of Religion.info. Archived from the original on 24 April 2008. Retrieved on 16 July 2008.
  39. Theism – definition of theism by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia. TheFreeDictionary.com. Retrieved on 16 July 2008.
  40. Alan H. Dawe (2011). The God Franchise: A Theory of Everything. ISBN 978-0-473-20114-2. “Pandeism: This is the belief that God created the universe, is now one with it, and so, is no longer a separate conscious entity. This is a combination of pantheism (God is identical to the universe) and deism (God created the universe and then withdrew Himself).” 
  41. Sean F. Johnston (2009). The History of Science: A Beginner's Guide. ISBN 978-1-85168-681-0. “In its most abstract form, deism may not attempt to describe the characteristics of such a non-interventionist creator, or even that the universe is identical with God (a variant known as pandeism).” 
  42. Paul Bradley (2011). This Strange Eventful History: A Philosophy of Meaning. ISBN 978-0-87586-876-9. “Pandeism combines the concepts of Deism and Pantheism with a god who creates the universe and then becomes it.” 
  43. 43.0 43.1 Allan R. Fuller (2010). Thought: The Only Reality. ISBN 978-1-60844-590-5. “Pandeism is another belief that states that God is identical to the universe, but God no longer exists in a way where He can be contacted; therefore, this theory can only be proven to exist by reason. Pandeism views the entire universe as being from God and now the universe is the entirety of God, but the universe at some point in time will fold back into one single being which is God Himself that created all. Pandeism raises the question as to why would God create a universe and then abandon it? As this relates to pantheism, it raises the question of how did the universe come about what is its aim and purpose?” 
  44. Peter C. Rogers (2009). Ultimate Truth, Book 1. ISBN 978-1-4389-7968-7. “As with Panentheism, Pantheism is derived from the Greek: 'pan'= all and 'theos' = God, it literally means "God is All" and "All is God." Pantheist purports that everything is part of an all-inclusive, indwelling, intangible God; or that the Universe, or nature, and God are the same. Further review helps to accentuate the idea that natural law, existence, and the Universe which is the sum total of all that is, was, and shall be, is represented in the theological principle of an abstract 'god' rather than an individual, creative Divine Being or Beings of any kind. This is the key element that distinguishes them from Panentheists and Pandeists. As such, although many religions may claim to hold Pantheistic elements, they are more commonly Panentheistic or Pandeistic in nature.” 
  45. John Culp (2013). "Panentheism," Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Spring.
  46. The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoyevsky pp. 259–61
  47. Henry, Michel (2003). I am the Truth. Toward a philosophy of Christianity, Translated by Susan Emanuel, Stanford University Press. ISBN 978-0-8047-3780-7. 
  48. 48.0 48.1 Edwards, Paul. "God and the philosophers" in Honderich, Ted. (ed)The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, Oxford University Press, 1995. ISBN 978-1-61592-446-2.
  49. "A Plea for Atheism. By 'IconoclastTemplate:'", London, Austin & Co., 1876, p. 2.
  50. 50.0 50.1 50.2 Dawkins, Richard (2006). The God Delusion. Great Britain: Bantam Press. ISBN 978-0-618-68000-9. 
  51. Dawkins, Richard. "Why There Almost Certainly Is No God", The Huffington Post, 23 October 2006. Retrieved on 10 January 2007. 
  52. Sagan, Carl (1996). The Demon Haunted World. New York: Ballantine Books. ISBN 978-0-345-40946-1. 
  53. Stephen Hawking (2010). The Grand Design. Bantam Books. ISBN 978-0-553-80537-6. 
  54. Template:Cite encyclopedia (p. 56 in 1967 edition)
  55. Template:Cite encyclopedia
  56. Template:Cite dictionary
  57. Nielsen 2013: "Instead of saying that an atheist is someone who believes that it is false or probably false that there is a God, a more adequate characterization of atheism consists in the more complex claim that to be an atheist is to be someone who rejects belief in God for the following reasons ... : for an anthropomorphic God, the atheist rejects belief in God because it is false or probably false that there is a God; for a nonanthropomorphic God ... because the concept of such a God is either meaningless, unintelligible, contradictory, incomprehensible, or incoherent; for the God portrayed by some modern or contemporary theologians or philosophers ... because the concept of God in question is such that it merely masks an atheistic substance—e.g., "God" is just another name for love, or ... a symbolic term for moral ideals."
  58. Edwards 2005: "On our definition, an 'atheist' is a person who rejects belief in God, regardless of whether or not his reason for the rejection is the claim that 'God exists' expresses a false proposition. People frequently adopt an attitude of rejection toward a position for reasons other than that it is a false proposition. It is common among contemporary philosophers, and indeed it was not uncommon in earlier centuries, to reject positions on the ground that they are meaningless. Sometimes, too, a theory is rejected on such grounds as that it is sterile or redundant or capricious, and there are many other considerations which in certain contexts are generally agreed to constitute good grounds for rejecting an assertion."
  59. Rowe 1998: "As commonly understood, atheism is the position that affirms the nonexistence of God. So an atheist is someone who disbelieves in God, whereas a theist is someone who believes in God. Another meaning of 'atheism' is simply nonbelief in the existence of God, rather than positive belief in the nonexistence of God. ... an atheist, in the broader sense of the term, is someone who disbelieves in every form of deity, not just the God of traditional Western theology."
  60. Boyer, Pascal (2001). Religion Explained. New York: Basic Books, 142–243. ISBN 978-0-465-00696-0. “boyer modern soap opera.” 
  61. du Castel, Bertrand (2008). Computer Theology. Austin, Texas: Midori Press, 221–22. ISBN 978-0-9801821-1-8. 
  62. Barrett, Justin (1996). "Conceptualizing a Nonnatural Entity: Anthropomorphism in God Concepts". Cognitive Psychology 31 (3): 219–47. doi:10.1006/cogp.1996.0017. PMID 8975683. http://commonsenseatheism.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Barrett-Conceptualizing-a-Nonnatural-Entity.pdf. 
  63. Rossano, Matt (2007). "Supernaturalizing Social Life: Religion and the Evolution of Human Cooperation". Human Nature (Hawthorne, N.Y.) 18 (3): 272–94. doi:10.1007/s12110-007-9002-4. PMID 26181064. http://www2.selu.edu/Academics/Faculty/mrossano/recentpubs/Supernaturalizing.pdf. Retrieved 25 June 2009. 
  64. Thomas Henry Huxley, an English biologist, was the first to come up with the word agnostic in 1869 Dixon, Thomas (2008). Science and Religion: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-929551-7.  However, earlier authors and published works have promoted an agnostic points of view. They include Protagoras, a 5th-century BCE Greek philosopher. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy – Protagoras (c. 490 – c. 420 BCE). Archived from the original on 14 October 2008. Retrieved on 6 October 2008. “While the pious might wish to look to the gods to provide absolute moral guidance in the relativistic universe of the Sophistic Enlightenment, that certainty also was cast into doubt by philosophic and sophistic thinkers, who pointed out the absurdity and immorality of the conventional epic accounts of the gods. Protagoras' prose treatise about the gods began 'Concerning the gods, I have no means of knowing whether they exist or not or of what sort they may be. Many things prevent knowledge including the obscurity of the subject and the brevity of human life.'”
  65. Aquinas, Thomas (1990). Summa of the Summa. Ignatius Press. 
  66. Aquinas, Thomas (1990). Summa of the Summa. Ignatius Press, 65–69. 
  67. Curley, Edwin M. (1985). The Collected Works of Spinoza. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-07222-7. 
  68. Nadler, Steven (29 June 2001). Baruch Spinoza. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2012/entries/spinoza/. 
  69. Snobelen, Stephen D. (1999). "Isaac Newton, heretic : the strategies of a Nicodemite". British Journal for the History of Science 32 (4): 381–419. doi:10.1017/S0007087499003751. http://www.toriah.org/articles/snobelen-1999-1.pdf. Retrieved 7 September 2014. 
  70. Webb, R.K. ed. Knud Haakonssen. "The emergence of Rational Dissent." Enlightenment and Religion: Rational Dissent in eighteenth-century Britain. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 1996. p19.
  71. Newton, 1706 Opticks (2nd Edition), quoted in H.G. Alexander 1956 (ed): The Leibniz-Clarke correspondence, University of Manchester Press.
  72. SUMMA THEOLOGIAE: The existence of God (Prima Pars, Q. 2). Retrieved on 30 December 2016.
  73. Summa of Theology I, q. 2, The Five Ways Philosophers Have Proven God's Existence
  74. Alister E. McGrath (2005). Dawkins' God: genes, memes, and the meaning of life. Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 978-1-4051-2539-0. 
  75. Floyd H. Barackman (2001). Practical Christian Theology: Examining the Great Doctrines of the Faith. Kregel Academic. ISBN 978-0-8254-2380-2. 
  76. Gould, Stephen J. (1998). Leonardo's Mountain of Clams and the Diet of Worms. Jonathan Cape. ISBN 978-0-224-05043-2. 
  77. Krauss L. A Universe from Nothing. Free Press, New York. 2012. ISBN 978-1-4516-2445-8
  78. Harris, S. The end of faith. W.W. Norton and Company, New York. 2005. ISBN 0-393-03515-8
  79. Culotta, E (2009). "The origins of religion". Science 326 (5954): 784–87. doi:10.1126/science.326_784. PMID 19892955. Bibcode2009Sci...326..784C. 
  80. Audio Visual Resources. Ravi Zacharias International Ministries. Archived from the original on 29 March 2007. Retrieved on 7 April 2007., includes sound recording of the Dawkins-McGrath debate
  81. Francis Schüssler Fiorenza and Gordon D. Kaufman, "God", Ch 6, in Mark C. Taylor, ed, Critical Terms for Religious Studies (University of Chicago, 1998/2008), 136–40.
  82. Ramsay, Tamasin (September 2010). "Custodians of Purity An Ethnography of the Brahma Kumaris". Monash University: 107–08. 
  83. Gen. 17:1; 28:3; 35:11; Ex. 6:31; Ps. 91:1, 2
  84. Gen. 14:19; Ps. 9:2; Dan. 7:18, 22, 25
  85. Exodus 3:13-15
  86. Bentley, David (1999). The 99 Beautiful Names for God for All the People of the Book. William Carey Library. ISBN 978-0-87808-299-5. 
  87. Aquinas, Thomas (1274). Summa Theologica. 
  88. Augustine of Hippo (397). Confessions. Book 7: Warren F. Draper. 
  89. (2002) Why Matter Matters: Philosophical and Scriptural Reflections on the Sacraments. Chapter Five: Why Male Priests?: Our Sunday Visitor. ISBN 978-1-931709-34-7. 
  90. Elaine H. Pagels "What Became of God the Mother? Conflicting Images of God in Early Christianity" Signs, Vol. 2, No. 2 (Winter, 1976), pp. 293–303
  91. Coogan, Michael (2010). "6. Fire in Divine Loins: God's Wives in Myth and Metaphor", God and Sex. What the Bible Really Says, 1st, New York, Boston: Twelve. Hachette Book Group. ISBN 978-0-446-54525-9. Retrieved on 5 May 2011. “humans are modeled on elohim, specifically in their sexual differences.” 
  92. Human Nature and the Purpose of Existence. Patheos.com. Retrieved on 29 January 2011.
  93. Template:Cite quran
  94. Allah would replace you with a people who sin. islamtoday.net. Archived from the original on 14 October 2013. Retrieved on 13 October 2013.
  95. McGrath, Alister (2006). Christian Theology: An Introduction. Blackwell Publishing. ISBN 978-1-4051-5360-7. 
  96. Moses – Hebrew prophet.
  97. Exodus 3:1–4:5
  98. 98.0 98.1 James Cornwell, 2009 Saints, Signs, and Symbols: The Symbolic Language of Christian Art ISBN 0-8192-2345-X p. 2
  99. Edward Gibbon, 1995 The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire ISBN 0-679-60148-1 p. 1693
  100. Adolphe Napoléon Didron, 2003 Christian iconography: or The history of Christian art in the middle ages ISBN 0-7661-4075-X p. 169
  101. Arena Chapel, at the top of the triumphal arch, God sending out the angel of the Annunciation. See Schiller, I, fig 15
  102. Bigham Chapter 7
  103. Arthur de Bles, 2004 How to Distinguish the Saints in Art by Their Costumes, Symbols and Attributes ISBN 1-4179-0870-X p. 32
  104. Irene Earls, 1987 Renaissance art: a topical dictionary ISBN 0-313-24658-0 pp. 8, 283
  105. CT25. Retrieved on 30 December 2016.
  106. Bigham, 73–76
  107. Louis Lohr Martz, 1991 From Renaissance to baroque: essays on literature and art ISBN 0-8262-0796-0 p. 222
  108. Gauvin Alexander Bailey, 2003 Between Renaissance and Baroque: Jesuit art in Rome ISBN 0-8020-3721-6 p. 233
  109. Charles Winston, 1847 An Inquiry Into the Difference of Style Observable in Ancient Glass Paintings, Especially in England ISBN 1-103-66622-3, (2009) p. 229
  110. Sir Thomas Browne's Works, 1852, ISBN 0-559-37687-1, 2006 p. 156
  111. Charles Winston, 1847 An Inquiry Into the Difference of Style Observable in Ancient Glass Paintings, Especially in England ISBN 1-103-66622-3, (2009) p. 230
  112. Oleg Tarasov, 2004 Icon and devotion: sacred spaces in Imperial Russia ISBN 1-86189-118-0 p. 185
  113. Council of Moscow – 1666–1667. Retrieved on 30 December 2016.
  114. Virani, Shafique N. (2010). "The Right Path: A Post-Mongol Persian Ismaili Treatise". Iranian Studies 43 (2): 197–221. doi:10.1080/00210860903541988. ISSN 0021-0862. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00210860903541988. 
  115. 1998, God, concepts of, Edward Craig, Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Taylor & Francis, [1]
  116. www.ditext.com
  117. Jung, Carl [1971] (1976). "Answer to Job", in Joseph Campbell: The Portable Jung. Penguin Books, 522–23. ISBN 978-0-14-015070-4. 
  118. Wierenga, Edward R. "Divine foreknowledge" in Audi, Robert. The Cambridge Companion to Philosophy. Cambridge University Press, 2001.
  119. Beaty, Michael (1991). "God Among the Philosophers". The Christian Century. Archived from the original on 9 January 2007. https://web.archive.org/web/20070109162529/http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=53. Retrieved 20 February 2007. 
  120. Pascal, Blaise. Pensées, 1669.
  121. More Americans Believe in Angels than Global Warming. Outsidethebeltway.com (8 December 2009). Retrieved on 4 December 2012.
  122. Template:Cite magazine
  123. "Poll: Nearly 8 in 10 Americans believe in angels", CBS News, 23 December 2011. Retrieved on 4 December 2012. 
  124. Salmon, Jacqueline L.. "Most Americans Believe in Higher Power, Poll Finds". Retrieved on 4 December 2012. 
  125. Qur'an 15:27

Bibliography

Template:Library resources boxTemplate:Refbegin

Template:Refbegin

(2008) The Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy. Blackwells. ISBN 9780470997215. 

Hastings, James Rodney [1908–26] (1925–2003). Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, John A Selbie, Volume 4 of 24 (Behistun (continued) to Bunyan.), Edinburgh: Kessinger Publishing, LLC. ISBN 978-0-7661-3673-1. “The encyclopedia will contain articles on all the religions of the world and on all the great systems of ethics. It will aim at containing articles on every religious belief or custom, and on every ethical movement, every philosophical idea, every moral practice.”  Template:Refend

External links

Template:Sister project links Template:Spoken Wikipedia

Template:Theism Template:Religion topics Template:Theology Template:Names of God

Template:Authority control