Is God: bad, good, or neutral? (or..)

[T'ai Chi]

I've noticed that atheist rants usually consist in pointing out all the bad in the world, and then asking why God would do all of that bad stuff.

Well, if there is a God, and if this God really is directly responsible for everything in the universe, didn't this God also do all the good stuff?

So this God did all the worst stuff, yet all the best stuff too, so doesn't this 'cancel out' and God is therefore neutral?

Or, are 'bad', 'good', and 'neutral' mere human terms which are incapable of describing God's actions?

[TheERK]

You have ten tickets. Five of them feed a hungry child for the rest of his or her life, and this will make the child happy. Five of them inflict massive amounts of pain on a child.

You can use any number of each type of ticket that you want.

I assert that using all ten is evil, not neutral, even if the effects of good and bad 'even out'.

[MRC_Hans]

Nonexistent.

Hans

[jimmygun]

It is fitting to describe 'god's' actions in human terms as humans have created god in their own image. It suits their agenda to have god described as loving, hating, forgiving, vengeful, caring, murderous etc.

[Igopogo]

What an excellent question! - Has to be the last option for me.

(edited for clarity)

[Chanileslie]

Originally posted by T'ai Chi
I've noticed that atheist rants usually consist in pointing out all the bad in the world, and then asking why God would do all of that bad stuff.

Well, if there is a God, and if this God really is directly responsible for everything in the universe, didn't this God also do all the good stuff?

So this God did all the worst stuff, yet all the best stuff too, so doesn't this 'cancel out' and God is therefore neutral?

Or, are 'bad', 'good', and 'neutral' mere human terms which are incapable of describing God's actions?

You forgot one option: There is no god, so it is irrelevent.

BTW, the atheist 'rants' I have seen that brings up the supposedly evil nature of god usually come following a religious persons rant about how wonderful god is. "If god is so wonderful then why would such a being allow such atrocity," is the argument. Of course I have yet to see a religious person explain why he/she believes his/her god is so good when there is also negative things that happen as well (other than the, god works in mysterious ways argument) especially when that religious person claims their god created everything, knows everything and can do anything. Even murderers can do decent things, does it make them good, bad or neutral?

Of course my argument is that it is all moot as there is no god.

[Nyarlathotep]

I am going to answer this assuming that you meant "If there is a god...."

If there was a god, I would still have to vote bad. Let me put it this way. If I made a beautiful work of art, donated millions of dollars to homeless orphans then went on a five state killing spree, would you consider me good or bad? I would consider someone like that bad, regardless of the good they did.

Need I even go into the concept of hell and infinite punishment for finite sins?

[Igopogo]

Originally posted by Nyarlathotep
I am going to answer this assuming that you meant "If there is a god...."



What if we replace the word 'god' with 'universe', what would your answer be?

[El Greco]

God is created after my image, so he is good if I am good and bad if I am bad

[Nyarlathotep]

Originally posted by Igopogo


What if we replace the word 'god' with 'universe', what would your answer be?

In that case I would say it wasn't applicable. The concept of 'God' implies something that has some form of sentience and is capable of making decisions. To me 'The Universe' implies no sentient guiding force, thus 'The universe' could no more be evil than could my desk.

[Ruby]

Originally posted by T'ai Chi
I've noticed that atheist rants usually consist in pointing out all the bad in the world, and then asking why God would do all of that bad stuff.

Well, if there is a God, and if this God really is directly responsible for everything in the universe, didn't this God also do all the good stuff?

So this God did all the worst stuff, yet all the best stuff too, so doesn't this 'cancel out' and God is therefore neutral?

Or, are 'bad', 'good', and 'neutral' mere human terms which are incapable of describing God's actions?

I voted neutral. If God exists, I can't see that he has had a hand in either good or evil. I see him as neutral...distant.....maybe even absent.

(edited for being redundant!)

[BobM]

Define "good"
Define "bad"

..then we can have this discussion. :)

Oops.. left out "Define God"

[Pahansiri]

Greetings T'ai Chi

With respect as I believe some have already pointed out the question you ask when asked to your target, here being atheist is irrelevant.

To ask someone who does not believe in big foot say, do they believe is big foot bad, good, or neutral is illogical.

There response must be they do not believe it is anything.




You write I've noticed that atheist rants usually consist in pointing out all the bad in the world, and then asking why God would do all of that bad stuff.


Here first your statement is attacking and that is not of any value.
Next it is a far too sweeping statement and such I believe renders it without value. If SOME atheist do as you say that is what you should say as of course you can not what all atheist say or think nor do all believe, say or think the same things. You did say “usually” but the base statement is still too sweeping.

The question you point out is of course not said in the light an atheist would say it. It would be posed as a question to someone who did believe in a God or Gods so as to question what they believe.

If an athiest believed God was this or that then they would not be an atheist, right?

Well, if there is a God, and if this God really is directly responsible for everything in the universe, didn't this God also do all the good stuff?

Yes that would be true just as if such a being exist they would be directly responsible for all the suffering and the good can in no way cover allowing such suffering on what would be this beings children..

I am not a good father if I give a child a candy bar, kiss them then beat them to death am I?

So this God did all the worst stuff, yet all the best stuff too, so doesn't this 'cancel out' and God is therefore neutral?

As I pointed out no it does not in any form. This being would be in total control of the bad and to inflict or allow suffering on a child when you had total control is evil. Any such father would lose all custody of a child in any court and be rightly jailed.

Or, are 'bad', 'good', and 'neutral' mere human terms which are incapable of describing God's actions?

Why?


Just what I believe.. Be well.

[jimlintott]

No, no, no.

The question should be:

Are gods bad, good or neutral?

The answer is yes.

[Yahweh]

Originally posted by T'ai Chi
I've noticed that atheist rants usually consist in pointing out all the bad in the world, and then asking why God would do all of that bad stuff.

Most of my ranting comes from the justification of actions. If you do something good because you are a good person, then :). If you do something good because your god tells you to do so, then :(. Bad things because you are a bad person, then :(. Bad things because god tells you to do bad things, then :mad:.

God's method of justifying his own good (creating the universe), bad (see Job, Deuteronomy, and Revelation), and neutral (being kind enough not to torture us) actions usually sound like this: "Because I said so". I'm sorry, that just dont cut it for me.

I voted "God is Bad". The bible is filled with hate. Maybe I just have a soft spot for women, but God is a cheavenist (and a bigot and a prick).

I would have voted "Planet X/God doesnt exist" if it was an option.

[ReasonableDoubt]

Originally posted by T'ai Chi
I've noticed that atheist rants usually consist in pointing out all the bad in the world, and then asking why God would do all of that bad stuff. They should be ashamed of themselves. Theodicy is a lousy foundation for atheism; the "Problem of Evil" is not an argument against the existence of God(s) but, rather, an argument against liking (worshipping) them. Next.

Originally posted by T'ai Chi
Well, if there is a God, and if this God really is directly responsible for everything in the universe, didn't this God also do all the good stuff? If God is directly responsible for everything, isn't God responsible for some things - truly brilliant.

Originally posted by T'ai Chi
So this God did all the worst stuff, yet all the best stuff too, so doesn't this 'cancel out' and God is therefore neutral?Only if one accepts all of your silly presuppositions, i.e., that a single God exists and is responsible for everything - fantasy blather for which you've offered absolutely no evidence.

Originally posted by T'ai Chi
Or, are 'bad', 'good', and 'neutral' mere human terms which are incapable of describing God's actions? What God? Do you know what question-begging means? You're really pretty bad at this stuff. You should stop embarrassing yourself.

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by Yahweh

I voted "God is Bad". The bible is filled with hate. Maybe I just have a soft spot for women, but God is a cheavenist (and a bigot and a prick).


Ok, that makes sense, but I'm a little confused; I mentioned "God", and you focus only on the Bible. What about all other texts that mention gods and powers and deities?

I should have been more clear in my opening post, but by "God", I mean the conception of God as conceived by all religions that conceive a God, not just literal Christianity.

[ReasonableDoubt]

Originally posted by T'ai Chi
I should have been more clear in my opening post, but by "God", I mean the conception of God as conceived by all religions that conceive a God, not just literal Christianity. No you don't. The majority of Gods worshipped throughout recorded history were not omniscient, were not omnipotent, were not omnibenevolent, and were members of a Pantheon - including YHWH in His formative years. These Gods were nothing like your childish caricature.

[Nyarlathotep]

Originally posted by T'ai Chi


Ok, that makes sense, but I'm a little confused; I mentioned "God", and you focus only on the Bible. What about all other texts that mention gods and powers and deities?

I should have been more clear in my opening post, but by "God", I mean the conception of God as conceived by all religions that conceive a God, not just literal Christianity. [/B]

The problem with that is that conceptions of God vary wildly from one religion to the next. There is no single conception of God that cuts across all religions.

[c4ts]

The poll is a false dilemma. What if there is no God? No poll option accounts for that possibility.

[T'ai Chi]

Nyarlathotep, certainly a 'higher power' or a 'first cause' seems to cut across most all religions. If that doesn't suit you, then consider "God" just as how an individual personally understands the term "God". Personally when I see the word "God" I think of it as a mix of a whole bunch of views of God.

Originally posted by ReasonableDoubt
Only if one accepts all of your silly presuppositions, i.e., that a single God exists and is responsible for everything - fantasy blather for which you've offered absolutely no evidence.
...
What God? Do you know what question-begging means? You're really pretty bad at this stuff. You should stop embarrassing yourself.

I'm not embarassed at all because I didn't intend to use this poll as a platform to show that any God exists or a single God exists. I never made the claim that God exists, so you complaining that I haven't offered evidence; I'll safely ignore that as a strawman. I did offer a hypothetical polling situation though for discussion.

c4ts, this wasn't a poll about if God exists or not. That was something that was a given for the purpose of this poll, despite whether it is in fact true or not true. It was a poll based more on peoples' conceptions of "God". If assuming that for the purpose of a silly poll does not agree with you, OK, but I'm not going to preface each and every dang thing I type with "If God exists..." in all of my posts just to please those who don't feel God exists and for those who even get argumentative when someone says "Is God..." because they feel that that is even a claim.

Anyways.............., I would personally vote for Good. Despite the very bad things out there, it seems there are more good things, just based on my personal experiences and opinion. I personally observe more good than bad. Also, the good out there seems able to change the bad to good very effectively, but bad seems to have a hard time changing the good to bad. If we are the effects of some Cause and we therefore take on the main properties of this cause, then due to more good being out there, I'd say that God is good overall, of course assuming yadda yadda.


You have ten tickets. Five of them feed a hungry child for the rest of his or her life, and this will make the child happy. Five of them inflict massive amounts of pain on a child.
You can use any number of each type of ticket that you want.
I assert that using all ten is evil, not neutral, even if the effects of good and bad 'even out'.


I'd counter by saying that I guess it depends on some specifics. First, I find it 'good' that this God created all 10 kids, giving each of them a chance at life. Is what happens to them after that due to God, or due to human factors? Did God create and then leave things alone, or did he create still have a hand in everything that occurs?

But then again, the Taoist in me realizes that 'good' and 'bad' are human constructs, and that the 'good' cannot exist without the 'bad'. If you have one you have the other, so I doubt anything, even God, is all good or all bad, but that maybe his good and bad acts are to be considered qualitatively different from our good and bad acts. It gets confusing. :)

[ReasonableDoubt]

I'll safely ignore that as a strawman.
Your safety is assured, if only by the banal nature of the tautology proposed. As for strawman: you apparently don't understand the term. You're truly not very good at this.

I did offer a hypothetical polling situation though for discussion.
You might just as well have asked: Given Unicorns, does unicorn poop smell good, smell bad, or have no smell at all when mixed with Pixie dust.

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by ReasonableDoubt

You're truly not very good at this.


You should really read that "You May Be a Fundy Atheist If..." list sometime.


You might just as well have asked: Given Unicorns, does unicorn poop smell good, smell bad, or have no smell at all when mixed with Pixie dust.

You can either play along with the conditions proposed in the poll, or not, obviously. I'm not going to preface everything with "If...". It should obviously be assumed that in a discussion about God, that "If..." is a given.

Fortunately, people in all socities have considered various concepts of God seriously as a creator of everything. Not all socities have considered unicorns/invisible dragons, etc. as a creator, or even at all, so your comparison is pretty moot. In fact, it seems like you're the only one considering a unicorn here. :D I personally I'm confused as to why you have to shift the topic at all.

[Pahansiri]

Originally posted by T'ai Chi


You should really read that "You May Be a Fundy Atheist If..." list sometime.



You can either play along with the conditions proposed in the poll, or not, obviously. I'm not going to preface everything with "If...". It should obviously be assumed that in a discussion about God, that "If..." is a given.

Fortunately, people in all socities have considered various concepts of God seriously as a creator of everything. Not all socities have considered unicorns/invisible dragons, etc. as a creator, or even at all, so your comparison is pretty moot. In fact, it seems like you're the only one considering a unicorn here. :D I personally I'm confused as to why you have to shift the topic at all. [/B]

Originally posted by T'ai Chi Fortunately, people in all socities have considered various concepts of God seriously as a creator of everything.


Not really true and all is again too sweeping and can not be known. Let us look back to very early man say Neanderthals the earliest man and to these beings and perhaps further I believe that such concepts were not relevant or considered. Either way you can not know “all societies” and what they believed.



Next there are many cultures that are Buddhist or Jain etc that do NOT believe God seriously as a creator of everything.

In addition and this is nit picking you say God seriously as a creator of everything. many cultures had many Gods that each had a roll in creating parts of the whole.


But as to the fact that even if every culture ever believed in a creator God does not make it so. Most or the world at one time believed the Earth was flat and we know it is not. There are many examples millions in fact.

The God Idea is even if right simply the most simple expiation the “God did it” requires no further thought and gives people greatly so way back the warm safe feeling that someone very big and powerful was taking care of them.


Not all socities have considered unicorns/invisible dragons, etc. as a creator, or even at all,

I would need to see you list ALL societies and prove what you have said. With respect you can not. Also There is another flaw I would say most societies have had a tail or belief in at least some part of mythical beast perhaps not always unicorns or dragons but some type.

Just what I believe.

[cbish]

Bertrand Russell pondered a similar question and found an interesting paradox.

Given the christian claim that God is good and God is omnipotent, then how could there be evil.

Answer: God is also evil (which many christians will reject)
or Evil is independent of God which means God is not omnipotent. (Russell went on to add that if God is not omnipotent then God is irrelevent).

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by Pahansiri

Next there are many cultures that are Buddhist or Jain etc that do NOT believe God seriously as a creator of everything.


Speaking of Jains, there are many parallels with religions' notions and properties of "God" and their many notions of 'karma'. They also believe in 'soul', in their enlightened ones, in 'bondage', 'liberation', and in many sides of existence. However, they seem to not personalize it though.


But as to the fact that even if every culture ever believed in a creator God does not make it so. Most or the world at one time believed the Earth was flat and we know it is not. There are many examples millions in fact.


Of course.


I would need to see you list ALL societies and prove what you have said. With respect you can not.


There has been religion in every society known so far.

[Pahansiri]

Originally posted by T'ai Chi


Speaking of Jains, there are many parallels with religions' notions and properties of "God" and their many notions of 'karma'. They also believe in 'soul', in their enlightened ones, in 'bondage', 'liberation', and in many sides of existence. However, they seem to not personalize it though.

[/b]

Jainism has no belief in a creator god, though there are a number of lesser deities for various aspects of life.


There has been religion in every society known so far.

As i pointed out that is not the case. Also "religion" does not always denote a belief in a God, i.e. Buddhism etc.

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by Pahansiri

Jainism has no belief in a creator god, though there are a number of lesser deities for various aspects of life.


'Jains believe their religion is eternal and hold that it was revealed in stages by a number of Conquerors, of whom Mahavira was the 24th.' Don't forget that too when you copy and paste from a webpage. ;)

Anyway, I'll conceed that they don't believe in a creator God, but they do believe in things that are shared in other religions, including some minor gods.

So now, even in hypothetical polling situations, I have to make the disclaimer "If..." for atheist, Jains, and who else now? :)

[T'ai Chi]

Originally posted by Pahansiri

As i pointed out that is not the case. Also "religion" does not always denote a belief in a God, i.e. Buddhism etc. [/B]

The societies that had/have Buddhism also had/have religions.

[Dorian Gray]

I'd counter by saying that I guess it depends on some specifics. First, I find it 'good' that this God created all 10 kids, giving each of them a chance at life. You misread the text - he said 10 TICKETS.

I am with the nonexistence crowd. However, if the Christian god exists, he is at best neutral. At worst, he is evil, since he puts three against one - Father, son and holy spirit against just one lowly devil. What a cheater.

[Ladewig]

In my experience, I have never encountered evidence of a "Good" God. I have seen things that can be interpreted as evidence of a "Bad, Inept, Indiferent, or Irrelevant" God.

Perhaps God is no longer alive. Sure He was, in many people's opinions, powerful enough to create the Universe, but what if immortality is not a characteristic of God.

You've already stepped away from Christian Fundamentalism as mentioned in this thread. However, I will say that if even a quarter of the Bible is true, then God is quite the sociopath. He appears to be incapable of telling right from wrong. Leaving aside all the horrible things that happen to those who don't worship Him, one is left with all the horrible things that happen directly from God's hand to people who are on God's good side. Spouse turned to pillar of salt, seeing one's children killed before being covered with boils, forced to wander in the desert for 40 years. No thank you, I believe I will not partake in any of that pie.

[fishbob]

The problem with that is that conceptions of God vary wildly from one religion to the next. There is no single conception of God that cuts across all religions. This made my vaguely formed answer clear right up. Kinda like that first cup of coffee in the morning.

The concept of god is bad, if indeed there is no such thing as god - as many of the posters on this board claim. Bad because of the wasted effort of working back to a neutral starting point from a wrong starting point in trying to figure out how stuff really works. Bad because you first have to discover that what you thought is wrong before you can start trying to figure out what is right.

Dang, wait a minute.

OK, so my vaguely formed answer is not as cleared up as I first thought. Maybe the concept of god is good because humans need to find out they are wrong before they bother to try to figure out what is right.

[Skeptical Greg]

I don't see how God ( any God ) could be anything more than an excuse for bad behaviour..

The naysayers ( ranting atheists ), that T'ai Chi alluded to, convert this into " God behaving badly " for the sake of argument.. This is an attempt to point out the irrationality of a belief in a loving benevolent God who obviously ( according to the stories ), behaves otherwise..


Good behaviour doesn't need one.. ( an exuse )



I didn't vote, since there is no evidence that God behaves in any way at all...

[Ossai]

T'ai Chi
I'd counter by saying that I guess it depends on some specifics. First, I find it 'good' that this God created all 10 kids, giving each of them a chance at life. Is what happens to them after that due to God, or due to human factors? Did God create and then leave things alone, or did he create still have a hand in everything that occurs? Your god is fickle. If you give your god credit for creating the children then it is indeed responsible for everything that happens afterwards as well as the situation they were created into.
The parents of the children were responsible for their creation.

I would personally vote for Good. Despite the very bad things out there, it seems there are more good things, just based on my personal experiences and opinion. Visited many inner city neighborhoods lately?

Also, the good out there seems able to change the bad to good very effectively, but bad seems to have a hard time changing the good to bad. Define your version of both bad and good. I haven't noticed the change from one to another to any significant degree.

But then again, the Taoist in me realizes that 'good' and 'bad' are human constructs, and that the 'good' cannot exist without the 'bad'. So do you believe in a zero sum universe. That for every good action an equally bad action must take place? Wouldn't that make the creator, at best, neutral?

Ossai

[Pahansiri]

Originally posted by T'ai Chi


'Jains believe their religion is eternal and hold that it was revealed in stages by a number of Conquerors, of whom Mahavira was the 24th.' Don't forget that too when you copy and paste from a webpage. ;)

Anyway, I'll conceed that they don't believe in a creator God, but they do believe in things that are shared in other religions, including some minor gods.

So now, even in hypothetical polling situations, I have to make the disclaimer "If..." for atheist, Jains, and who else now? :) [/B]



Greetings T'ai Chi.


Now take a deep breath and relax, stop being so defensive and angry because others disagree with you and point out flaws or challenge your statements and/or beliefs. Here is a hug.

I am a bit sad to see you mainly avoiding statements made and or facts that disprove your position. You are very right and I thank you and apologize for not posting the site information regarding the post I made disproving what you have said. It was late and I posted very quickly and made the mistake of not including the site information.

What is good is the facts I gave/statement disproved your belief and position but my not posting the site information did bring you out to respond so there was some good from my mistake.


'Jains believe their religion is eternal and hold that it was revealed in stages by a number of Conquerors, of whom Mahavira was the 24th.

Yes that is all true but is irrelevant to your statements i.e.

1- Fortunately, people in all socities have considered various concepts of God seriously as a creator of everything.

I pointed out that of course Buddhist societies do bot believe a creator created all or anything and many have not.

' Don't forget that too when you copy and paste from a webpage. yes thank you I covered this above.

Anyway, I'll conceed that they don't believe in a creator God, but they do believe in things that are shared in other religions, including some minor gods.


And? Many religions share many things materialistic atheism share things with many religions so I am not sure how your statement is at all relevant.

You did very well and I applaud you for saying Anyway, I'll conceed that they don't believe in a creator God, Why the need to twist. You are wrong about most things said here as the core of the thread there is nothing wrong with being wrong I am so often such. What is wrong and I believe below who you really are is becoming angry about being wrong and not just saying “hey you are right and I am wrong it is always good to learn”?

So now, even in hypothetical polling situations, I have to make the disclaimer "If..." for atheist, Jains, and who else now?

YES you do and greatly so when you lake statements like

1-Fortunately, people in all socities have considered various concepts of God seriously as a creator of everything.

and
2- I've noticed that atheist rants usually consist in pointing out all the bad in the world, and then asking why God would do all of that bad stuff.

Well, if there is a God, and if this God really is directly responsible for everything in the universe, didn't this God also do all the good stuff?

So this God did all the worst stuff, yet all the best stuff too, so doesn't this 'cancel out' and God is therefore neutral?

Or, are 'bad', 'good', and 'neutral' mere human terms which are incapable of describing God's actions?

3 - I should have been more clear in my opening post, but by "God", I mean the conception of God as conceived by all religions that conceive a God, not just literal Christianity.

Taoism is not a God based religion, Buddhism is not, Jain is not I can compile the entire list if you like.

Be well my friend

[Pahansiri]

Originally posted by T'ai Chi


The societies that had/have Buddhism also had/have religions.

My friend you are dancing as fast as you can..lol :rub:

Let us again look at YOUR statments.

1- Fortunately, people in all socities have considered various concepts of God seriously as a creator of everything.

- I should have been more clear in my opening post, but by "God", I mean the conception of God as conceived by all religions that conceive a God, not just literal Christianity.

Again using Buddhism because I am Buddhist. There are countries more so were but still now countries societies that are almost completely Buddhist. In these countries there will be people of other beliefs and even some Buddhist who choose to believe in a creator and I respect that. BUT your statements are inherently flawed because they are sweeping and in many cases just wrong and not factual.

Are you saying that say in Thailand or say Bhutan or Mustang where the population is between 80 and 99% Buddhist that you are right in saying what you have because 1% believe in a God??

The music has stopped, stop dancing.

What will help this is if you just say what you mean and not make sweeping statements.

Be well my friend

[T'ai Chi]

Pahansiri,

LOL, who's angry?

Anyway, while the vast majority of Buddhists don't believe in a typical creator God, their conception of "God" seems to be replaced by both an enlightened being who will save you from suffering, and karma which created the universe. They also believe in 'god realms'.

There is nothing wrong with what I've said about societies and religion. In all societies, there are God-believers, and by "God" I meant God as conceived by all religions that conceive a God. If your certain religion/philosophy/worldview/whatever doesn't believe in a God, then the poll doesn't apply.

I'm not going to add the "If..." for hypothetical polling situations. The "If..." should be taken as a given in any discussion of God.

Hugs back. :)

[Pahansiri]

Originally posted by T'ai Chi
Pahansiri,

LOL, who's angry?

Anyway, while the vast majority of Buddhists don't believe in a typical creator God, their conception of "God" seems to be replaced by both an enlightened being who will save you from suffering, and karma which created the universe. They also believe in 'god realms'.

There is nothing wrong with what I've said about societies and religion. In all societies, there are God-believers, and by "God" I meant God as conceived by all religions that conceive a God. If your certain religion/philosophy/worldview/whatever doesn't believe in a God, then the poll doesn't apply.

I'm not going to add the "If..." for hypothetical polling situations. The "If..." should be taken as a given in any discussion of God.

Hugs back. :)

Greetings T'ai Chi

Anyway, while the vast majority of Buddhists don't believe in a typical creator God,

Buddhism does not believe in a creator God and when it speaks about gods it is speaking about realms of rebirth. These “heavenly realms” are only marked by long lives mostly free from suffering but like all realms of rebirth are “ruled” by the reality of impermanence. Old age and death, decay of what is compound.

But as I said and you allude to some Buddhist do believe in Gods, there are Christians that also consider themselves Buddhist etc. We as Buddhist or Buddhism does not have “rules’ surely not membership rules ( other then if you were a nun or monk) and know clearly fear is an illusion so it is not part of our belief or a tool use to control the masses.

The “people” reborn there are you and I and related to karma they are not Gods. No powers no creating etc. They can be due to karma/actions be reborn after death to a life of great suffering, that is out belief a ask no one to believe it nor demand it as fact.

their conception of "God" seems to be replaced by both an enlightened being who will save you from suffering, and karma which created the universe. They also believe in 'god realms'.



Not the case by far. . No one and no thing saves us but us.
"By oneself, indeed, is evil done; by oneself is one defiled. By oneself, indeed, is one purified. Purity and impurity depend on oneself. No one purifies another." (Dhammapada 165)



"Mind is the forerunner of all actions. All deeds are led by mind, created by mind. If one speaks or acts with a corrupt mind, suffering follows, as the wheel follows the hoof of an ox pulling a cart." -The Dharmapada.


Buddha never said he was a God or savior only I can control my actions and awaken my mind. We as Buddhist believe all are Buddha’s and need only see the true nature of mind, become fully awaken/enlightened.


Buddha clearly said many times and his last word, you have to do this yourself. The Buddha was a teacher. He said often Do not confuse the finger pointing at the moon with the moon

Enlightenment ends the cycle of rebirth and death and the law and reality of cause and effect/karma.

No one “saves” me but me.


As you see and I mean no disrespect you have above made what you believed was a statement of fact yet it was clearly mostly wrong. Should you have not asked me rather then tell me?

There is nothing wrong with what I've said about societies and religion.

Clearly there was and I demonstrated that using facts and your words. But never allow fact get in your way…lol


In all societies, there are God-believers,

Rather then keep changing and twisting and turning why not just say “ok I was wrong and over stated” ?Your base statement said Fortunately, people in all socities have considered various concepts of God seriously as a creator of everything.

Here indicating that the society as a whole believed in God which I have demonstrated is clearly wrong.

Now you seek to change what you said and say In all societies, there are God-believers, but your own words betray and hang you.

I believe in reality you are an honest person you are not acting that way here and fooling no onw.

and by "God" I meant God as conceived by all religions that conceive a God.

After rereading the following I should have been more clear in my opening post, but by "God", I mean the conception of God as conceived by all religions that conceive a God, not just literal Christianity.

You did clearly say all religions that conceive a God very sorry for that one mistake.

If your certain religion/philosophy/worldview/whatever doesn't believe in a God, then the poll doesn't apply.

That is not the case please refer to your poll. You are asking atheist how they see God as I and others pointed outan atheist sees god as a myth rendering the poll irrelevant.