You have just proven what I've always known about you

a) you're ignorant (Jehovah means "the Great I Am", moron)

b) you're a satan worshipper.  God is eternal and immutable. He is the Most High.  He cannot lie, even about himself.  Therefore, your view necessarily means that you are under the direct influence of Satan, attempting to change the definition of The Eternal.

 But here's the best part [sarcasm] and why I think you are really at this.  God loves ALL his children.  That includes MEXICANS (yes!) and Pakistanis AND... AFRICANs (oh my goodness.)  That even includes their UNBORN CHILDREN, yes, the very ones you want to never be born!

 That is why you need a new definition of God, so you can justify infanticide of races you don't like.

You are extraordinarily transparent (and dull), Frosty.

John Green,

Shame on your for making such false statements. Your lack of intelligence and inability to extrapolate beyond your nose does not give you any special blessings. I respect all races, creeds and colors. I support all people. I stand for birth control to bring about human population stabilization so humans and the rest of God's creatures stand a chance of surviving the 21st century. Your lack of thought  or intellectual horsepower only shows that you cannot grasp my work.  But, please remain silent in the future so as Lincoln said, "It's better to be thought an idiot rather than opening your mouth and proving it." You are like most ancient believers in that you can't think for yourself so you throw stones at those who do.  FW

 There are many points in your article to pick up from for a discussion - arguably, almost too many.  This is not a complaint.

At various places in the Judeo-Christian Bible, the Deity (God) assume the role of creator, teacher, lawgiver, destroyer, healer, guide, angry tribal chieftan, origin of absolution, etc.

If I recall Genesis 1:26 - 28 correctly, God created man(kind) in his own image, after his likeness.  Male and female created He them.  So your rhetorical question related to God's maleness/femaleness has some affimative support in the Bible itself.

The great "I am".  In Exodus, Moses asked for God's name.  Some say the entire Hebrew Old Testament is the name of God.  But Moses gets a reply often translated into these 5 words, "I am that I am."  It is not immediately apparent, but after dwelling upon this for some time, I have concluded that God constantly creates God.  If this is so, he cannot offer anyone a name, because to do so changes God and the appropriate name.

This thought is disquieting to contemporary rationalists because it involves an aspect of recursion.  See M.C. Escher's drawings.  Rational thought was all the rage back before the days of the electronic computer.  Kepler did his orbital calculations that showed the Sun was the center of the Solar System using pencil and paper (or was it a quill pen?!!!).  He did not even have the benefit of Newton's calculus, having made the grave error of being born about a century too soon.  Kepler bemoaned the tedium of his work.  He wrote in his diary that he was almost driven to madness during that work.

Even ultimately rational calculations such as the ones Kepler performed were avoided for simpler ones.  Imagine how far and fast mathemeticians of that day fled from infinite recursion!  Escher's drawings are a good way to go.

But just because mathemeticians fled from such calculations does not mean that such calculations are not a necessary element in describing what the universe actually is.

In a chemistry 101 course, I remember a quote cited at the opening of one of the chapters in the textbook, (gist wise) "The reason everybody wants to go around naming everything is because man believes if he knows the name of something, he can control it."  Maybe God avoided giving Moses a name in the usual sense to prevent that.  What this about taking God's name in vain?  Some Hebrew sects will not say out loud any word taken to "name" God.  This was brought to my attention in an episode of "Northern Exposure" that was adapted from Jonah.

Before moving on from the great "I am", I want to mention another 5 word sentence offered up by the noted, famous, and beloved theologian Popeye the Sailor, who often said, "I am what I am."

Having completed that discussion, I now offer two more definitions of God.  In Christian Science, God is synonymous with mind.  You ask whether God is self-aware.  If this definition is any indication, many disciples of Christian Science would most likely answer, "Yes" to that question.

And they're not alone.  In the monistic idealism school of quantum physics, consciousness is considered to be the foundation of all that is.  So they would likely believe that God is conscious.

And the last definition I have to offer for God is "God is that which ultimately concerns humanity."  Is an angry tribal chieftan that which ultimately concerns humanity?  Maybe law and medicine are high on the list.  Closer to the top of the list than these is mind.  Is mind that which ultimately concerns humanity?

You write:  "The key: while you’re still breathing, enjoy yourself. Laugh, write, paint, run, walk, talk, eat, love and follow your heart’s desires toward limitless creative process."

The sage of old wrote:  Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.  (Ecclesiastes 9:10)

The stuff about the sinfullness of man is one of the (many) old essence philosophies.  Man is this or Man is that or man is (insert approprate noun with adjectives here).  Your thought just cited and the thought expressed in Ecc 9:10 is of a more existential nature.  Man exists.  His aim in life is one of his own choosing (or lack thereof).  Your thought and the thought of the sage of old is to make the best of it you can in a method of your own choosing.  Your words indicate the actions you choose and the attitude you choose.  In my view, the ability to make those choices are the very definition of individual freedom.

Those choices are your religion.

Those choices answer the question, "What is that which ultimately concerns Frosty Woolridge?"  Yep, those choices, in the most profound manner, express your definition of God.

DC Treybil

Frosty, your reply to me is just as extraordinarily revealing and dull as was the original post to which I first replied.

 You think your words on God are original and "new for the 21st century."?  You are very wrong.  They are old, as old as the words of the serpent in the Garden of Eden, repeated periodically throughout history and epochs of humanity.

 You have come up with no new material here.  It's available in Margaret Sanger's works, it's available in Julian Huxley's works, one can find it in most New Age Gaia namby pamby writing.

I do know you.  Your name is legion.  I imagine you think that's a good thing.

My little thoughts on this go something like...

Matthew 8:8-12 (NIV)

8 The centurion replied, “Lord, I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. But just say the word, and my servant will be healed. 9 For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, ‘Go,’ and he goes; and that one, ‘Come,’ and he comes. I say to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.”

10 When Jesus heard this, he was amazed and said to those following him, “Truly I tell you, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. 11 I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. 12 But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

----------

God certainly enjoys you as you exercise your key.

The key: while you’re still breathing, enjoy yourself. Laugh, write, paint, run, walk, talk, eat, love and follow your heart’s desires toward limitless creative process.  Since God expresses through you, when someone asks, “How are you doing today?”  You might answer, “I am showing God a great time by riding my bicycle, loving my children, going camping, bowling or dancing….”
 
----------

But as He is amazed at the faith of some - like the centurion - He is also amazed at the lack of it in others:

Isaiah 59:15b-18 (NIV)

The Lord looked and was displeased
    that there was no justice.
16 He saw that there was no one,
    he was appalled that there was no one to intervene;
so his own arm achieved salvation for him,
    and his own righteousness sustained him.
17 He put on righteousness as his breastplate,
    and the helmet of salvation on his head;
he put on the garments of vengeance
    and wrapped himself in zeal as in a cloak.
18 According to what they have done,
    so will he repay
wrath to his enemies
    and retribution to his foes;
    he will repay the islands their due.

----------

What's interesting is that the word "islands" in verse 18, above, refers to all the lands across great waters, outside of the known world of the day... Europe, Asia, and Africa. "Islands" is a warning to America, as well.
 

Thank you Dennis,

 Excellent response and you bring up many outstanding points on the question of God. In the end, it all gets down to individual interpretation. I thought it might be fun to kick out some new ideas on what constitutes God.  Obviously, I go against the old concepts because I bring new concepts. Thus, some throw rocks and names.  They cannot help themselves.  It's easier to throw names than deal with reality.  I find it ironic that animals do not need a god or worship or any knowledge of God and they do just fine. Humans, still animals themselves, created the God concept and seem to think they cannot survive without religion.  In fact, religion must be the worst invention of humans because it creates fear, wars and duress among people, tribes and other groups.  At some point, I suspect if the human race survives the 21st century, we will come to even greater understandings about God and probably realize that 'It' is a figment of our imaginations.  Such is life.  FW

It is so extremely interesting how many people use the word "we" when speaking of the human race. It's like they want to include their thoughts and opinions into everybody's lives. The reality is that no two people who completely agree on anything actually have exactly the same understanding of it. So, what about all those who disagree?

If the past is any indicator of the future, all of us who are commenting in Freedom's Phoenix will not be around by the time the 21st century is over. Everybody lives and dies to himself/herself, no matter how many people are around.

What is really interesting is that God's understanding of us is complete. And it is the truth. Yet our understanding of God is not complete, and therefor is not truth. Besides, each of us has a different understanding of God.

In the Old Testament, The Angel of the Lord is referred to at different times. Anyone researching this Angel throughout the Bible will find that, at times, that The Angel of the Lord is equated with God, Himself.

When Moses received the Ten Commandments from God, and he came down from the mountain, his face was radiant. It actually shown with a light of its own. But that radiance was fading away the longer Moses remained outside of the presence of God.

This point is that people are allowed to come near to God. We are allowed to pick up aspects of God's righteousness and become similar to Him in some ways. But we MUST do it in the prescribed way. We are allowed to lose the God similarity, as well.

The ancient city of Ugarit, in the land of ancient Canaan - the land on the eastern end of the Mediterranean, that God gave to Israel - was settled shortly after the Great Flood of Noah's day. It may have been a pre-Flood city that was simply repopulated. Many of the writings of Ugarit parallel Old Testament writings. Yet Ugarit was moving away from the truth about God, while Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were upholding the truth of God - which truth is... ONE GOD.

In the writings of Ugarit, there is the Great One God. Then there are His children, the prominent one of which is Yahweh. Yahweh has been given the authority for the things that happen on the Earth.

Moses's face became radiant as he moved into oneness with God. The Angel of the Lord, Who often takes on the aspect of God, Himself, appears to be Yahweh - the real Yahweh. It is very difficult distinguishing between The Angel and God, Himself, at times.

Now, who would better fit the description of being the Son of God, as well as, The Angel of the Lord, Who could take the name Yahweh, Who talks with people, Who gives the Word of God to people, Who brings the people into Godness (consider Moses, and "You are gods" from both the O.T. and the N.T.)... Who better than Jesus?

This is fascinating stuff to study. And it is exciting to think that we can become like God IF WE WAIT PATIENTLY FOR HIM TO CALL, AND THEN COME WHEN HE CALLS.

So, Frosty is partially right. But all who try to take up Godness without becoming the way God is, will fail miserably, and will ultimately lose even the right to take up Godness. All who do it the right way, by filling themselves on the Word of God (look at the beginning of the Gospel of John), will become sufficiently like God, that they will become sons and daughters of God, and will be called gods.