'We should proclaim to the world that our God is not a divine being "out there" nor the mind behind the creation, nor the providential ruler of the universe.'

OK, Peter, you've 'proclaimed' what he is NOT: now what IS he, exactly? Preferably in plain English.

Or failing that, welcome to atheism.

Beautiful article, Thank you Peter!

Jon J, you asked: "you've 'proclaimed' what he is NOT: now what IS he, exactly? Preferably in plain English"

If that was possible to tell, then God would be reduced to the level of an object; in other words, an idol, of which we have too many already. Only THINGS or OBJECTS can be described in a positive way, yet God is not a thing, God is not an object.

I did however encounter one flaw in the article, claiming that "God is personal": Yes, God is not a person, but God is not personal either - I assume that what Peter meant is that the EXPERIENCE OF GOD is personal; not an objective one.

Unlike God Himself, one's experience of God can be described positively, but being subjective in nature, it obviously cannot be too accurate or serve as substitute for the actual direct experience of God.

Dear Trav,

Christianity is not a theology - Christianity is the willingness to follow Jesus' example and be crucified, or whatever equivalent anguish is required under the circumstances, for the love of God and Others. A Christian is someone who is willing to go on the cross for God's sake, not someone who holds this or another belief. I met just a handful of those.

...yet another definition of god/faith/religion.
I love this...there seems to be no end to it.
I guess a delusion is a personal and completely subjective thing isn't it.

"If that was possible to tell, then God would be reduced to the level of an object; in other words, an idol, of which we have too many already. Only THINGS or OBJECTS can be described in a positive way, yet God is not a thing, God is not an object."

Wonderful! Only a theist would try to make a virtue of the fact that they don't know what the hell they are talking about.

"Wonderful! Only a theist would try to make a virtue of the fact that they don't know what the hell they are talking about."

Virtue? can you please tell me how this possibly makes me any better than anybody else?

The only "virtue" I can think and boast of, is that of not being a complete illogical fool and/or an idol-worshiper. This is not a matter of belief, but of pure logic.

I take it as accepted (otherwise let me know and I can elaborate on it) that:

A: Only objects can be described positively.
B: All objects are limited.

If you further claim that:

C: God is __fill_in_the_blank__

Then
D: God is an object
and
E: God is limited.

A limited god is called an idol, so if you worship a God that can be described positively, then you worship an idol.

"I take it as accepted (otherwise let me know and I can elaborate on it) that:

A: Only objects can be described positively.
B: All objects are limited."

And I take it as accepted that:

C: Only things which can be described positively exist.

So therefore

D: If God cannot be described positively, God does not exist.

But if you can think of any counterexamples, let me know.

What would the Christian martyrs in the Colosseum have made of your pathetic "God", I wonder, this ghost of a ghost? Or Joan of Arc and St Louis? What would all the missionaries who suffered illness and death to bring the gospel of a loving God and a blissful afterlife to the world feel, if you could tell them that their spiritual heirs would declare 'all objects are limited'? Do you think they would be proud of your feeble logic-chopping?

If this is what Christianity has come to in the year of our lord 2011, then the quicker it puts itself out of its misery the better.