Reflections on the Controversial Concept of Being Called 'God'

When someone refers to you as 'god', it can often lead to a mix of emotions and thoughts, particularly if the reference is meant to invoke the idea of a supreme being. This article explores the context and implications of such a description, examining it largely through the lens of a person who vehemently disassociates from god-like connotations.

Theological Underpinnings and Personal Beliefs

The phrase 'aatma parmatma ka bhaag hai' lends a spiritual context to the person's identity, suggesting that they are inherently connected to a higher entity, Vishnu. However, this connection does not translate into adopting the title 'god' for oneself. The individual posits that being a part of the infinite lord Vishnu does not equate to being 'god' in the traditional sense.

There is a significant difference in expecting a supreme being to demonstrate its omnipotence and omniscience in reality. The lack of tangible evidence and the absence of a logical argument for the existence of a particular god lead many to view the concept with skepticism. This perspective is especially pronounced in the context of monotheistic deities like Allah or the Christian God, whose existence remains a matter of faith rather than empirical evidence.

Understanding the Misalignment of Expectations

The individual's stance is further emphasized by a call to consider the actions of so-called 'gods'. The premise that a powerful and all-knowing entity should be demonstrating these attributes is challenged. The idea of a 'god of nothing' or non-existent god due to the absence of evidence is presented as a relevant viewpoint. This aligns with a position often held by atheists and agnostics who base their beliefs on the lack of concrete evidence rather than faith.

Personal Dedication and Peer Reflection

In contrast to the discussion on being a god, the individual takes pride in their actions and contributions. They point to practical help offered to people and animals, emphasizing their active engagement with the world rather than passive existence. This stance can be seen as a counterpoint to the perceived inaction of a traditional god, further differentiating their beliefs and actions.

Addressing the Meaninglessness of the Label

The title 'god' is often considered meaningless when uttered in a vacuum, without agreement on the definition. It can be seen as a statement void of context or intention. The example provided illustrates how different individuals might interpret the term differently, rendering it useless as a standalone compliment or insult.

To truly understand the implications of the label, one must clarify their definition of 'god'. The example of Bob, Alice, and Jack illustrates how without a shared understanding, the term remains empty and ineffective. This underscores the importance of communication and mutual understanding in such matters.

While one might find the notion of being called 'god' intriguing or flattering, the reality is often quite different. This article encourages a deeper reflection on the personal, philosophical, and practical aspects involved in such a label, inviting readers to consider their own beliefs and practices.