How do you define a God?

[NeoGoomba]

I posit that God is my wife. She knows what I will think or say before I think or say it, always knows where I am, and will utterly crush me if I show the slightest hint of defiance or disobedience.

Yay happy fun times!

/sob

[Simon_Jester]

Now this might seem a tangent, but the OP asked about the definition of "godhood", and I'm of the opinion that the influence of the Abrahamic religion on our culture has corrupted the idea of divinity in our minds, by setting the pointlessly broad attributes of Yaweh as the "standard" definition of a "god", despite the abrahamic definition (or re-definition) literally being an attempt at invalidating the godhood status of competitors by hijacking the term.

This... is pretty much my point. I quite agree.

Going back to my original post... I still think divinity is more or less defined by the willingness of people to worship the divine being, regardless of the fluff surrounding the character itself. But that'd be the real world meaning.

That's the meaning of "god" in the sense of "is this character the focus of a religion," yes. In real life Superman is not a god, and Bes is, even though it's entirely possible that Superman would win in an arm-wrestling match or a footrace. Because Bes was at one time worshiped as a deity.

But in fiction, we may distinguish between "gods" who are the literal foci of religions, and "godlike beings" who are not the focus of a religion but clearly have power that would qualify them as one if they wanted it. Such as the Q continuum.

Within the confines of a story? Divinity is defined, again, in my opinion, not by the specific powers of the divine being, but by the role said being plays in the setting. As such Yaweh's divinity is central to the theme of the Abrahamic settings, but is just as important to that setting as Thor, Odin and Loki are to the Nordic setting, or Cthulhu to the Lovecraftian setting.

I agree with this; it fits in with my (2) and (3).

[Oskuro]

But in fiction, we may distinguish between "gods" who are the literal foci of religions, and "godlike beings" who are not the focus of a religion but clearly have power that would qualify them as one if they wanted it. Such as the Q continuum.

I agree, although I think a problem, for me at least, is that I view religions as "fiction" too. And from that viewpoint gods, within the narrative of the religion itself, are considered worthy of worship due to their role in the setting, rather than because someone is worshipping them already.

So if the point of the narrative is to explore the difference between faith and reality, it is a good idea to differentiate between "gods" as entities that are simply worshipped by the faithful regardless of any logic, and "godlike beings" as entities that have quantifiable power, regardless of them being worshipped or not.

If the narrative, on the other hand, does not want to explore that but rather build, like religions do, a "straightforward" cosmology, then there would be no practical difference between a "god" and a "godlike being", at least if the reasoning for worship is the power these beings hold. In such a setting powerful beings not directly worshipped could be seen as "forgotten gods".


For example, in the case of the Q continuum, or the Ascended Ancients/Ori, the narratives in which they exist do want to point out the difference between "god" and "god-like being", you could go as far as to say that one of the main points of the whole Stargate narrative is pointing that power does not equal divinity, and that worshippers are often manipulated (Which made me feel betrayed when in a later episode, while discussing the Ori's literal god-like powers in the magic meeting room, they make sure to imply that GOD is still above the Ori).


On the other hand, narratives like say, the Dungeons & Dragons cosmology, have plenty of deities who are deities just because, regardless of worship (including a few "we don't want to be worshipped" ones). The rules for this entities dictate, even, that their power level should be adjusted dynamically so the deities are always beyond the power levels of the players.... Unless the point of the campaign is to have players become gods... Which means again that, from a narrative standpoint, what matters is the position of the deities in the universe's "power hierarchy", more than their details.


I'm not really disagreeing much with what people have said here, though, I just find out this is an interesting subject to think about.