The following is the entry under GOD in the Guide to Humanistic Judaism,
published by the Society of Humanistic Judaism, 28611 West Twelve Mile Road,
Farmington Hills, MI 48334.  (Price $10.00)

Historically, the belief in the existence of gods or God has been an
important part of most cultures.  Gods are supernatural beings of
extraordinary power who enjoy immortality.  God is a Supreme Being, all
knowing and all powerful, who created and governs the world.

Monotheism is the belief that there is only one God.  Ethical monotheism is
the belief that one God is just.  Since the seventh century B.C.E., the
religious establishment of the Jews has embraced the idea of monotheism.
Yahveh, the God of the Jews, became the God of the universe.

Until the time of the Greek philosophers , no one felt the need to prove the
existence of gods or God.  People simply assumed it.  In the fourth century
B.C.E., an outbreak of public skepticism gave rise to a new discipline called
"theology."  Theology is the "science" of divinity.  One of its main purposes
is to prove the existence of God. (Theology is the only academic study in
which the existence of the subject matter needs to be demonstrated.  Biology
does not have to prove the existence of life; nor does anthropology have to
prove the existence of people.)

The two most popular theological arguments for the existence of God were the
causal argument and the design argument.  Everything -- including the
universe itself -- must have a cause.  The world requires a world-maker. A
perfect design requires a pefect design-maker. For most pious people,
however, theological arguments were irrelevant.  They worshipped God because
it was customary to do so or because they had "direct" spiritual experiences.

With the coming of the Enlightenment, skepticism reappeared.  Both the
justice and the very existence of God were questioned. The philosopher
Immanuel Kant demonstrated that neither the existence or the nonexistence of
God could be demonstrated.  If it is legitemate to ask who made the world, it
is equally legitemate to ask who made God.  So much for the causal argument.
As for design, it is a function of purpose.  Did a good God design cancer,
and for what good purpose?

After Kant, theology shifted its emphasis from proofs to the religious
experience, the experience of God as a  psychological phenomenon.
 Ultimately, theology degenerated into discussions about the "need to
believe."  God was no longer an objective being with an independent
existence.  He became a subjective being, a convenient illusion for people
who could not bear to live without him.

As a just Supreme Being became less credible, theology turned to redefining
the word God.  God became nature, love, goodness, positive power.  The
motivation for this redefinition is questionable.  If God refers to a unique
supernatural being, then the need for the word is obvious.  But if God refers
to powers and values for which other terms exist, then the usefulness of the
word God is doubtful.  If God is love, why not simply use the word love?  If
God is nature, why not use the word nature?  Most modern theology is an
intellectual version of the "emperor's clothing" -- words without real
meaning.

Today, theology provides sux alternative beliefs with regard to God:
1. Theism: believing in a Supreme Being, a supernatural creator-God who
responds to prayer and worship and intervenes actively in the lives of
people.

2. Deism: believing in a Supreme Being, a supernatural creator-God who cannot
respond to prayer and worship and who does not intervene in the lives of
people.

3. Pantheism: believing that God and nature are one and the same, or that God
and some part of nature, such as life, are one and the same.

4. Agnosticism: not knowing whether or not a Supreme Being exists.

5. Atheism:  believing that a Supreme Being does not exist.

6. Ignosticism: finding the question of God's existence meaningless because
it has no verifiable consequences.

Humanistic Judaism is incompatible with theism.  There is no evidence that a
supernatural conscious being exists who responds to the personal problems of
human beings and who deliberately intervenes in the affairs of humanity in
response to prayer or to ensure justice.  Most liberal God-believers
vigorously deny that they believe in such an anthropomorphic God.

Humanistic Judiasm can be compatible with deism, if the deist finds no need
to worship a creator-God and if the deist attributes no moral authority to
that God.

Humanistic Judaism is incompatible with pantheism.  Calling nature God is
verbal confusion.  Just call it nature.

Humanistic Judaism is compatible with  agnosticism.  Many, if not most,
Humanist Jews would describe themselves as agnostics.

Humanistic Judaism is compatible with atheism.  But it is not compatible with
aggressive atheism.  Aggresive atheism assumes that denying the existence of
God is of ultimate philosophic and social significance.  Humanistic Jews
assume that affirming human power, responsibility, and dignity is primary.

Humanistic Judaism is compatible with ignosticism.  Many Humanistic Jews find
the question of God's existence meaningless and therefore avoid God-language.

Humanistic Jews do recognize the importance of gods and God in human and
Jewish history.  The deity is the  projection of the first and most intimate
human experience, the dependence of the child on the parents.  Patriarchy,
monarchy, and traditional religion go hand in hand.  Just as the family
requires a father-leader and the nation requires a father-king, so does the
universe require a father-God.  (In matriarchial cultures, "mother" can be
substituted for "father.")

Modern individualism and democracy negate this view of society and the
universe.  The belief in God derives much of its emotional energy from the
historic attachment to the authoritarian family.  Humanistic Judaism is a
reflection of the fact that this historic attachment is no longer appropriate
or useful.