Quick English lesson for everyone. The word “God” is only capitalized when it is being used as a proper noun, not when it is used as a common noun. Capitalizing “God” but not “gods” is not a monotheist slight against polytheism that implies that Yahweh should be given some sort of orthographic reverence that all of the other gods don’t get. It’s purely because monotheists use the word “God” as Yahweh’s proper name.
This is exactly the same as the capitalization of the words “mom” and “dad.” When I write to you, “my dad bought me a unicorn,” I do not capitalize it. When I write to my brother, “Dad bought me a unicorn,” I capitalize it. I capitalize it when I am using it as a proper name. Ditto with “God” and “Goddess.” When you’re talking about someone named “Goddess,” you capitalize it. When you’re talking about someone else who just so happens to be a goddess, you don’t.
This is not oppression or lack of respect to the gods of polytheist religions. This is just how the English language works when you write it.
So, the following sentences are written correctly:
“I pray to God.”
“I pray to the gods.”
“Hera is a goddess.”
“Yahweh is a god.”
“Wiccans revere the Goddess.”
“Jim Morrison is God.”
And yes, that means the following sentence is also written correctly:
“My favorite god is God.”
The same goes for other words used as proper names for assored deities. This is why we capitalize “the Lord” when referring to Yahweh but not “a lord” when referring to an aristocrat in general. But when you directly address that aristocrat by his title–and manners dictate that you should–you call him “Lord,” capitalized. You might capitalize “Lord” when it is part of a title, such as in a deity’s honorific, but not when used descriptively. So therefore while you might say “Zeus is Lord of the Heavens,” and capitalize it, you would also say “Zeus is the lord of many awesome things, including, inter alia, lightning, meting out justice, Mount Olympus, fatherhood and the heavens” and not capitalize it.
Of course, the exceptions to this rule of capitalization are the same as with any other word. Continue to capitalize the common noun, “god” when you use it in the title of a work, such as Kerenyi’s The Gods of the Greeks or Gaiman’s American Gods (by the same token, do not capitalize it when you use those same phrases in sentences, such as, “the gods of the Greeks were sexually active,” and “money and celebrities are truly American gods”). Also, capitalize it when it’s the first word in a sentence, like always.
Overcapitalization is a sin punishable by ridicule and mockery.
Sailing to Byzantium 
I love you. 😀
It just needed to be said.
offense is something people just really love to take
more so then cookies or cake
Wrong.
First of all, all capitalization is by convention. You can’t hide behind “the rules”, because these rules reflect the values of a given society. And they change over time. A lot.
The conventionally accepted rules governing capitalization with respect to deities (aka, “reverential capitalization”) overlap (but not completely) with the broader rules for proper nouns. Just so you know.
Also, one of the main things that determines the conventions that in turn determine the rules for capitalization (and grammar, etc) is USAGE. And there are always variations in usage, and only exceptionally uptight people concern themselves with trying to eliminate such variations.
I disagree. I realize that all linguistic norms are created by usage, but that doesn’t mean there are no norms. I’m just not convinced that “reverantial capitalization” is widespread or regularized enough to rise to that level.
Furthermore, I think that “reverential capitalization”–precisely because it is not regular or consistent–leads to rampant overcapitalization. As someone who drafts and deals with legal documents all the time, a context where irregular and inconsistent capitalization is hyperprolific, I can tell you that this is a huge pain in the ass.
When reverential capitalization becomes widespread and regular enough to rise to the level of a descriptive norm, we’ll talk. Until then, don’t capitalize common nouns. I will mock you.
I won’t deny that I’m exceptionally uptight. I’m a lawyer, after all. I have to wear a mouth guard to keep from grinding my teeth into powder at night. I could almost always stand to loosen up.
On the other hand, I’m not just being pedantic here. I’ve seen modern pagans get in a huff over this more than once. The implication that the capitalization rules are some kind of religious oppression or cultural hegemony is complete nonsense. Christians are supposed to de-capitalize “god” when they talk descriptively about what kind of being Yahweh is, too.
Also, “god” when used to refer to the gaseous invertebrate worshipped by the christians is only a “proper noun” by arbitrary fiat. One must implicitly accept the christians claim that their “god” is unique in order to capitalize God in the way you are (and Websters) are insisting.
And many people, including many christians, use “God” in an extremely nebulous way that doesn’t properly fit the “proper noun” category at all. That is “God” is widely used as a catch-all word to include just about any religious belief whatsoever, since in the West all religion is understood with reference to the monotheistic concept of “God”. In most western people’s minds, the questions “do you believe in God?” and “are you religious?” are synonymous.
Also, many people, including many christians, explicitly say that they believe in “an impersonal God”, and it is clear that this does not fit in the “proper noun” category either, except, as previously noted, by arbitrary fiat (as opposed to unarbitrary fiat).
The reason why people now sometimes speak in terms of “reverential capitals” is that they realize that “god” is a very special case not actually covered by the generic rules for “proper nouns”.
Not at all. See my discussion of the use of “Dad” above. The usages of “dad and “god” in this sense are identical. “A dad” is a common noun, and uncapitalized. When I use the word as a name, such as when I address my dad or talk to my siblings about “Dad,” I capitalize it. There’s no implication of uniqueness.
The fact that it’s a proper name for a sometimes vaguely defined object doesn’t mean it’s not a proper name. An abstract, ill-defined noun is still a noun. This is why, when poets directly address something abstract (“O Love,” or “O Death”), they capitalize it. If they’re adhering to orthographic conventions, that is.
No way. Many impersonal things have proper names. “Maryland,” for example.
No, they’re just bedazzled by the confusion caused by using a common noun as a proper name. It’s not a special case; it’s just uncommon.
[…] sin and punishment, the pre-existence and reward/punishment, spirit prison, the Plan of Salvation, capitalization, folklore, divine mysteries, values, favorite guns, where the hell is hell, who is the prophet, who […]
What do you say about the capitalization of “He” when it refers to gaseous invertebrate worshipped by the creed-making fishermen?
Nothing at all.
[…] everything else, including the other one. Thus there can be only one God, and following the usual grammatical convention of capitalizing unique titles, we capitalize the […]