Originally posted by PalynkaI can believe that some people who have personally rejected the notion of a supreme moral being would pay lip service, because they know the people generally believe in God as a supreme moral being. I am sure that many politicians are like this. OTOH, I have known some people, one being my sister, who think of God as a 'principle' and don't mind using the word in that sense. If some people think God is a living being of some sort, it's OK by them. It's just too bad that the respect isn't always mutual.
That makes a lot of sense to me. I'm not sure if I understand where you want to go with this, though. We're talking about people who have rejected the notion of a supreme moral being, still calling something "God".
Originally posted by PalynkaDo you object to pantheists referring to the universe itself as god?
That makes a lot of sense to me. I'm not sure if I understand where you want to go with this, though. We're talking about people who have rejected the notion of a supreme moral being, still calling something "God".
Originally posted by JS357So, in a sense, it is doublespeak. Either that, or personal confusion.
I can believe that some people who have personally rejected the notion of a supreme moral being would pay lip service, because they know the people generally believe in God as a supreme moral being. I am sure that many politicians are like this. OTOH, I have known some people, one being my sister, who think of God as a 'principle' and don't mind using the word ...[text shortened]... ing of some sort, it's OK by them. It's just too bad that the respect isn't always mutual.
Originally posted by PalynkaProbably in most cases, it is one or the other. I know I use language like "God help us" or "God only knows" without believing in a god. Like, today's stock market behavior triggers both thoughts.
So, in a sense, it is doublespeak. Either that, or personal confusion.