19 Jan '11 23:40>8 edits
My question is in bold at the bottom of this post:
Often I refer to the god a person believes exists in the small case 'g' (as I just did then) Firstly, I don't do this out of defiance, mockery, mischief, I do this because I am of the conviction that the god I'm refering to is most likely not representative of a god that exists; instead this god is a construct formed in the mind of this person, which at best is only an approximation of some existent god (based upon their particular interpretation of some holy book, or the teachings they have received from their peers, or what they would like a god to be, etc...). Moreover to use the term "God" is to suggest one is discussing a unique entity when in fact almost every reference to this deity is made by people who on an individual basis hold it to have at least one characteristic disjoint from the god of their neighbours.
- Some will think it lets people burn for eternity, others will think otherwise.
- Some will think this god transcends logic, some will think otherwise.
- Some will think it's a "He", some will think otherwise.
- Some will think it hates homosexuality, some will think otherwise
- Some will think this god has a purpose for *them*, some will think otherwise.
- Some will think it cares about no living creatures other than humans, some will think otherwise.
- Some will think it regularly interacts with them on a personal basis, some will think otherwise.
- Some will think it dislikes meat eaters, some will think otherwise.
- Some will think all human morality is sourced from this deity, some will think otherwise
- Some will think it dislikes blood transfusions, some will think otherwise.
- Some will think this god is "timeless", some will think otherwise.
- .
- .
- .
and so the list goes on... (and I could suggest many attributes of my own with varying magnitudes (perhaps unrelated to popular gods) such to bear out the claim there are *lots* of different types of gods that can be summoned to ones thoughts)
Whenever I'm discussing some god, at the forefront of my mind is that I'm discussing some person's notion of this entity (and should quickly try to establish which properties they assign to it); and that this entity may be a good fit, or a bad fit for some god that may or may not exist.
I've never really been a believer so I'd like to ask: Is it the case with many of the theists among you that the only point at which you're discussing a "notion" of god is when you're discussing with someone who disagrees with you - and it is only they who have some notion of it (as opposed to the "real deal" like you have(?)) and is deserving of the sort of criticism that would be wholly inappropriate if redirected back to your god; and finally that this notion of theirs contains all the errors?
Often I refer to the god a person believes exists in the small case 'g' (as I just did then) Firstly, I don't do this out of defiance, mockery, mischief, I do this because I am of the conviction that the god I'm refering to is most likely not representative of a god that exists; instead this god is a construct formed in the mind of this person, which at best is only an approximation of some existent god (based upon their particular interpretation of some holy book, or the teachings they have received from their peers, or what they would like a god to be, etc...). Moreover to use the term "God" is to suggest one is discussing a unique entity when in fact almost every reference to this deity is made by people who on an individual basis hold it to have at least one characteristic disjoint from the god of their neighbours.
- Some will think it lets people burn for eternity, others will think otherwise.
- Some will think this god transcends logic, some will think otherwise.
- Some will think it's a "He", some will think otherwise.
- Some will think it hates homosexuality, some will think otherwise
- Some will think this god has a purpose for *them*, some will think otherwise.
- Some will think it cares about no living creatures other than humans, some will think otherwise.
- Some will think it regularly interacts with them on a personal basis, some will think otherwise.
- Some will think it dislikes meat eaters, some will think otherwise.
- Some will think all human morality is sourced from this deity, some will think otherwise
- Some will think it dislikes blood transfusions, some will think otherwise.
- Some will think this god is "timeless", some will think otherwise.
- .
- .
- .
and so the list goes on... (and I could suggest many attributes of my own with varying magnitudes (perhaps unrelated to popular gods) such to bear out the claim there are *lots* of different types of gods that can be summoned to ones thoughts)
Whenever I'm discussing some god, at the forefront of my mind is that I'm discussing some person's notion of this entity (and should quickly try to establish which properties they assign to it); and that this entity may be a good fit, or a bad fit for some god that may or may not exist.
I've never really been a believer so I'd like to ask: Is it the case with many of the theists among you that the only point at which you're discussing a "notion" of god is when you're discussing with someone who disagrees with you - and it is only they who have some notion of it (as opposed to the "real deal" like you have(?)) and is deserving of the sort of criticism that would be wholly inappropriate if redirected back to your god; and finally that this notion of theirs contains all the errors?