Agnostic.com

3 2

No gods for me thanks.

#god
Freeman999 2 Mar 22
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

3 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Sounds about right 🙂

0

Silence is golden,such peace.

0

No gods for me thanks.

But what we need to know is, are you an atheist or an agnostic about them? Are you a Hatfield or a McCoy? (Hatfield here) 🙂

What gods are you talking about that you disbelieve in? I don't know of any god (small g) that Christians believe in. They claim to believe in one named "God" (capital G), or "Yahweh" (capital Y), but I have no concept of any god (small g) they could be talking about believing in, do you?

@EdwinMcCravy I use a small thing these days when writing of a god simply because the word "God" is not a name and was not the name of the biblical god. Getting into arguments on what that biblical god's name really was is pointless unless you are standing on biblical belief.

@DenoPenno It's not pointless. The word "god" with a little "g" is a meaningful word, standing for any of the imaginary gods of the ancient Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, etc. of which the ancients drew pictures and made statues. These show us how these ancient people imagined these gods to look like, thus we have clear concepts of these gods. However "God" with a capital "G" is a meaningless row of letters believed by theists and agnostics (and unfortunately most atheists) to be a coherently meaningful word for a nonexistent or possibly nonexistent entity. My question is: Why use a meaningFUL word "god" for a meaningLESS one, "God"?

@EdwinMcCravy I do see the difference but there are many words from the bible that can be used for the creator god. I know them as well as the correct usage but I am not teaching Sunday school or preaching.

@DenoPenno That shows that you believe that the row of words"creator god" or "the god which created the universe" is a meaningful row of words. But it isn't meaningful because the words "creator" and "created" can only be defined in terms of the ALREADY EXISTING universe, like Edison (one part of the already existing universe) is the CREATOR of the incandescent lamp (another part of the already existing universe). So saying "the god which created the universe" is the same as saying "The part of the already existing universe that created another part of the already existing universe known as the already existing universe". That gobbledygook makes no sense. So it makes no sense to say "the god that created the universe". There is no concept that can be had for the row of words "the god that created the universe".

@EdwinMcCravy I do not argue and I do not debate. I'm using words to identify what I'm talking about. You win. It makes sense. And I'm done. 🙂

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:41649
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.