Meanings of “God” in some scriptures

[jimhabegger]

(The following is meant to be friendly constructive criticism )

Don’t worry, that’s exactly how it looks to me.

I’m sorry for all the confusion I’ve created, and I’m grateful to you and others who have groped your way through it, trying to find me. The benefits for me have been wonderful.

I would welcome some more critical examination of how I use the word “God,” from people who don’t use it, if anyone would volunteer for it, but I not sure there would be any benefit in it for anyone but me. Anyway, I’ll describe it again, hopefully in a way that will clear up some of the confusion.

Sometimes I study some religious scriptures for personal reasons which for my purposes don’t need to be discussed, but which I’m willing to discuss if anyone wants to. Those scriptures often use the word “God,” in such a variety of ways that I’ve given up trying to find any meaning in that word, by itself, which means that I have no opinion about whether it corresponds to anything that exists or is real.

I do see meanings in the expressions that use that word, mostly as if it’s the name of some being in the world with powers beyond those of human beings, but sometimes as if it’s the name of a being that allegedly created the universe. I’ve found it useful for some of my purposes which, again, don’t need to be discussed unless someone wants to, to use that word, “God” in some of those same ways in my thinking. I’ve also found it helpful for communicating with some people sometimes. I’ve used those “God” expressions in my thinking so much and for so long that I don’t always know how to say what I think about some of the things that matter the most to me, without using them, and sometimes it takes a lot of time, effort, and painful trial-and-error to find a way.

[robvalue]

As far as it being real, it would need defining first. If it could mean anything... then sure, it could correspond to some real things.

If it's just "An intelligent creator of our environment", then there's no way to test the existence of such a thing, as far as I'm aware. I personally don't care either way. There are methods I could think of for the creator to make us away of their existence, but it would have to come from them. I've seen nothing so far.

If it's, "A magical character from a religious book", then no, these are as fictional and (more) ridiculous than Spider-Man.

[robvalue]

I have an idea about how this "God" business could help, while actually meaning nothing.

(As an aside, I think theists have a subconcious drive to keep the definition of "God" as vague as possible, so as to make it harder to disprove, and to answer all the questions they want it to.)

I think that considering "God", higher powers, "energy", all these mystical things, is a way of getting outside of your own head. By zooming out and looking at the big picture, it becomes easier to consider other people as being as important as yourself, as well as bigger issues affecting the world in general. I regularly do the same thing, just without any woo involved.

[The Grand Nudger]

... in communicating with people who believe in gods, even. ... They might think you’ve been talking about something...or someone....else, all this time.

Yes. I’ve learned that the hard way, many times.

What communicative purpose does the term hold, then?  It cant be reliably employed with fellow believers...and it;s risible to many atheists.

Again I have to ask why you wouldn;t simply say what you mean, instead?  Seems like you;d get more traction from every angle.

As an in-thread example:

"Hey guys, what do you think about god?"
or
"Hey guys, what are your opinions on this ethical postulate"

Of the two...which is going to yield a more productive discussion on the topic of ethics? Which clearly communicates what you want to discuss?

If it's just "An intelligent creator of our environment", then there's no way to test the existence of such a thing, as far as I'm aware. I personally don't care either way. There are methods I could think of for the creator to make us away of their existence, but it would have to come from them. I've seen nothing so far.

If it's, "A magical character from a religious book", then no, these are as fictional and (more) ridiculous than Spider-Man.

Is there a difference between the two cases?  The "intelligent creator of our environment" is found nowhere other than magic books in the first place. 

I see the deists position given more credence than it deserves with regularity. I get that deists often have less erroneous positions on a host of issues...but their god belief (not any attendant system, the belief itself) is no more or less flawed than a theists and for all of the same reasons. The difference between the two isn;t an issue of god belief, after all. Testing either proposition runs along identical lines. Did the theists god of genesis make this world? No. Did any god make this world (or this universe)....no. Answering either question immediately addresses the other. Neither this world nor this universe were created in any meaningful sense.....and that pretty much destroys the idea that any being created either..regardless of the being in question or where we find it;s origin...or even whether or not something like either creature even exists.

On a more positivist note, they;re both projections of the human psyche. While the deists god is often conceptualized as being a vague entity...and people take this to mean that theres less to prove or disprove..it;s status as an entity is downright pregnant with familiar and elaborate assumptions of personhood. We know where these assumption come from. We see them in every god story ever written or told.

Words and words and words...but, to sum it all up - we know that the notion of this world or this universe having been created is wholly divorced from reality, and we understand the origin and nature of god beliefs be they deist or theist. We know what gods aren;t...and we know what they are. This leaves me wondering what room there could possibly be for navigating the god term around the realization that it;s fiction from start to finish in every incarnation. I can;t think of any other object (real or hypothetical) that meets this bar and isn;t addressed as a matter of fact issue. I can;t help but shake the notion that leaving invisible space is more a negotiating tool for social interactions with people who don;t think that god wants them to kill the gays (for example) than a statement of a the factual status of the thing or situation.

Take our new buddy Jim, here. Seems like a nice guy. The kind of guy a person might want to make civil allowances for to keep the convo running smoothly. Thing is, he'll inevitably go full loon (no offense, honest..we all go full loon about something Jim - ask me about MREs, lol). We;ll find that the space carved out to give this "god" whatever credence will have been wasted...because he believes in the things well beyond the veil of that space, a space which is inherently suspect to begin with, and self identifies as such.

[jimhabegger]

We’ll find that the space carved out to give this "god" whatever credence will have been wasted...because he believes in the things well beyond the veil of that space, a space which is inherently suspect to begin with, and self identifies as such.

I had trouble following that the first time through, but on the third or fourth reading I struck it rich. Yes, this conversation might turn out to be a waste of time for anyone but me, apart from any satisfaction you might get from helping me learn whatever I might learn from it. I see it doing me a world of good, and I still see more possibilities in it, but that might not be any reason for anyone else to be part of it. All the other implications in what you said might be true also. I’ll have more to say later about what’s already been posted.

---

What communicative purpose does the term hold, then?

I see one objection to what I’m doing as a suspicion that using the g word can’t serve any beneficial purpose that can’t be better served some other way. I’ll come back to that later. I see a question I want to ask now. I study Christian and Baha’i scriptures to help me learn to do what I want to do for myself and for the world. Suddenly the way I use the g word seems to me to fade into insignificance beside that. We can still discuss that question if anyone wants to, but I have a question now that might be more important than that: What concerns you might have about what I’m doing, and whether there’s any possibility of relieving those concerns, without giving up my study of those scriptures. For example, does it seem inevitable to you that studying those scriptures will influence me in ways that that are harmful to me and to society? If so, then I might like to try telling you more about how I use those scriptures, to see if that does anything to relieve those concerns. That’s just an example. I don’t see clearly where the conversation might go, but where I’d like to start is with what concerns you might have about a person studying some religious scriptures as one way among others of learning to live a better life.

[Angrboda]

[jimhabegger]

Good point. Thanks.

---

... where I’d like to start is with what concerns you might have about a person studying some religious scriptures as one way among others of learning to live a better life.

That’s too restrictive. I study some religious scriptures as one way among others to help me learn to live a better life. Besides that I’m a member of a religious community that uses some of those scriptures, and I participate in some of its activities, including its efforts to expand and multiply. Does that make me a bad person?

Honestly, I don’t know where I’m trying to go with this. Anything anyone wants to say about it, critical or otherwise, would be welcome.

(edited)
I still don’t know where I was trying to go with this, but I have an idea of what I’d like to do. I’d like to discuss possible reasons for me to give up studying religious scriptures, and collaborating with a religious community, including trying to help it grow and spread.

Anything else anyone else anyone wants to say about it would still be welcome, and I’m still willing to discuss the g word and how I use it, if anyone wants to.
(end edit)

I’ve said all I want to say about the g word and how I use it, but if anyone wants to discuss it any more, I’m willing.

[The Grand Nudger]

does it seem inevitable to you that studying those scriptures will influence me in ways that that are harmful to me and to society?

Nah.  Plenty of people read magic books.  If you start believing them..then yeah, it;s inevitably going to be harmful.

If so, then I might like to try telling you more about how I use those scriptures, to see if that does anything to relieve those concerns. That’s just an example. I don’t see clearly where the conversation might go, but where I’d like to start is with what concerns you might have about a person studying some religious scriptures as one way among others of learning to live a better life.

You;re going to tell us that you have the best of intentions.  I believe that you do...but since you study magic books you should already know what they paved the road to hell with. 

That’s too restrictive. I study some religious scriptures as one way among others to help me learn to live a better life. Besides that I’m a member of a religious community that uses some of those scriptures, and I participate in some of its activities, including its efforts to expand and multiply. Does that make me a bad person?

You;re helping to spread the assembly?  I mean, if you want an oversimplification... then sure..you;re a bad person on that count. You understand that you;re associating yourself with a whackadoodle cult of personality that exists for no reason other than to fleece it;s constituency...and that;s laying aside their dystopian fever dreams...right?

[arewethereyet]

Sure is nice to see that TTA isn't the only platform for Jim.

Have fun y'all.