Word of God
Please mostly use the capital letter for "God", even if I am a stoic and do not believe in God but in Fate and Nature. People on this forum do believe in the word of God and we should respect their opinions with the same faith as we have in our own opinion or in the universe.
Anyways: what discussion can we have around the word of God?
Here are a few questions:
Why should I have access to infinite knowledge of God if I am a finite being?
Do you think the word of God is the truth: why or why not?
What are the ramifications of a disbelief in God?
How do we know that God exists?
(Any other questions can be answered I just want to here different opinions).
If you didn't use the capital letter sometimes for God, don't worry about it, it is probably a typo and arguments should not be judged on their ability to meet rules of grammar.
Anyways: what discussion can we have around the word of God?
Here are a few questions:
Why should I have access to infinite knowledge of God if I am a finite being?
Do you think the word of God is the truth: why or why not?
What are the ramifications of a disbelief in God?
How do we know that God exists?
(Any other questions can be answered I just want to here different opinions).
If you didn't use the capital letter sometimes for God, don't worry about it, it is probably a typo and arguments should not be judged on their ability to meet rules of grammar.
Comments (19)
It is difficult to know what God “says” or even if one can speak of Him in this way. If you believe that Jesus was God, then you can get some evidence from the New Testament, but there are also Gospels that didn’t make it into the Bible. My view is that figuring out the nature of God is a matter that is helped by studying various religions and philosophies, as well as science, maths, and humanities studies.
Man: *Punches another man* "You didn't capitalize my name in the email!!!"
I don't think any finite being can have infinite knowledge of anything. Where could they store the knowledge? Some philosophers (eg Kant, who was at least a Deist if not a Theist) go further and suggest we can have no knowledge at all about God. I am inclined to agree.
I don't think we could ever know if any given writing is the word of God. It's safest to assume that no human writing is the word of God. But that doesn't mean we can't respect others' beliefs about it, and maybe even in some cases find wisdom in parts of it. Just as long as the writing doesn't tell people to mean to one another. That's when trouble starts.
Many, and it depends on the person and which version of God they don't believe in. Some people get good things from belief in a version of God, so a nonbeliever would miss out on that, except that they may get the same benefit from some alternative belief or practice. Some people perform terribly evil acts motivated by belief in their version of God. Again, a nonbeliever would not do that unless motivated by some other belief, such as White Nationalism.
Some people believe they have met God. That seems a fair enough reason to believe. I have not met Her, so I remain open-minded. Some versions of God are so self-contradictory that they could not exist unless we decide to discard logic - eg the version of God that is said to love us perfectly yet will torture us forever in hell if we are not convinced enough to believe.
I tend to use "God" about a specific entity within the context of a specific religion. I use "god" when I'm talking about the general concept of god. As Phil Connors says:
You can't
That presupposes words from God. If there were such, they'd be true.
The Bible isn't the word of God. God didn't write the Bible. A bunch of men wrote the Bible.
...distinctly fallible men who weren't above frequent forgery, and various morally-abhorrent positions and words.
It implies disbelief in what one doesn't have a definition of...disbelief without an object of disbelief.
Our "New Atheists" say that, rather than actively disbelieving, they merely don't believe. That's a perfectly reasonable position, to not believe in what they don't have reason to believe.
But where our Atheist friends go wrong is when they evaluate others' beliefs. That's when they forget their professed absence of active disbelief.
"Exist", in an objective, noncontextual, unqualified sense, is undefined for the things of phenomenal world, the logically-interdependent things. And, even if "Exist" meant something within that realm, it wouldn't be meaningful to even try to use that word for other than that.
For humans to debate whether God exists, is like for mice to debate whether humans chew hardwood or softwood.
My suggestion:
Forget the Theism vs Atheism debate. Of course it's reasonable to not believe in what one doesn't know of reason to believe. Leave it at that.
You don't know of justification for others' beliefs? Yes. Leave it at that.
Michael Ossipoff
12 F
1852 UTC