FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-10-2003, 01:00 PM   #11
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Ill
Posts: 6,577
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by ReasonableDoubt
He's stated that he calls himself a Christian and still prays, etc. I just think he does not want to call himself an atheist (or agnostic?)
ReasonableDoubt, I think JSS calls himself a Christian because he has some special regard for Jesus as one who uniquely revealed God* to the world and also because JSS continues to align himself with Christian tradition and practices even though he's greatly redefined and reinterpreted many things according to his own nontraditional beliefs. For example, he has redefined 'prayer' as 'good deeds', if I recall correctly.

*JSS defines God as the 'ground of our being' rather than as an Omni-everything Person.

VP, I've found that liberal Christians tend to have similar values to atheists which is probably because they all derive their values in similar ways i.e. based on what makes sense to them rather than based on what the Bible says.

As RD's post implies, nontheists do wonder why liberal Christians don't go the whole way to atheism since they don't consider the Bible authoritative or even historically true, necessarily.

There are probably many reasons for that just as there are many reasons why atheists are atheists.

Helen
HelenM is offline  
Old 02-10-2003, 04:24 PM   #12
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: S Cal
Posts: 327
Default

Jumping in midstream here. I hope this post isn't inappropriate, but I've met several people who believe in 'the spririt of the universe' or they somewhat make the universe personified. Others sort of gather up that which is unexplained or inexplicable (science does have limits) and call it 'god'. While this isn't any more defensible by reason than other definitions, hey, it works for some people and I can accept that (tho I dont' ascribe to it). Some people have to believe there's a benevolent or encompassing force in the universe.
admice is offline  
Old 02-11-2003, 11:06 AM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 6,471
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Vicar Philip
Diana,

I guess what I'm trying to do is convince myself, perhaps unsuccessfully, that I can still use the term "god" and have it actually mean something to me.
It can mean the abstract concept you've always known it means, or you can redefine it as you wish. It's been my experience that "god" is an an objective word that is, in common usage, subjective.

Quote:
My purpose in doing so is simply to not be accused by my wife of "not believing in god." This seems so important to her and devastating if I do not believe in some form of god. I, personally, have absolutely no need for belief in god to live my life. I'm only attempting to come up with a definition of god that I can be comfortable with when discussing religious matters with her.
How sad for her that her love and devotion to you is conditional. She'd use emotional blackmail to control you into "believing in god," or so it sounds.

I hope you can find a happy medium. It's obviously important to you to not be lying to her, just to make her happy. So...you're trying to figure out how to lie to yourself instead. Interesting.

Quote:
As I said above I'm trying to come to some sort of mental compromise with myself to still be able to talk about god. It might be a waste of time.
If it helps, no thought or effort to better define our knowledge, thoughts and beliefs is a waste of time, IMO.

d
diana is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:57 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.