tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post824788089162721997..comments2023-07-27T05:49:05.756-07:00Comments on C. Orthodoxy: What's in a Name?Ken Brownhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08014885672703727636noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-7688266993518688102008-09-05T16:53:00.000-07:002008-09-05T16:53:00.000-07:00Do you believe that trust in God is possible for a...<I>Do you believe that trust in God is possible for anyone or do you believe that the good life is possible for anyone regardless of whether or not they are theists?</I><BR/><BR/>Both and neither. I believe that anyone who trusts in God can have the kind of relationship that I have had, and that it will <I>do</I> them "good." Whether that translates into "the good life" is quite another matter, which is likely to vary from person to person (rumor has it, some who trust in God become martyrs).Ken Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08014885672703727636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-49410829287096018982008-09-05T10:17:00.000-07:002008-09-05T10:17:00.000-07:00I don't even need to prove that my own claims are ...<I>I don't even need to prove that my own claims are true, nor do I have such proof to offer. All I can say is that, in my life, trust in God has resulted in good. And since I am not so egotistical as to think myself special, I must conclude that similar experiences are possible for anyone.</I><BR/><BR/>Could you qualify that. Do you believe that trust in God is possible for anyone or do you believe that the good life is possible for anyone regardless of whether or not they are theists?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04895456698133290279noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-53504173125301512762008-08-28T14:14:00.000-07:002008-08-28T14:14:00.000-07:00What's he saying to Osama Bin Laden?"Stop kil...<I>What's he saying to Osama Bin Laden?</I><BR/><BR/>"Stop killing people, you crazy 'tard!"<BR/><BR/>Of course, not everyone listens to God's voice, so...:'(<BR/><BR/>of course, maybe i'm wrong. then again, maybe i'm not. i suppose we'll have to wait and see, won't we? <3Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-14297494802278054822008-08-28T14:11:00.000-07:002008-08-28T14:11:00.000-07:00Hugh,What's [God] saying to Osama Bin Laden?How ar...Hugh,<BR/><I>What's [God] saying to Osama Bin Laden?</I><BR/><BR/>How are we to know? I don't need to prove that everyone who claims divine guidance or sanction is right (particularly when they claim it for such destructive policies). I don't even need to prove that my own claims are true, nor do I have such proof to offer. All I can say is that, in my life, trust in God has resulted in good. And since I am <I>not</I> so egotistical as to think myself special, I must conclude that similar experiences are possible for anyone.Ken Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08014885672703727636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-20732124918801427492008-08-28T13:12:00.000-07:002008-08-28T13:12:00.000-07:00an omniscient and omnipotent Creator of the Univer...an omniscient and omnipotent Creator of the Universe would be more than capable of being the 'personal lifestyle coach' of six billion individuals jeb said... <BR/>___________________________________<BR/><BR/>What's he saying to Osama Bin Laden?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-17535067655500647282008-08-28T12:15:00.000-07:002008-08-28T12:15:00.000-07:00You assess your god to be a good god but nobody is...<I>You assess your god to be a good god but nobody is bound to agree with your judgment.<BR/></I><BR/><BR/>cool. and by the same token, nobody is bound to give a whit about whether or not you agree with them, or about anything you think, say, or do for that matter, at least on this little slice of the internet. same applies to me, so we're in the same boat, bro <3<BR/><BR/><I>Tell us more. Does he tell people the best dish on the menu when they visit a restaurant? Does he tell you the necktie to select in the morning?</I><BR/><BR/>Who knows? Maybe. <BR/><BR/><I>I would suggest that people who proclaim that the Creator of the Universe is their personal lifestyle coach have insanely inflated egos.</I><BR/><BR/>since we have already established that an omniscient and omnipotent Creator of the Universe would be more than capable of being the 'personal lifestyle coach' of six billion individuals with virtually no effort required on his part, i would suggest there's nothing particularly egotistical at all about that assertion. :DAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-77411464745202949592008-08-28T10:28:00.000-07:002008-08-28T10:28:00.000-07:00"The evidence for the existence of a Big God manip..."The evidence for the existence of a Big God manipulating the lesser gods like puppets and making them say contradictory things...."<BR/><BR/>Hugh I never said that God manipulates lesser gods like puppets and makes them say contradictory things. What I said was that PEOPLE claim to know what God is saying. PEOPLE put words in God's mouth and therefore make it seem like God is saying contradictory things. There has never been a single word, written or uttered, in any language, that can be attributed to God without dispute. Even the ten commandments can be disputed because the entire story of the tablets can be disputed.majorstevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00797963894653739547noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-18915858542254989462008-08-28T08:08:00.000-07:002008-08-28T08:08:00.000-07:00Some folks would "reasonably contest" the assertio...Some folks would "reasonably contest" the assertion that it's an "odd" use of infinite time in the least.jeb said... <BR/>_________________________________<BR/><BR/>Tell us more. Does he tell people the best dish on the menu when they visit a restaurant? Does he tell you the necktie to select in the morning? I would suggest that people who proclaim that the Creator of the Universe is their personal lifestyle coach have insanely inflated egos.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-36175514061321702192008-08-28T08:02:00.000-07:002008-08-28T08:02:00.000-07:00All I can do is tell my story.____________________...All I can do is tell my story.<BR/>_________________________________<BR/><BR/>Ken, <BR/>I take you at your word, just as I believe those who are told to fly planes into buildings believe they were told by their god to do it. <BR/><BR/>You have heard a god and have passed judgment on him. I don't doubt you have judged him to be good. I don't doubt those who have committed atrocities because their god told them to do it are perfectly sincere.<BR/><BR/>I don't know what's going on in your brain or in that of the billions of other believers of the many different religions but I can form an opinion of what they say their god says. You assess your god to be a good god but nobody is bound to agree with your judgment.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-17847943114188070892008-08-28T01:46:00.000-07:002008-08-28T01:46:00.000-07:00it really seems an odd use of even infinite time t...<I>it really seems an odd use of even infinite time to tell somebody not to have sex before marriage and to respect their father.</I><BR/><BR/>Some folks would "reasonably contest" the assertion that it's an "odd" use of infinite time in the least.<BR/><BR/>I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-24387379905549698732008-08-27T21:38:00.000-07:002008-08-27T21:38:00.000-07:00Hugh,I am part of a tradition that teaches that a ...Hugh,<BR/>I am part of a tradition that teaches that a relationship with a good and personal God is possible for any who seek, and upon seeking I have found just such a relationship to be possible. If you are looking for proof of those claims, good luck. All I can do is tell my story.Ken Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08014885672703727636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-73100465669221473732008-08-27T01:36:00.000-07:002008-08-27T01:36:00.000-07:00You don't understand that Muslims, Christians and ...You don't understand that Muslims, Christians and Jews all worship the same single God.majorsteve said... <BR/>---------------------------<BR/><BR/>The evidence for the existence of a Big God manipulating the lesser gods like puppets and making them say contradictory things is even flimsier than that for the existence of the lesser gods themselves, Christian God, Jewish God and Muslim God.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-9763271147730834302008-08-27T01:30:00.000-07:002008-08-27T01:30:00.000-07:00Ken's GodFrom what you have said about what you re...Ken's God<BR/>From what you have said about what you regard as key meetings with him, he sounds more like somebody's Grandmother than the Ultimate Being. While it must be flattering to have the Creator drop in personally, it really seems an odd use of even infinite time to tell somebody not to have sex before marriage and to respect their father. <BR/><BR/>You may bestow titles as you like, even though The Ultimate Being might be a better name for a pro-wrestler than the piffling god you have fashioned to be your personal life coach. I don't imply that you have made this god out of nothing. The gods are a collective effort and don't spring fully-formed out of the mind of a single individual. <BR/><BR/>It's not the case that all gods are vainglorious enough to claim to be The One and Only or, simply the Greatest. This is the monotheistic tradition. Allah and the Christian God are just such religious imperialists. <BR/><BR/>Polytheistic and syncretistic traditions are more accommodating. <BR/>The essential point is that it is you who has exercised your human judgment on the character of the gods and consider that your inner voice is that of a 'good and wise being' Opinions as to what is good and wise differ. I notice Stalin is enjoying a revival in Russia and the (highly religious) Vladimir Putin is said to greatly admire him and regard the gulags, show trials and massive death tolls from botched policies as not detracting from the essential wisdom and rightness of the Great Leader. I think we may reasonably contest this opinion.<BR/><BR/>It's not by their names or titles that the gods are to judged but by what they say and do. God Brown may be quite a nice chap but he's a very small figure in the universe. To consider that God Brown is the Universal God, is the same error as would be made be seeing Michael Phelps and Ken Brown (and everybody else) as one and the same person called Man.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-36320524581978995502008-08-26T13:02:00.000-07:002008-08-26T13:02:00.000-07:00You don't understand that Muslims, Christians and ...You don't understand that Muslims, Christians and Jews all worship the same single God. What's different is that each religion claims that God is saying something different to them. Each religion attributes certain things to God and they can't all be true. Some, if not all of them, has to be wrong about ome things. It's not that there are several different gods,just that different people around the world percieve It differently.majorstevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00797963894653739547noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-42369276113006410492008-08-24T15:22:00.000-07:002008-08-24T15:22:00.000-07:00Hugh,Yahweh, Allah, Zeus, Christian God? Just diff...Hugh,<BR/><I>Yahweh, Allah, Zeus, Christian God? Just different names for the universal God?</I><BR/><BR/>Yes, because unlike Michael Phelps and Ken Brown, these particular divine beings are each claimed to be ultimate. Since only one being (or none) <I>can</I> be ultimate, the claims made about each of them are all, rightly or wrongly, made about that ultimate being, if such exists.<BR/><BR/><I>The confusion of using capital G, without the qualification of Christian, misleads those using to think that the Christian God and the universal God are one and the same, whereas the Christian god is just one among many.</I><BR/><BR/>You seem to forget that "God" is an English term that rose to use in a Christian context. With a capital letter, for several centuries, it was used almost exclusively to speak of the Christian God in particular. You can deny some or all of the claims Christians make about that God, and are welcome to continue using it even then, but it simply is not the case that the word was once used generically of the Universal Power but has since been co-opted by Christianity. Rather the English term (capitalized) was first widely used by Christians to express their own belief about ultimate reality, and has since been extended for use in that more generic sense. <BR/><BR/>Since language can change, it is entirely legitimate to use the term "God" in non-traditional ways, and we both do so when we distinguish between "God" and "the Christian God", but you don't get to decide for all of Western society that those traditional claims cannot be legitimately associated with the term. You might check out Timothy's post above for more on that (he is a secular humanist, so perhaps you'll find him easier to agree with).<BR/><BR/><I>An additional complication with the Christian God (and others, no doubt) is that there are public versions and private versions. About the public version, as recounted in the Bible and defined in the creeds, we have an objective point of reference. In the case of the Ken Brown version, we are kept guessing and He/She/It has a capacity for adapting his/her/its characteristics to meet any objections.</I><BR/><BR/>Since the aspects of my beliefs about God which you most disagree with--eternality, creator, perfectly good and loving--are ones that I <I>share</I> with that tradition, I'm afraid I don't see your point. Everything I am saying has been said before by many Christians, and the tradition is not so monolithic that it doesn't have room for my positions. For that matter, even the creeds are not universally accepted by Christians, nor have they ever been. But we all, rightly or wrongly, make our claims about the same being.<BR/><BR/><I>Why does He/She/It bother about trivia and not dispatch a subordinate. Oh, well, He/She/It is just like that, saith Ken.</I><BR/><BR/>I have only said that it has been my habit to refer to the one who seems to have taken an interest in my life as "God," because that is what my own Protestant tradition has taught me (and, I might add, whether I am right or wrong to do so, he/she/it has never objected). I have never claimed the right to do this on my own authority. Christian scripture from beginning to end is filled with prayers and expressions of credit and thanks addressed directly to "God" (and several other names, such as "Lord," "YHWH," "Jesus Christ" etc.), so I stand firmly within that tradition when I continue to do the same. I am, however, entirely comfortable with the possibility that I am mistaken, and that all this time I have in fact been interacting with a subordinate. Either way it is ultimately God who deserves the credit, and either way I can confidently say that it <I>is</I> possible to have a relationship with a good and wise being who answers to the name "God."<BR/><BR/><I>many associations that I would not accept--as a distant and angry Father, or a violent and bloody dictator Ken Brown said<BR/>------------------------------<BR/><BR/>Exactly. You look at the tradition and make your own god out of it.</I><BR/><BR/>I claim allegiance to a tradition which has always left room for much disagreement. We are <I>all</I> seeking to find our places within (or outside) it. But those particular associations rejected above are not affirmed by any of the creeds, and have been rejected by many thoughtful Christians from the beginning, so I have no need to apologize for denying them.Ken Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08014885672703727636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-59639486583705267012008-08-24T13:39:00.000-07:002008-08-24T13:39:00.000-07:00many associations that I would not accept--as a di...many associations that I would not accept--as a distant and angry Father, or a violent and bloody dictator Ken Brown said<BR/>------------------------------<BR/><BR/>Exactly. You look at the tradition and make your own god out of it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-34277540911727352522008-08-24T02:57:00.000-07:002008-08-24T02:57:00.000-07:00Just about names?Ken Brown, Michael Phelps, Barack...Just about names?<BR/><BR/>Ken Brown, Michael Phelps, Barack Obama? What's the difference? Just different names for the universal Man?<BR/><BR/>Yahweh, Allah, Zeus, Christian God? Just different names for the universal God? The confusion of using capital G, without the qualification of Christian, misleads those using to think that the Christian God and the universal God are one and the same, whereas the Christian god is just one among many. It's like calling Ken Brown, Man, instead of a man.<BR/><BR/>An additional complication with the Christian God (and others, no doubt) is that there are public versions and private versions. About the public version, as recounted in the Bible and defined in the creeds, we have an objective point of reference. In the case of the Ken Brown version, we are kept guessing and He/She/It has a capacity for adapting his/her/its characteristics to meet any objections.<BR/><BR/>Why does He/She/It bother about trivia and not dispatch a subordinate. Oh, well, He/She/It is just like that, saith Ken.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-31835330630673003892008-08-23T22:23:00.000-07:002008-08-23T22:23:00.000-07:00Saying "Pat" instead of "God": Clarification or m...Saying "Pat" instead of "God": Clarification or manipulation?majorstevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00797963894653739547noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-88253949002890178922008-08-23T14:52:00.000-07:002008-08-23T14:52:00.000-07:00Thanks Timothy!As for the ambiguity of "God," in s...Thanks Timothy!<BR/><BR/>As for the ambiguity of "God," in some ways I consider this a good thing. The history of Western civilization has given the term to evoke many beliefs that I hold about the deity, making it appropriate for my use. But too often the same term also carries many associations that I would not accept--as a distant and angry Father, or a violent and bloody dictator--and for the sake of those for whom such associations are decisive, I wish I had a better alternative.<BR/><BR/>Which is why I am glad that "God" is still amorphous enough to leave room to clarify what <I>I</I> mean by it, without being so unknown that I have to start from scratch. Just imagine the confusion first-time readers would feel if I suddenly replaced all references to God in my posts with "Pat" or even "the deity." Would I have less explaining to do, or more?Ken Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08014885672703727636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4065406139986258489.post-4294315240812666922008-08-23T14:28:00.000-07:002008-08-23T14:28:00.000-07:00Well-said, Ken.I suspect you're feeling like I did...Well-said, Ken.<BR/><BR/>I suspect you're feeling like I did when I wrote <A HREF="http://friendlyhumanist.blogspot.com/2007/11/watch-your-language.html" REL="nofollow">this post</A>.<BR/><BR/>It's useful to occasionally remind ourselves of the arbitrariness of language, and to allow that, often, different people use different terms to refer to the same thing (or, perhaps equivalently, to the same properties). But we need to remember that all words' meanings are derived from how they are used. If we dismiss any arbitrary meaning as unimportant, we dismiss all meaning and undermine communication itself.<BR/><BR/>Okay, rant over. I'm a linguist, and this is one of my pet rants.<BR/><BR/>In Hugh's defense, I do feel that it would be useful if the Christian god were given a name other than "God" - it would avoid certain ambiguities of intent that might come up. But that's language - arbitrary, and bearing deep traces of its cultural history.Timothy Millshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00373801153623991221noreply@blogger.com