An Empirical Theory Of God (2)

[Michael]

Michael, do you believe in a god?

I believe in the existence of *one* God.

 

[madaz]

I believe in the existence of *one* God.

I will refer to this god as "your" god, (that is to say) the god that " you" believe exists, can you accept that reference for the sake of this argument?

 

[Michael]

I will refer to this god as "your" god, (that is to say) the god that " you" believe exists, can you accept that reference for the sake of this argument?

Why do you have an emotional need to assign personal ownership of God to me? Would you also use the term 'my universe' or 'his universe' to describe variations in cosmology theories like EU theory? Why not simply discuss *my beliefs* (if you must)?

 

[madaz]

Why do you have an emotional need to assign personal ownership of God to me? Would you also use the term 'my universe' or 'his universe' to describe variations in cosmology theories like EU theory? Why not simply discuss *my beliefs* (if you must)?

Michael, you are "smoke screening" again, we got off to a bad start, I'm attempting a new start, one with clarity.
Once again...
I will refer to this god as "your" god, (that is to say) the one god that " you" believe exists, can you accept that reference for the sake of this argument?

 

[Michael]

Michael, you are "smoke screening" again, we got off to a bad start, I'm attempting a new start, one with clarity.
Once again...
I will refer to this god as "your" god, (that is to say) the one god that " you" believe exists, can you accept that reference for the sake of this argument?

Not really, no. Your use of the term "my/your God" implies ownership where none exists. I'd feel the same way if you *insisted* on using terms like 'my/your universe" in relationship to various cosmology theories. I see no purpose in the term "your/my" at all. If you really must talk about my beliefs about God (or the universe), just talk about my beliefs. Can we do it that way?

 

[bhsmte]

Not really, no. Your use of the term "my/your God" implies ownership where none exists. I'd feel the same way if you *insisted* on using terms like 'my/your universe" in relationship to various cosmology theories. I see no purpose in the term "your/my" at all. If you really must talk about my beliefs about God (or the universe), just talk about my beliefs. Can we do it that way?

Michael,

I believe what he is getting at, is the fact that you have certainly given thought to this God you believe in and likely have your own perception of that God, so he is calling it; "your God".

 

[madaz]

Michael,

I believe what he is getting at, is the fact that you have certainly given thought to this God you believe in and likely have your own perception of that God, so he is calling it; "your God".

Thank you bhsmte that is precisely what I'm getting at.

 

[Michael]

Michael,

I believe what he is getting at, is the fact that you have certainly given thought to this God you believe in and likely have your own perception of that God, so he is calling it; "your God".

I'm having a *really* difficult time understanding why it's necessary, let alone see the value in, attributing personal ownership of the universe (or God) to me personally. If we were discussing various opinions about cosmology theories, what is the point of talking about *my/your universe* rather than my/your *beliefs* about the universe?

 

[bhsmte]

I'm having a *really* difficult time understanding why it's necessary, let alone see the value in, attributing personal ownership of the universe (or God) to me personally. If we were discussing various opinions about cosmology theories, what is the point of talking about *my/your universe* rather than my/your *beliefs* about the universe?

I don't see it as giving you ownership to a God. I see it as he is establishing that you have thought about this God and have your own individual perception of this God.

We all have perceptions of things that exist or may not exist and those perceptions are unique to each of us and are ours alone.

 

[Michael]

I don't see it as giving you ownership to a God.

Then the term 'my/your' is completely unnecessary.

I see it as he is establishing that you have thought about this God and have your own individual perception of this God.

I have thought about our universe and I have my *highly* individual perceptions about it as well, but I don't run around calling it *my* universe when I'm discussing astronomy.

We all have perceptions of things that exist or may not exist and those perceptions are unique to each of us and are ours alone.

Granted, but it's still the different *beliefs* that we should be discussing.

 

[bhsmte]

Then the term 'my/your' is completely unnecessary.



I have thought about our universe and I have my *highly* individual perceptions about it as well, but I don't run around calling it *my* universe when I'm discussing astronomy.



Granted, but it's still the different *beliefs* that we should be discussing.

Michael,

I think you are being a tad overreactive here.

Let me give you an analogy:

Lets say I am a person who believes aliens exist and they have visited earth. I have certainly given thought to my reasons why and have developed a perception of these aliens. Other people who believe the same as I, would not share my exact same perception of these aliens, so I would have no problem with someone stating; "my aliens", because that would simply denote, my perception of the aliens, not ownership of them.

 

[Michael]

Michael,

I believe what he is getting at, is the fact that you have certainly given thought to this God you believe in and likely have your own perception of that God, so he is calling it; "your God".

I fully accept, and I'm fully aware of the fact that my *beliefs* are unique to me as an individual, but I don't profess to own the universe, nor do I profess to own God, so the term 'my/your' universe is irrelevant. It's valid to discuss *my beliefs* about the universe, but it's irrational IMO to call it *my universe*. I see no point in the *my/your* association with a *universe* (or God).

I am however *more than willing* to discuss *my beliefs*. I have no problem owning my own beliefs, but I lack belief in the ownership of God.

 

[madaz]

I fully accept, and I'm fully aware of the fact that my *beliefs* are unique to me as an individual, but I don't profess to own the universe, nor do I profess to own God, so the term 'my/your' universe is irrelevant. It's valid to discuss *my beliefs* about the universe, but it's irrational IMO to call it *my universe*. I see no point in the *my/your* association with a *universe* (or God).

I am however *more than willing* to discuss *my beliefs*. I have no problem owning my own beliefs, but I lack belief in the ownership of God.

I was about to explain to you what I meant by the term "your" god but bhsmte beat me to it. I'm please he did because he articulated my point more precisely and succinctly than I could have. Please read what he said in #571.

Now because your concept of god appears to be exclusive to the christian god, (correct me if I'm wrong). You leave me with no choice but to address your god simply as "your god" if we are to both to be "on the same page".

Disregard any notion of ownership, universe or beliefs, we are not dealing with these things right now. We are dealing with "how" I can "refer" to your god so we can get on and progress with this argument.

 

[Michael]

I was about to explain to you what I meant by the term "your" god but bhsmte beat me to it. I'm please he did because he articulated my point more precisely and succinctly than I could have. Please read what he said in #571.

Now because your concept of god appears to be exclusive to the christian god, (correct me if I'm wrong). You leave me with no choice but to address your god simply as "your god" if we are to both to be "on the same page".

Disregard any notion of ownership, universe or beliefs, we are not dealing with these things right now. We are dealing with "how" I can "refer" to your god so we can get on and progress with this argument.

As I explained to bhsmte, I *reject* your use of possessive pronouns, where none are warranted, nor required. If you *insist* on using one, the *only* one I will accept is the term *our*. If we were discussing my beliefs about EU theory, it would make sense for you to refer to *our* universe. It would not make any sense at all to discuss *my* universe, vs. *your* universe, and it's just an unnecessary term in the first place.

At the level of psychology, your use of a possessive pronoun is your blatant attempt to insert *your own* belief systems into the discussion, specifically your belief that "gods are all in peoples heads". I absolutely refuse to start from anywhere other than *pure neutrality*. You're welcome to discuss *my* beliefs so long as you make a good faith effort to present them correctly, but you are not welcome to discuss *my* universe, or *my* God. The concept of monotheism is the exact same idea as the concept of a *universe*. The assumption is that there is *only one* of them.

 

[madaz]

Michael to be fair to you we both need to be "on the same page" and reffering to the same character to make any progress, Im simply trying to avoid the "Mickey Mouse/Donald Duck" problem you introduced earlier. Since you insist on regressing this debate into an infinite circle, may I suggest I omit the "your" from now on and simply refer to your god as "god". The god that is depicted in the bible. Do you accept?

 

[Michael]

Michael to be fair to you we both need to be "on the same page" and reffering to the same character to make any progress, Im simply trying to avoid the "Mickey Mouse/Donald Duck" problem you introduced earlier. Since you insist on regressing this debate into an infinite circle, may I suggest I omit the "your" from now on and simply refer to your god as "god". The god that is depicted in the bible. Do you accept?

Yes.

 

[Michael]

When you say "The god that is depicted in the Bible", I'm assuming *you're personally deciding* how to interpret the Bible?

 

[Michael]

One caveat here:

What you're calling "my God" in relationship to a specific book, is really *my beliefs* about that specific book. My beliefs about how to *interpret* the Bible (or the Qu'ran) are likely to be radically different from yours. How do we decide what is the "right" interpretation of the document in question?

 

[madaz]

Yes.

Thank you.

Would you be kind enough Sir to direct me with a link to a dictionary site that defines the meaning of "malevolent" that you agree with?

 

[Michael]

I doubt that's actually necessary, but this one works for me.

Malevolent - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary