my god

i need to define my god…for discussion…rationally i know my god through science…emotionally i know my god
because of my human nature…i see the boat going down so the best i can do is bail and help my friends…

in the other posts… i have been talking about THE god, and the idk god, and the god=to ultimate reality…
but i think that is not being very constructive arguing about who is right…

maybe this is not the appropriate forum for personal disclosure…

Your personal god is your situation, your personal circumstance, fore nothing has more influence over you nor provides more to you than that.

I think he is looking fer ya to share yer situation and circumstance.

Your mistake, turtle, is in thinking that there’s a ‘right definition’. So yes, I would agree that it’s not very constructive.

You can define the word ‘god’ however you like, turtle. It’s what you say about that definition afterward that’s the issue. You focus too much on definitions.

No. Other people focus too little on definitions and that is why he and so many others have problems with it (and many other things).

But turtle, don’t forget the “Ideal/Perfect God”.
That is one of the more popular God concepts, wherein God is the name of whatever perfection is.

If I were to make a complete statistical survey of all posts by each poster, and take all posts that include the word ‘god’ in them, and find out what percent of those posts also include the word ‘definition’, turtle would be near the top of that list.

In other words, for turtle, [#posts that include both “god” and “definition”] / [#posts that include “god”] is definitely higher than the same figure for most other posters. Probably a lot higher.

So…I don’t think his problem is too little focus on definitions. You could argue that he’s focusing on the wrong aspect of definitions, focusing too little on the right aspect of definitions, but he’s definitely focusing on definitions.

His “problem” is that he has identified the problem and asks for clarification from people who don’t want to give it.
So of course, he is going to be statistically high using the word “definition”.

Someone asking for the truth would probably be statistically much higher with the usage of that word over those trying to ignore the truth and even those claiming that it doesn’t exist.

If you are asking about the small pox in your can of peas, you are much more likely to be using that word than the canner of those peas.

one of my proposals is that there is no the-god…what we have is a bunch of different gods as seen by different people…so why are we arguing so much…i think we all like to be right…even the atheist is here with the no-god…

i find it interesting that no one wants to debate or discuss…flannel you usually help out here

how can we possibly determine the true nature of god assuming that you believe in a god…we just all want to think we are right…that we know the true god…that seems dumb to me…

i will answer…no one wants to debate when someone says my god…i believe in my god…i am not challenging…
anyone elses god…and there are many versions…

There are people who say the word ‘god’ is simply meaningless and they don’t even call themselves atheists. They don’t disbelieve the assertion that god exists because that would imply something meaningful to be rejected. perhaps its like saying “urghheggserrgsrhj;j;df” cannot be affirmed or denied. I have met at least two people who argue this. I think this is unsatisfactory because the word ‘God’ is not simply gibberish, in some way it is meaningful. Perhaps it is helpful to work with the idea of relevant concepts. The concept of omnipotence seems relevant to thinking about God in a way that the idea of a train timetable does not (not withstanding some zen koan perhaps). I think the idea of perspective is relevant: we do construe god in different ways. A very rich variety of ways. Wittgenstein used the idea of ‘family resemblances’ in his analysis of language. The term god may be used in a bewildering variety of ways and perhaps there is no one shared unifying feature. There is a system of family resemblances This suggests no essential mark of the concept god. But then language is our limitation. If i may sound mystical perhaps God infinitely surpasses our ability to talk of ‘him. But being a chatterbox i cannot pass over the subject in silence…’

searcher-----thank you for searching…for me just understanding the atomic theory of matter puts me in awe…
that is a little part of my god…

And you might want to start with a definition of “a god” before getting into “God” or “THE God”.

james i dont agree about agnostic-----what are you assuming…

“Agnostic”??

I was referring to Ignostic.
It refers to the belief that until you define a word, anything you say on the subject is somewhat meaningless.

but james you said “including agnostic”…

Where??
A quote would help.

there

Oh.

What that meant is that even he who proclaims himself to be an agnostic is assuming that the knows what the word “God” meant, else he could have no opinion at all and not know what he was concerning it.