Some folks believe in a god which is entirely consistent with the laws of nature which govern us. I believe in this 'god', but I do not call that a god. I call that idea the laws of nature which govern us. Some of which we understand at this point, some of which we do not, but all of which are understandable in some manner of thinking.
Some folk believe in a god which is entirely consistent with the good will of humanity. I believe in this 'god', but I do not call this idea a god. I call this idea goodwill, humanism, or some thing that appears to our conscious to be an act of kindness. I do not claim certainty in knowing whether this is a part of what some might call 'free will' or a display of cause and effect or something in between. I just call it goodwill, humanism, act of kindness in an attempt to relate the notion to others in discourse.
Some folks believe in a god which is consistent with a series of scripture that what written by dessert people during a period of time spanning 6000-10000 years ago. They believe in a demigod named Jesus who was written about by another group of dessert people approximately 2000 years ago approximately 1.5-2 human lifetimes after his presumed death. I am almost certain that this god does not exist. I am also almost certain that the demigod called Jesus did not exist. I am not certain whether a man name Jesus existed, but find the notion irrelevant because that man was only a man if he did in fact exist. A man who has some humanist ideas associated with him, but a man none the less. A man who's good ideas about kindness and good will, while favorable, were not originated by him, if he indeed existed in any way consistent with what is told in the New Testament of these ancient scriptures, and were certainly not exclusive to him in any way. Most men living at that time could easily have told you that these are values that much humanity as a whole had learned by this time period. The man labeled Jesus certainly does not deserve any special credit, if he indeed existed at all.
The problem with the use of the term "god" to describe any belief, is that it is useless. It is so vague that it does not describe anything at all. It is so relative to each individual that it cannot possibly be a useful word in any context. I might use some words that are misunderstood, or less understood such as the words 'atheist' or 'humanist'. I do not claim that there is a complete lack of subjective definition in those words, but they do still serve as a precursor to legitimate discussion which I can use to begin to identify what I mean by them.
Some folk believe in a god which is entirely consistent with the good will of humanity. I believe in this 'god', but I do not call this idea a god. I call this idea goodwill, humanism, or some thing that appears to our conscious to be an act of kindness. I do not claim certainty in knowing whether this is a part of what some might call 'free will' or a display of cause and effect or something in between. I just call it goodwill, humanism, act of kindness in an attempt to relate the notion to others in discourse.
Some folks believe in a god which is consistent with a series of scripture that what written by dessert people during a period of time spanning 6000-10000 years ago. They believe in a demigod named Jesus who was written about by another group of dessert people approximately 2000 years ago approximately 1.5-2 human lifetimes after his presumed death. I am almost certain that this god does not exist. I am also almost certain that the demigod called Jesus did not exist. I am not certain whether a man name Jesus existed, but find the notion irrelevant because that man was only a man if he did in fact exist. A man who has some humanist ideas associated with him, but a man none the less. A man who's good ideas about kindness and good will, while favorable, were not originated by him, if he indeed existed in any way consistent with what is told in the New Testament of these ancient scriptures, and were certainly not exclusive to him in any way. Most men living at that time could easily have told you that these are values that much humanity as a whole had learned by this time period. The man labeled Jesus certainly does not deserve any special credit, if he indeed existed at all.
The problem with the use of the term "god" to describe any belief, is that it is useless. It is so vague that it does not describe anything at all. It is so relative to each individual that it cannot possibly be a useful word in any context. I might use some words that are misunderstood, or less understood such as the words 'atheist' or 'humanist'. I do not claim that there is a complete lack of subjective definition in those words, but they do still serve as a precursor to legitimate discussion which I can use to begin to identify what I mean by them.
Comments
Post a Comment