Richo wrote:
> On Feb 22, 12:27 am, Mike <prabb...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Richo wrote:
>>> On Feb 21, 1:34 am, Dubh Ghall <p...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 19:04:07 -0800, DanielSan
>>>> <danielsan1...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>> Pastor Frank said the following on 2/18/2008 6:09 PM:
>>>>>> "DanielSan" <danielsan1...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:5JadnXhbA_hBEiTanZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>> Pastor Frank said the following on 2/13/2008 6:11 PM:
>>>> snip
>>>>> Sorry, but that's not how it works. I am not operating on belief or
>>>>> faith that "there ain't no gods".
>>>>>> True believers will not
>>>>>> be swayed in their beliefs AKA disbeliefs by museums full of
existing gods,
>>>>>> many of them superb pieces of ancient art.
>>>>> What "existing gods"?
>>>> Frank thinks that statues and fetishes, are gods.
>>> I actually agree with him.
>>> A god is:
>>> god n. (1) Superhuman being wor****ped as having
>>> power over nature and human fortunes, deity
>> Well, a stone statue isn't a god per this definition.
>>
>
> Generally no. See below.
>
>>> (2) Image, animal, or other object, wor****ped as
>>> symbolyzing, being the visible habitation of, or
>>> itself possessing, divine power; an idol.
>> This one here says that the statue has to be a symbol for a divine
power
>> or be inhabited by a divine power or possess such a power. So if
there's
>> no divine power, the statue can't be a symbol of it, be inhabited by it
>> or possess it. Calling a piece of glass "a diamond" doesn't make it
one.
>>
> It doesnt have to have supernatural power to be a god - it merely has
> to be "wor****ped as having..."
> Belief makes a thing a god.
It actually has to be "wor****ped as [representing/]symbolizing..." and
where we disagree is if the object itself can really be called a god if
that object does not really have the attributes that someone attribute
to it. To say "it's a god if someone thinks it's a god" basically, IMHO,
trivializes the term "god" to the point of meaninglessness since
anything can then become a god as long as someone calls it such.
Much like saying "a diamond is made of carbon" means we can objectively
look at something and say "that's a diamond" or "that's cut glass." But
saying "a god is simply anything someone calls a 'god'" means we have no
way to distinguish "is this object a god or not?" without asking
everyone in the world.
>
>>> ...
>>> [Concise Oxford Dictionary 1976]
>>> From Webster's:
>>> God \God\ (g[o^]d), n. [AS. god; akin to OS. & D. god, OHG. got,
>>> G. gott, Icel. gu[eth], go[eth], Sw. & Dan. gud, Goth. gup,
>>> prob. orig. a p. p. from a root appearing in Skr. h[=u], p.
>>> p. h[=u]ta, to call upon, invoke, implore. [root]30. Cf.
>>> {Goodbye}, {Gospel}, {Gossip}.]
>>> 1. A being conceived of as possessing supernatural power, and
>>> to be propitiated by sacrifice, wor****p, etc.; a divinity;
>>> a deity; an object of wor****p; an idol.
>> This definition again requires some sort of supernatural power (or, if
>> you take "an object of wor****p; an idol" to be separate definitions,
>> then it just widens out the definition so broadly that it's basically
>> meaningless.)
>>
> Again it merely has to be "considered" to have superpowers.
>
>>> So if someone believes that the statue represents or contains the
>>> spirit of his or her deity then it is their god.
>> No, it's simply something that they BELIEVE is a god. I can BELIEVE
that
>> piece of glass is a diamond but that doesn't make it one.
>>
> Being made of diamond is an objective fact - you can perform physical
> tests to ascertain whether something is one substance or another.
> Being a god is entirely a matter of belief.
>
> There is no concievable physical test for "godness" (divinity).
That's the point: by using the above definitions, we get to the point of
where "god" is a meaningless phrase. Now I don't think any god exists
but we should at least be able to agree "if a god exists, here's what it
would be like" so we can KNOW that we've never seen one. We can do the
same with a dragon, an elf, Superman, etc. To allow a god to simply be
"anything someone wants to call a 'god'", we might as well not even have
the word at all.
|
