Thou Shalt Not Take The Name Of The Lord In Vain

[phee]

monotheist is a description of a religion... not a religion in and of itself... It's kind of like saying I drive a car made by "4 wheel drive"... no.... 4 wheel drive can be made by ford/honda/nissan/etc... but it describes in part the type of car you have... Just like monotheist describes Chirstianity/Islam/Jedaism etc...

[BrassFusion]

When someone asks "what religion are you?" or "what do you believe in?" they expect at least some sort of language that gives them at least a general idea of what you believe ethically/cosmologicly. "Christian" would give them some idea. "Muslim" would as well. "Athiest" also. In gaf's case maybe "Non-Denominational christan" might work. "your religion" i think is very definetaly an ethical question.

Thats what its about, your moral/ethical outlook on the universe.

Sort of like asking:

"What politics do you belive in?"

"I'm an american" wouldn't be a useful response. Or at least i personally wouldnt feel it was particularly useful. "Im a democrat." or "I'm a republican" or "Im a >something descrptive<" is what they are looking for.

I very much disagree that religion, in and of itself, has anything to do with moral character, and vice versa.

I know a lot of people DO tie them together, but I feel they're very wrong in doing so. That's where you find the people who are afraid of the violent Muslims and who don't trust the clincial, cynical Agnostics/Atheists and who bank with frugal Jews.

I also don't assume, when someone tells me he's Christian, that he has ANY concern for my welfare, much less respect for MY beliefs. Even though that's what many of them want us to think.

[Troy Spiral (13)]

I very much disagree that religion, in and of itself, has anything to do with moral character, and vice versa.

Must be a problem with communication. Religion is , by virtually all definitions a stated moral compass. Not even really mildly controversial. Your not going to find much support for the idea that religion isnt moralistic in nature. Maybe we might not agree that they are GOOD morals, but they are morals.

Maybe the practicioners or "claimed followers" to a given religion are hypocritical or don't act in accordance with that stated morality. But, that doesn't change the fact that a given religion is , pretty much by definition a stated "ethcial concept".

[Steven]

I also don't assume, when someone tells me he's Christian, that he has ANY concern for my welfare, much less respect for MY beliefs. Even though that's what many of them want us to think.

hmmm, I pretty much just want you to think I'm a stud. that's pretty much it.

Nevertheless I DO happen to care about your welfare and I respect your beleifs. but you knew that.

[phee]

hmmm, I pretty much just want you to think I'm a stud. that's pretty much it.

Nevertheless I DO happen to care about your welfare and I respect your beleifs. but you knew that.

You Stud... (wait that wasn't meant for me)

[Steven]

Must be a problem with communication. Religion is , by virtually all definitions a stated moral compass. Not even really mildly controversial. Your not going to find much support for the idea that religion isnt moralistic in nature. Maybe we might not agree that they are GOOD morals, but they are morals.

Maybe the practicioners or "claimed followers" to a given religion are hypocritical or don't act in accordance with that stated morality. But, that doesn't change the fact that a given religion is , pretty much by definition a stated "ethcial concept".

by and large I would agree with this statement.

to me "religion" holds much more to the rigidity of an understood tradition or behavioural ethos than an exploration of the divine. It's sort of like getting lost in the process itself and losing focus of the goal.

[Steven]

You Stud... (wait that wasn't meant for me)

...oh yes it was

[BrassFusion]

hmmm, I pretty much just want you to think I'm a stud. that's pretty much it.

Nevertheless I DO happen to care about your welfare and I respect your beleifs. but you knew that.

I didn't assume you cared about people right off the bat, but now i KNOW you do. and you're a total stud for that.

[phee]

I didn't assume you cared about people right off the bat, but now i KNOW you do. and you're a total stud for that.

Thanks :blushing

*Phee unjacks the thread*

[Steven]

I didn't assume you cared about people right off the bat, but now i KNOW you do. and you're a total stud for that.

she cares.......(gets teary)

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Just a little trivia thing on the monotheis nature of Christianity, Judiasm and Islam.

They Worship one God, but they beleive there are others. The Old Testament says there are other gods, just says not to worship them before or place them higher than God.

[phee]

Just a little trivia thing on the monotheis nature of Christianity, Judiasm and Islam.

They Worship one God, but they beleive there are others. The Old Testament says there are other gods, just says not to worship them before or place them higher than God.

This is true... and very interesting don't you think?

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Mildly. Gods were dime a dozen back then.

[Steven]

This is true... and very interesting don't you think?

you are correct sir. Molech and the various Baal's of the surrounding nations to name some.....

[BrassFusion]

Just a little trivia thing on the monotheis nature of Christianity, Judiasm and Islam.

They Worship one God, but they beleive there are others. The Old Testament says there are other gods, just says not to worship them before or place them higher than God.

At least by my understanding, while the Old Testament acknowledges the existence of other gods, I think it only means in the context of other people worshiping gods that don't truly exist. It never goes so far as to describe any actions by those gods, right?

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

It never says they are not Gods or that they are false gods. it does mention false idols.. but on other Gods... It refers to them as Gods. Take that how you will.

[BrassFusion]

It never says they are not Gods or that they are false gods. it does mention false idols.. but on other Gods... It refers to them as Gods. Take that how you will.

I guess it boils down to what's written in the original language. And there's probably no way for us to know what their word for "God" REALLY meant.

[Troy Spiral (13)]

This is true... and very interesting don't you think?

Theres god and then theres God. Loosely used the term "god" can be used to describe anything "worshiped" regardless if it actually exists or not. None of the "gods" that the bible references are believed by the biblical writers to be anything other than either 1. total manmade constructions or 2. some manifestation of the devil. Unfortunately there are no other "real" gods according to the bible.

Separate subject:

I really am going to have to continue to use the term "religion" as trying to use some other term like "spirituality" muddles the point. Or using the term 'god' to refer to something other than a supernatural being... just makes it that much more difficult to communicate. The sort of new-age philosophy likes to throw the terms "God" (capital G) and "religion" around. But, once you finally get to the actual point(s) you realize that was just a smokescreen. Basically they are not talking about anything that would traditionally be considered "god" or "religion".

Guys like Steven J. Hawking, Thich Nat Han and Carl Sagan (all of which i have great respect for) but they like to randomly throw terms like "seeing god" or "touching the face of god" and similar terms into their writings. None of which really mean "god" as they are all hardcore atheists. Just helps to sell books and maybe fool a few people into thinking they really do believe in god for the 5 minutes it takes to figure out that they are confusing the issue.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Yod-Heh-Vav-Heh or YHVH (promuanced yaway) Which in ancient Hebrew meant.. well.. nothing... but it's root word was Heh-Yod-Heh and that means "to be". Like I always say.. God is.

God, the God of the Hebrews, later Christians and Muslims... had many many many names. Elohim, El, Eloha, Elohai (my God) and Elohaynu (our God), El Shaddai, YHVH Tzva'ot, Yah, Yahu or Yeho, Yehoshua,

Eliyahu, Halleluyah and so on and so on....

[BrassFusion]

Yod-Heh-Vav-Heh or YHVH (promuanced yaway) Which in ancient Hebrew meant.. well.. nothing... but it's root word was Heh-Yod-Heh and that means "to be". Like I always say.. God is.

God, the God of the Hebrews, later Christians and Muslims... had many many many names. Elohim, El, Eloha, Elohai (my God) and Elohaynu (our God), El Shaddai, YHVH Tzva'ot, Yah, Yahu or Yeho, Yehoshua,

Eliyahu, Halleluyah and so on and so on....

And what's the word they used for other gods that they referred to, is what I asked.

[Troy Spiral (13)]

Yod-Heh-Vav-Heh or YHVH (promuanced yaway) Which in ancient Hebrew meant.. well.. nothing... but it's root word was Heh-Yod-Heh and that means "to be". Like I always say.. God is.

God, the God of the Hebrews, later Christians and Muslims... had many many many names. Elohim, El, Eloha, Elohai (my God) and Elohaynu (our God), El Shaddai, YHVH Tzva'ot, Yah, Yahu or Yeho, Yehoshua,

Eliyahu, Halleluyah and so on and so on....

Not sure anyone was debating the meaning of the original proper noun "name" of God. But just as a random point the tetragramation of YHWH in actual ancient hebrew pronunciation is lost and is considered, at least in everything i've read to be unlikely to be recovered.

[Troy Spiral (13)]

And what's the word they used for other gods that they referred to, is what I asked.

They usually called them by name, or used the generalized meaning that i was referencing 2 posts up. God meaning "the" God vs god as in any random worshiped thing.

The king james version of the bible in particular really did a disservice to the orignial wiritings. The most common term is YHWH or something aproximating it. That is "jehovah" or "yawhew" giving god an actual "name" rather than this catch-all term "God" which has come into favor in the last 5 centuries or so. (due to various reasons, a lot to due with jewish traditon)

But a lot of this really is a frustrating exersize in symantics, can go round and round on it forever. I'd rather go round and round on some actual ethcial/moral/spirtual point rather than the terms. =D

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Thats because the ancient Hebrews were weird. They never wrote vowels.. you filled them in when reading...

I'll ask my daughter when I see her... she is working on her degree in Judiasm. Hell.. she tutors jews on Judiasm.

[Troy Spiral (13)]

Thats because the ancient Hebrews were weird. They never wrote vowels.. you filled them in when reading...

I'll ask my daughter when I see her... she is working on her degree in Judiasm. Hell.. she tutors jews on Judiasm.

Some ancient hebrew is still considered to be "acurately passed down" to us through the ages. There was a superstition that using God's actual proper name would cause/create/bring >insert various negative things here

And yeah, ancient hebrew, like a lot of the early languages assumed that the readers already basicly knew the stories they were recording and its generally thought that the idea was that much of it was meant as a "memory jogger" for the people at the time and thus left little details out like VOWELS haha. But for us 2000 years later... it sucks. heh.

[Steven]

I guess it boils down to what's written in the original language. And there's probably no way for us to know what their word for "God" REALLY meant.

sure there is.

watch the events preceeding and proceeding the text, look for a consistent pattern, see if the pattens can be duplicaed between the vast amount of time between old testament and new testament writings