references to God

[Elijah John]

I notice it seems to be the habit of many atheists and agnostics here on these forums to refer to God as "it".

And I think I understand the motivation, in that such references are most probably a desire to remain gender neutral, because a lot of folks are uncomfortable with calling God "He" or referring to Him in masculine terms. Fair enough.

But most of us Theists know that the masculine pronoun is due to the limitations of the English language, and some of us realize that such usage may be unneccesarily anthropromorphic to some who doubt the very existance of God.

But is the word "it" any better when referring to God?

Many theologians consider the word "it" to be limiting as well, in reference to God. And many of them say that God is no THING. "It" implies a "thing".

What I am trying to say, for those non-believers who also want to treat the subject of theism with respect and in the interest of civility, would you consider humoring us Theists by using the pronouns "He" when referring to God, or "She" if referring to a Goddess?

The word "it" in reference to God sounds demeaning and disrespectful to us believers. Obviously if one just does not care, one may consider my request unreasonable. And no one is questioning your RIGHT to call God "it".

But on the other hand, many who are quick to embrace the latest politically correct terminology from the Left will use whatever phrase is requested or dictated to them, newly fashionable acronyms such as "LGBT", or not LGBTQ" rights, instead of simply the old fashioned "gay rights" without a second thought.

So why not show us Theists the same respect, even if you do not respect our beliefs?
The "why or why not" is the question for debate, and is this request in and of itself yet another attempt of a Theist to control behavior?

If so, why do you accept control of speech from the political Left, but not from a politically neutral perspective in matters of Spiritual terminology? Is there a double standard here?

Or what may be some alternatives that every one could be happy with?

Believe me, we get it, if you were to call God "He" we would not think all of a sudden you converted or changed your fundamental world view. We would just consider it a sign of respect.

[Ooberman]

I wish people would focus on expressing their ideas as clearly as possible and not who they may or may not offend. I see no reason we can't speak of "the gods" as a way to speak about someone's God. The focus should be on the point being made, not the sensitivities of the reader.

[connermt]

I wish people would focus on expressing their ideas as clearly as possible and not who they may or may not offend. I see no reason we can't speak of "the gods" as a way to speak about someone's God. The focus should be on the point being made, not the sensitivities of the reader.

From my experiences, believers are extra sensitive. I would imagine it comes from weak faith. After all, if they believe they're right in their belief, and they are, there's no reason to be defensive.

[Zzyzx]

.

Does make conversations simple, though; everybody is so busy being insulted that no actual discussion ever goes on.

Any of us can be deliberately insulting (most learn that in childhood), some of us have learned or are learning that damage done to communication by insults far outweighs the emotional satisfaction of insulting someone.

[connermt]

.

Does make conversations simple, though; everybody is so busy being insulted that no actual discussion ever goes on.

Any of us can be deliberately insulting (most learn that in childhood), some of us have learned or are learning that damage done to communication by insults far outweighs the emotional satisfaction of insulting someone.

And some people can think anything someone says that isn't what they agree with is insulting.As I saw it said in another thread:
GROW UP

Anyone that gets insulted over what's said to them anonymously from an online forum such as this has greater issues and, IMO, should spend less time online and more time in front of a professional of some sort

The one who gets offended/upset has only themselves to blame.

[Ooberman]

BTW, instead of everyone getting upset at posters for not respecting their religious views and trying to get the person banned - why not exercise the "block" function?

I got tired of 99%'s constant obfuscation so i blocked him from my view. I don't need to tell mommy that he's hitting me.

I expect that many people are going to say things that offend my sensibilities. I have control over my actions - I presume - and there is a block function... Use it!

[Ooberman]

I wish people would focus on expressing their ideas as clearly as possible and not who they may or may not offend. I see no reason we can't speak of "the gods" as a way to speak about someone's God. The focus should be on the point being made, not the sensitivities of the reader.

From my experiences, believers are extra sensitive. I would imagine it comes from weak faith. After all, if they believe they're right in their belief, and they are, there's no reason to be defensive.

I agree, and it seems to speak to the personal nature of the God Belief. Since people associate their own thoughts and feelings as those of their gods, they take criticism personally - as expected.

My goal would be to show them how their personal feelings have nothing to do with gods, but that their pastors have lied to them by making them believe their feelings are legitimate evidences of gods.

[dianaiad]

I wish people would focus on expressing their ideas as clearly as possible and not who they may or may not offend. I see no reason we can't speak of "the gods" as a way to speak about someone's God. The focus should be on the point being made, not the sensitivities of the reader.

From my experiences, believers are extra sensitive. I would imagine it comes from weak faith. After all, if they believe they're right in their belief, and they are, there's no reason to be defensive.

I agree, and it seems to speak to the personal nature of the God Belief. Since people associate their own thoughts and feelings as those of their gods, they take criticism personally - as expected.

My goal would be to show them how their personal feelings have nothing to do with gods, but that their pastors have lied to them by making them believe their feelings are legitimate evidences of gods.

Let's see if I have this line of reasoning right:

Because theists believe in something that is not real, they are not believing correctly, and they falsely attribute their own thoughts and feelings to that of the deity they worship. Therefore, they consider that discourtesy aimed at their deity is actually aimed at them, and therefore take offense.

Non-believers understand that the deity in question is not real, and so any disparagement of that deity IS aimed at the believer (there's nothing else to aim at, after all) and so understand quite well that the offense is aimed at the believer, not the belief, but that's ok because in the view of the non-believer, the believer is wrong and thus deserves it anyway.

The believer, if he is correct in his beliefs, should simply accept such criticism humbly and not object, being, after all, secure in his truth.

However, if it's the non-believer's ox that is being gored, reverse the above logic.

Gotcha.

[connermt]

[Replying to post 76 by Ooberman]

My goal would be to show them how their personal feelings have nothing to do with gods, but that their pastors have lied to them by making them believe their feelings are legitimate evidences of gods.

I wish you luck with that one!
I wonder though, is it a lie if the pastors really believe it, or is it 'garbage in garbage out' as the saying goes...?

[Ooberman]

I wish people would focus on expressing their ideas as clearly as possible and not who they may or may not offend. I see no reason we can't speak of "the gods" as a way to speak about someone's God. The focus should be on the point being made, not the sensitivities of the reader.

From my experiences, believers are extra sensitive. I would imagine it comes from weak faith. After all, if they believe they're right in their belief, and they are, there's no reason to be defensive.

I agree, and it seems to speak to the personal nature of the God Belief. Since people associate their own thoughts and feelings as those of their gods, they take criticism personally - as expected.

My goal would be to show them how their personal feelings have nothing to do with gods, but that their pastors have lied to them by making them believe their feelings are legitimate evidences of gods.

Let's see if I have this line of reasoning right:

Because theists believe in something that is not real, they are not believing correctly, and they falsely attribute their own thoughts and feelings to that of the deity they worship. Therefore, they consider that discourtesy aimed at their deity is actually aimed at them, and therefore take offense.

Non-believers understand that the deity in question is not real, and so any disparagement of that deity IS aimed at the believer (there's nothing else to aim at, after all) and so understand quite well that the offense is aimed at the believer, not the belief, but that's ok because in the view of the non-believer, the believer is wrong and thus deserves it anyway.

The believer, if he is correct in his beliefs, should simply accept such criticism humbly and not object, being, after all, secure in his truth.

However, if it's the non-believer's ox that is being gored, reverse the above logic.

Gotcha.

However you want to make sense of it for yourself is fine by me.

The point I am making is that people believe all kinds of things, and are offended by all kinds of things, especially in the areas of sex, religion and politics - all things that have little data to support the right or wrong views.

These are personal things, and the belief in gods, being a psychological condition, are prone to personal reactions.

We don't have to wonder about gods possibly existing. They don't, and certainly not all the ones that garner the outrage by people in the world.

Why do Muslims get outraged by perceived offenses against their gods? Because it's emotional, not because their gods exist - they are personally wounded by slights against the object of their fixation.

I'm sure you have critiqued Allah, or other Faiths in your life, and you don't mean it to be a personal attack - but you can see the person is taking it personally.

IMO, Religionists must realize that not everyone worships what they worship, and also have no reason or duty to respect what other people worship.

Consider the Sambian people who practice semen ingestion. I'm sure you could say a few things about that, but criticising it would be offensive to them.

Would you feel the need to respect their position, or them yours? Why not simply recognize you are both going to say things you don't like, and that you each try to make your points as best you can?

[connermt]

BTW, instead of everyone getting upset at posters for not respecting their religious views and trying to get the person banned - why not exercise the "block" function?

I got tired of 99%'s constant obfuscation so i blocked him from my view. I don't need to tell mommy that he's hitting me.

I expect that many people are going to say things that offend my sensibilities. I have control over my actions - I presume - and there is a block function... Use it!

The problem here is that 'others have to see the disrespect between you and someone else and we can't have that!'. And there's always a need to have someone to control someone else. I have seen and participate in other forums where there's no moderation. It's fun
Either way, some people are just jerks....