Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Third commandment...

 

"Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain"

 

So is he lord, god, or something else ? Does the common daily Oh! my god ! fits right in becoming a mortal sin to say ?

Posted

The bible says his name is 'Jehovah'. This is based on the older name 'YHVH' in old Hebrew (however you should pronounce that).

Posted (edited)

He has more than one name: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nine_Billion_Names_of_God


More seriously, God really does have a lot of names: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_God

 

I assume the "not taking in vain" commandment is the reason that some people write "G-d" for example. But apart from the fact that this euphemism is pretty transparent (it certainly isn't going to fool anyone who is omniscient) it also seems unnecessary: if one is discussing God, then one isn't taking his name in vain. (Whereas, for example, stubbing your toe and swearing, or describing some Hollywood actor as a G-d would be.)

Edited by Strange
Posted

With lots of Books/Religious Texts "allegedly" being "doctored" over the years I believe it's safer to call Him The Creator.

I read once that God is Dog in reverse relating to the Egyptian "God" Anubis - the "Dog God".

Posted

Did you hear about the insomniac, agnostic, dyslexic who lay awake all night wondering if there was a Dog...


I read once that God is Dog in reverse relating to the Egyptian "God" Anubis - the "Dog God".

 

Just in case anyone is tempted to take this seriously ... The germanic God/Gott/etc derives from proto-indoeuropean word mean "to invoke" or possibly "to pour a libation".

 

Interestingly, the word dog in English is relatively new (well, from the 16th century, when it replaced hund). The origin is unknown...

Posted

Strange with Your flippance in Your posts it's coming across to Me that YOU revere YOURSELF more than Max Planck or Sir Isaac Newton in the intelligence stakes!!! !

Posted

The bible says his name is 'Jehovah'. This is based on the older name 'YHVH' in old Hebrew (however you should pronounce that).

It's pronounced po͞op, from Middle English poupe, from Old French, from Latin puppis, from old Hebrew בֵּית אַחֲרָה
Posted (edited)

Strange with Your flippance in Your posts it's coming across to Me that YOU revere YOURSELF more than Max Planck or Sir Isaac Newton in the intelligence stakes!!! !

is your point in mentioning those two scientists who happened to be christian that because they were very intelligent that it is also intelligent to believe in some personal creator god? this seems to be an appeal to accomplishment fallacy.

 

smart people can have irrational beliefs; critical thinking, skepticism and empiricism do not necessarily extend to all the different parts of peoples lives.

Edited by andrewcellini
Posted

Strange with Your flippance in Your posts it's coming across to Me that YOU revere YOURSELF more than Max Planck or Sir Isaac Newton in the intelligence stakes!!! !

 

Don't worry. I learnt a long time that I am not as clever as I thought I was.

Posted

With lots of Books/Religious Texts "allegedly" being "doctored" over the years I believe it's safer to call Him The Creator.

 

 

It’s only safer because of the zealous nature of the believers; I’ve called it many things over the years most of which weren’t pleasant and I’ve yet to be stoned/punished by “the creator”.

 

 

Strange with Your flippance in Your posts it's coming across to Me that YOU revere YOURSELF more than Max Planck or Sir Isaac Newton in the intelligence stakes!!! !

 

 

 

If you want a theological discussion that doesn’t contain flippancy, a science forum isn’t the best place to look, besides which Sir Isaac Newton also believed in alchemy.

Posted

is your point in mentioning those two scientists who happened to be christian that because they were very intelligent that it is also intelligent to believe in some personal creator god? this seems to be an appeal to accomplishment fallacy.

 

smart people can have irrational beliefs; critical thinking, skepticism and empiricism do not necessarily extend to all the different parts of peoples lives.

 

 

Your assumptions not mine!

Don't worry. I learnt a long time that I am not as clever as I thought I was.

I realised that too when You said neutrinos didn't have magnetic properties!!! !

Posted (edited)

I realised that too when You said neutrinos didn't have magnetic properties!!! !

 

Hey, that's ignorance, not lack of intelligence. Which is OK, because ignorance is fixable. As long as one is smart enough to be aware of the ignorance....

Edited by Strange
Posted (edited)

You dont seem to understand Stranges point, not to mention, Ignorance is bliss is not from Yorkshire or care of Richard Feynman.

I comprehend Strange perfectly well and understand to no Man. Also I didn't say the saying "ignorance is bliss" originated in Yorkshire nor was the care of Richard Feynman - can You read??? ?

is your point in mentioning those two scientists who happened to be christian that because they were very intelligent that it is also intelligent to believe in some personal creator god? this seems to be an appeal to accomplishment fallacy.

 

smart people can have irrational beliefs; critical thinking, skepticism and empiricism do not necessarily extend to all the different parts of peoples lives.

 

 

This is YOUR statement NOT Mine!!! !

Edited by Ant Sinclair
Posted (edited)

This is YOUR statement NOT Mine!!! !

can you clarify your original statement if my understanding of it is not the same as yours then?

Edited by andrewcellini
Posted

I comprehend Strange perfectly well and understand to no Man. Also I didn't say the saying "ignorance is bliss" originated in Yorkshire nor was the care of Richard Feynman - can You read??? ?

 

 

This is YOUR statement NOT Mine!!! !

 

 

Can you write an intelligible sentence (bolded)? I admit you didn’t directly say that but you implied it.

 

 

It's in plain enough english! !!!

 

 

 

If someone asks for clarification maybe you should provide some; the onus of understanding is the responsibility of the communicator.

Posted

!

Moderator Note

OK, it looks like the OP's question was answered early. Is there any further on-topic discussion? Post now, since it looks like it's close to closing time.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.