Oy. You people drive me insane. You've got people trying to say that their way is the only way, you've people telling those people that their "way" is stupid and meaningless. You've got people who know nothing of the Jewish faith arguing about whether we sacrifice or not. But most of all, the most annoying thing on the face of the earth is this superficial debate about god being a "person".
God is not a person. If there is a god, he's not a "he"; doesn't have a beard; doesn't care whether you worship with undying love or not. I've said this before, but obviously no one was listening then so I have to say it again: it is very conceited for us humans to believe that whatever god is, that it has human emotions. God is supposed to have been able to create a universe (a cosmic chain reaction, if you will), so don't you think that that Universal Cosmic force is a little more advanced than to be held by such stupid things as jealousy, love, compassion, hatred, or caring about what you do with your weekend?
That's the problem with monotheism. That is the problem with all monotheistic religions: these people (including myself at one point) believe that god is a person, not a force. God cares what you do. God has emotions. God gets mad when you eat shellfish, or have sex, or wear a poly-cotton blend t-shirt.
God doesn't care. Okay? God doesn't have emotions, because god is NOT a person. God is a force, like gravity. Gravity doesn't care who you are or what you do with your weekend. You have the option to believe in deities like Siva, or Jesus, but this over-arching creator-of-all-things is not a deity. It is a force. That force permiates all things. IS all things. It is you, it is the person you hate. It is your bedsheets and the flowers you got from your boyfriend. It is all of these things, and because this force is everything in the universe it doesn't have emotions. It is more advanced than we are, and so it doesn't need emotions, or morality, or stupid monotheistic sacrifices that people insist be made in order to secure "forgiveness".
It doesn't matter what you do or what you want to believe (or not). God is everything, but is not a specific persona (the old man with the beard and white robes who lives in the sky is just as much of a fairy tale as the charming prince who gallops to your rescue).
God is a force. Not a person.
Affectionately,
Rachel
An excellent point. Wonderfully written. I can't really say anything you haven't said already, or I would.
I do agree with you, but when talking about god or religion, I do tend to refer to god as a he, for use of a pronoun. I try not to, but I do slip up on occaision.
"It" also functions as a pronoun. ;-)
------------------------------------------------------------
If I had had more time I would have written less. -- Thomas Jefferson
RachelSetzer.com
I know, and I try to use 'it'. Sometimes I just let slip a he...
I like what you said about God not being a person, because he isn't and that is a thing that most people tend to confuse about God. But, I do believe, being of the christian faith that God does care what you do and he does want you to live your life for him, that is just what I believe, I have nothing against other religions, and I also don't try to force my beliefs on others, like some many people I know do. No, If you do have sex you will not go to hell, unless you aren't saved and jesus is not in your heart, good point on God not being a person though, his son once took human form, but God is not a person.
-Caity =)
Well, since I'm Jewish I'm already going to hell. So, I guess I'll just go out and engage in debachery then...
Hell not existing is another topic all together... but I'm too tired and frustrated to discuss its entire history right now.
------------------------------------------------------------
If I had had more time I would have written less. -- Thomas Jefferson
RachelSetzer.com
The only hell people who are Jewish go to, is one where you have no money. :) I didn't make the joke, a Jewish friend of mine told it to me.
I thought all Jews were "chosen" by God to enter heaven?
Not according to Christians...
~C
Read the news
Nominate a featured blogger!
That's not funny.
In fact, it's very insulting. Consider thinking before making a racist joke next time.
------------------------------------------------------------
If I had had more time I would have written less. -- Thomas Jefferson
RachelSetzer.com
I personally found it quite hilarious. Especially when I heard it from my Jewish friend.
I don't mean to offend your religious sense but you say you are of Christian faith but then very specifically claim beliefs that contradict Christian faith. If you do believe in a Christian god, then god IS a person. I'm not criticizing your beliefs, I'm just saying I think you're mislabeling yourself.
-Tim
"It costs nothing to be honest, loyal, and true."
Wow, A person makes a few grammatical errors and their just terrible at typing? I type so fast that sometimes, yes as a human, I do make mistakes and I really hate spell checkers, because they try to make you change everything you said with their "Proper grammar," so why is grammar so important to you? I am a christian, and God is not a person, he is three different parts in one, no he does not have a beard and he is not a human person. Plus, basing one post once again on someone you don't know is sort of ridiculous. Also, let's just stop arguing, because fighting over the internet is stupid. Were here to have fun and blog, not to argue and nit pick. Rachel's post was good, A lot of people do insist on God being a man and a person.
Thanks.
If "God" isn't human, then it cannot take human form. It has no need to. Therefore, Jesus is not "God", can never be because a force that has no emotion cannot and will not make a "son" to save mankind.
--"You've got people trying to say that their way is the only way"
--"God is not a person. If there is a god, he's not a "he"; doesn't have a beard; doesn't care whether you worship with undying love or not....."
So let's get this straight:
1) You hate when other people make statements about god that are definite
2) You go on to make your own statements about god that are definite.
Should we really take that seriously? I very much respect the idea of a force of nature type of "god" more than anything in organized religion but it's weak to complain about people insisting upon things and then insist upon something yourself.
-Tim
"It costs nothing to be honest, loyal, and true."
To be honest, I think this criticism veers a little to the side of anal nit picking. This line of critiicism is tiresome, kind of like people who can't find anything more to add to a discussion or debate than correcting somebody's spelling or grammar.
_____________________________________________________________
I am the people my mother warned me about.
That's entirely inaccurate. What she's doing here is pure hypocrisy. If she had just come on here and stated her religious view points it'd be fine, but she does exactly what she claims to abhor. It's no different than if someone were to make a post deriding racism and then go on to bash Cambodians.
Besides, anyone who wants to be taken seriously should have at least passable grammar. As far as bad spelling? We're all typing on computers so there's no excuse for it.
Besides, I'm just stating my opinion as to why a person lacks credibility. You call it nitpicking, so all you're really doing is nitpicking a nitpicker.
-Tim
"It costs nothing to be honest, loyal, and true."
To be honest you don't strike me as the type of person who couldn't see past this minor trangression in the message she was communicating. It is enitirely more reasonable for her to assert that God isn't a man with a beard etc than it is to assert that he is. To claim that you believe that she is exactly the same as those she criticizes based on a slip up in wording is nit picking.
"Besides, anyone who wants to be taken seriously should have at least passable grammar. As far as bad spelling? We're all typing on computers so there's no excuse for it."
That is true to a certain extent, but that mode of thought overlooks numerous variables. Firstly, somebody could be writing in English as a second language. Secondly, somebody could be lacking in formal education regarding correct use of grammar. Thirdly somebody could be typing hastily and might not use a spell checker. The fact is that I see it all too often online where people put forward a perfectly reasonable piece of communication only to be confronted by people who are more interested in analyzing their grammar and spelling than honestly analyzing the content of their message. It is an old PR trick, this pointing out of spelling mistakes, it aims to discredit the author of a message, without actually discrediting the message itself.
I'm aware that there are English and Journalism majors who love to act the grammar nazi, I work with enough copywriters to know this. However none of them like it much when I turn the tables on them and brow beat them about their poor understanding of typography and editorial layout.
"Besides, I'm just stating my opinion as to why a person lacks credibility. "
I know exactly what you are doing. You are trying to undermine the credibility of the author through nit picking at a minor discrepency rather than discrediting the message in her communication in an honest fashion. You are, by your own admission, trying to discredit the person, not the message.
"You call it nitpicking, so all you're really doing is nitpicking a nitpicker. "
I call it nit picking, because that is a nice way of putting it. I'm not nitpicking a nitpicker, I'm merely highlighting one.
_____________________________________________________________
I am the people my mother warned me about.
There's nothing wrong with my grammar, thank you very much.
Try discussing the idea rather than the way in which it is formulated.
------------------------------------------------------------
If I had had more time I would have written less. -- Thomas Jefferson
RachelSetzer.com
Both the word "person" and especially the word "god" are abstract terms (created by gradually eroding content from the word until all that's left is an empty shell that points to something, like a shortcut on your desktop). These empty shells, or shortcuts, are used by different people with different intentions. Not only do we have to figure out what such abstract words mean in actual usage, but additionally, you have people saying: "this word SHOULD mean so-and-so". For an example of abstractions gone crazy, how about this one: "speed kills": two empty shells of abstact content. To make sense of this phrase, you have to fill it with content first: what speed, what circumstances, etc. We are currently traveling at 67K MPH around the sun. That's faster than a speeding bullet, but it doesn't kill anybody.
To make sense of the word "god" or "person" in a serious discussion, I think it is well to first fill these empty shells (shortcuts) with content or otherwise show their connection to their underlying content, in such a way that the particpants of the discussion can agree on such content, otherwise you have people arguing about what empty shells should mean.
If a biblical Christian God exists then he is going to put me in hell for eternity. That's a pretty long time. On the other hand, if no God exists as I believe then this life is the only one we will ever have and it would be better not wasting one's time worshiping a figment of one's imagination. So tell me again why this doesn't matter.
Why call EVERYTHING God? Why not just call it ... everything .... or "the universe" . Why call that God?
Does this "force" have an intelligence? Does it have 'wants"? Can it communicate? Can it intervene at its own will on behalf of people here on Earth? If so then it possess qualities that are otherwise unique to humans. So then why is not a mental picture of a person OK for God?
Cheers,
Darwin's Beagle
===
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. - Anatole France
"Why call EVERYTHING God? Why not just call it ... everything .... or "the universe" ."
Bingo. Thank you for getting the point.
------------------------------------------------------------
If I had had more time I would have written less. -- Thomas Jefferson
RachelSetzer.com
So you take the deist view of an impassive god who just got the all rolling?
"Every man makes a god of his own desire."
-Virgil
I am a non-dualist. I believe that all is one. All is god. And that is all and nothing.
------------------------------------------------------------
If I had had more time I would have written less. -- Thomas Jefferson
RachelSetzer.com
God is a force, not a person. Thank you Darwins Beagle for understanding and not jumping all over me and saying that I have no idea what I'm talking about.
Caity =)
YAY!!!!!!
!!!!!!
FINALLY someone with my religious views (or at least somewhat, I don't know what your complete religious views are)
I believe that God i the energy that created the universe (energy before big bang). It is a force that resides in us and unifies us all (and many physicists are on this side, or rather, I am siding with them, because the idea was really theirs first). Thus, you do not need to worship anything, but rather focus on bettering yourself and the world.
I am really enjoying your posts (though I've only read 2, I'll read more eventually and maybe write something on my religious views).
all monotheist religions take God to be a person
Islam- does Not say that God is a person, a man or woman, someone with any feaures or resemblance to anything human
yeah, so Islam is a monothiestic religion that does not in any way say that God is a man or something
and often times you might see people using HE to refer to ALLAH but it's wrong
"Pride is concerned with who is right. Humility is concerned with what is right."
"Age is an issue of mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter." - Twain