Philosophy Now Forum

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 7:13 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 3:56 am

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 2:59 am
Theology is the study of religious faith, practice, and experience; a theological theory or system.

That's the sort of definition that will only satisfy somebody agnostic/Atheistic

It's the Merriam-Webster definition. Must you insist on being the authoritative mouthpiece and judge over all?

Shame on you Lacewing. Shame on you. You deleted the most important part. Let's make it large, so that you don't "inadvertently" (ahem) miss it again.

Merriam-Webster wrote: 1: Theology: the study of religious faith, practice, and experience
especially : the study of God and of God's relation to the world

Folks refuse to say or write God for various reasons. What's your reason?

The word god is a common noun, like the words dog and fairy. So the god that some people call God is just one of the thousands of gods and other supernatural beings invented by our ancestors. It makes no more or less sense to refer to God than to Devil, Goblin or Fairy.

Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 9:45 am The word god is a common noun, like the words dog and fairy. So the god that some people call God is just one of the thousands of gods and other supernatural beings invented by our ancestors. It makes no more or less sense to refer to God than to Devil, Goblin or Fairy.

well put!

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 7:48 am
Folks refuse to say or write God for various reasons.

God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God GodGod God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God GodGod God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God God


God

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 7:13 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 3:56 am

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 2:59 am
Theology is the study of religious faith, practice, and experience; a theological theory or system.

That's the sort of definition that will only satisfy somebody agnostic/Atheistic

It's the Merriam-Webster definition.

The MW is not premised on any belief that any "theology" is truthful. It's based on a sort of "uncommitted" stance on that, either way. Or, if you think I'm wrong, show me what theology the MW is committed to.

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 7:48 am You deleted the most important part.

Merriam-Webster wrote: 1: Theology: the study of religious faith, practice, and experience
especially : the study of God and of God's relation to the world

Folks refuse to say or write God for various reasons. What's your reason?

If that were the most important part, it would have been listed first -- and it said nothing about studying what's 'accurate about the one God', as I.C. claims.

When have I ever refused to talk about God? That's what we're talking about right now.

What is your reason for being so stupid?

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 5:31 pm

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 7:48 am You deleted the most important part.

Merriam-Webster wrote: 1: Theology: the study of religious faith, practice, and experience
especially : the study of God and of God's relation to the world

Folks refuse to say or write God for various reasons. What's your reason?

...it said nothing about studying what's 'accurate about the one God', as I.C. claims.

IC didn't "claim" that that's what MW said.

IC said that MW tries to be non-sectarian and non-commital to any particular view in its definition: and as such, will not allow its definition to settling any difference between true and false "theology," or even to mention such a distinction.

Nevertheless, there IS a distinction. And it's as big a distinction as the study of science and the study of alchemy, or between the study of facts and the study of myths.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 6:08 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 5:31 pm

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 7:48 am You deleted the most important part.


Folks refuse to say or write God for various reasons. What's your reason?

...it said nothing about studying what's 'accurate about the one God', as I.C. claims.

IC didn't "claim" that that's what MW said.

IC said that MW tries to be non-sectarian and non-commital to any particular view in its definition: and as such, will not allow its definition to settling any difference between true and false "theology," or even to mention such a distinction.

Nevertheless, there IS a distinction. And it's as big a distinction as the study of science and the study of alchemy, or between the study of facts and the study of myths.

No theology is any truer or falser than any other, except to a devotee of a particular theology. You can't expect anyone else to make a special case out of your theology. Science is totally different, so your comparison is invalid.

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 6:18 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 6:08 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 5:31 pm
...it said nothing about studying what's 'accurate about the one God', as I.C. claims.

IC didn't "claim" that that's what MW said.

IC said that MW tries to be non-sectarian and non-commital to any particular view in its definition: and as such, will not allow its definition to settling any difference between true and false "theology," or even to mention such a distinction.

Nevertheless, there IS a distinction. And it's as big a distinction as the study of science and the study of alchemy, or between the study of facts and the study of myths.

No theology is any truer or falser than any other, except to a devotee of a particular theology.

Well, that's the Atheistic assumption...all theology is false...it's like "unicorn studies," or "fairyology." That's how they think.

And given that MW is trying to produce a definition to please everyone, including "devotees" of every creed and ideology, and Atheists as well, it has to just ignore the differences in views of God completely.

But those differences are real, whether it is more politically-advantageous for a dictionary to ignore them or not.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 2:42 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 7:13 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 3:56 am
That's the sort of definition that will only satisfy somebody agnostic/Atheistic

It's the Merriam-Webster definition.

The MW is not premised on any belief that any "theology" is truthful. It's based on a sort of "uncommitted" stance on that, either way.

Of course. Otherwise, it would be idiotic. Notice how you acknowledged 'any theology'. The truth slips through (even for you): there are many. Theology is not defined as studying 'anything that's accurate about the one God', as you claimed.

Why do you so often use the tactics of dishonesty and distortion to support your claims while it appears you actually know better? Is that what you think you must resort to because you have no other proof or demonstration? Maybe such claims (by you) don't truthfully support your beliefs if this is what they lead you to do on a forum.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 6:35 pm Notice how you acknowledged 'any theology'.

I was using the MW definition of that. I was arguing that that definition is agnostic with regard to truth. And I'm right.

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 6:18 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 6:08 pm MW tries to be non-sectarian and non-commital to any particular view in its definition

You can't expect anyone else to make a special case out of your theology.

Exactly right.

God's creation is so much bigger than I.C. and what I.C. thinks and believes.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 6:24 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 6:18 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 6:08 pm
IC didn't "claim" that that's what MW said.

IC said that MW tries to be non-sectarian and non-commital to any particular view in its definition: and as such, will not allow its definition to settling any difference between true and false "theology," or even to mention such a distinction.

Nevertheless, there IS a distinction. And it's as big a distinction as the study of science and the study of alchemy, or between the study of facts and the study of myths.

No theology is any truer or falser than any other, except to a devotee of a particular theology.

Well, that's the Atheistic assumption...all theology is false...it's like "unicorn studies," or "fairyology." That's how they think.

And given that MW is trying to produce a definition to please everyone, including "devotees" of every creed and ideology, and Atheists as well, it has to just ignore the differences in views of God completely.

I would call it unbiased, rather than "ignoring the differences", which is what a dictionary should be.

But those differences are real, whether it is more politically-advantageous for a dictionary to ignore them or not.

I'm sure they seem real to you, but that isn't a good enough reason to start changing all the dictionaries.

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 6:44 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 6:18 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 6:08 pm MW tries to be non-sectarian and non-commital to any particular view in its definition

You can't expect anyone else to make a special case out of your theology.

Exactly right.

God's creation is so much bigger than I.C. and what I.C. thinks and believes.

The problem, of course, is the "ology" at the end of the word; it gives the impression -to some- that it should be taken seriously.

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 6:57 pm

Lacewing wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 6:44 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 6:18 pm
You can't expect anyone else to make a special case out of your theology.

Exactly right.

God's creation is so much bigger than I.C. and what I.C. thinks and believes.

The problem, of course, is the "ology" at the end of the word; it gives the impression -to some- that it should be taken seriously.

A bit like you