Does a belief in a god show lack of education?

[Sheldon]

Believing in a possible God

Not unless they can demonstrate sufficient objective evidence that a deity is possible, and though I've seen many bare claims, I've not seen such evidence demonstrated.

And no, I don't believe what you claimed was evidence for a deity is in fact evidence for a deity, but if you get published in a worthy peer reviewed journal and claim the Templeton prize, and a Nobel prize, accompanied by a global scientific consensus that your conclusions are correct, then I will pay attention. Until then I do not believe they indicate what you are claiming they do.

 

[KWED]

Believing in a possible God is fine but describing God and beleiving that description that was devised by men , is Neurological Sujectiveness !

Believing that some form of god is possible is not the same as believing in that possible god. One position is more rational than the other.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Indeed, so as an atheists who doesn't believe there is any one deity, but rather thousands that humans have imagined and created, I never capitalise it.

That would be incorrect English. I don't believe in Santa Claus, but I still capitalize it because it is still a proper noun. So again, whether you believe in a monotheistic God or not, you still capitalize the G when discussing it.

Obviously it is in your head to simply use a small g in order to mock. Sorry, I can't respect that.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Ah, I see. Religionists want their god to be capitalised, but not any others.
Fair enough.

I'm giving you the rule for the English language. It doesn't really matter what people WANT.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

To me (and many others) that is still just the idea of "a god" like all the others, so why does it deserve capitalisation when the others don't?

Because when the idea is that there is only one God, that God is THE God. It's not a matter of "deserving." It's simply a matter of using good English grammar.

As I said to someone else a moment ago, it appears that your desire is to use a small g in order to stick it to monotheists. Sorry, I can't respect that. You don't get to change what is good grammar to make a point that you can easily make by using a sentence such as the one above.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

"God" is capitalized when you're using it as a proper noun.

That is correct. For all practicle purposes, "God" is a proper noun when you are referring to the one and only, even if you don't believe in him. It is no different than capitalizing Shiva or Loki.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Then I'm doing it right since even the allegedly monotheistic gods are a category of all the widely different images people have of them.

No, if you are not capitalizing the monotheistic God, whether he be the Jewish version or the Deistic version or the Lakota version, you are not using good English grammar.

 

[Sheldon]

It is my opinion that the entire world is deluded and most neurological reference frames are full of corrupt data .

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur...

...and deluded does not necessarily involve a mental illness.

 

[KWED]

I'm giving you the rule for the English language. It doesn't really matter what people WANT.

"Today there is no widely accepted rule in English on whether or not to use reverential capitalization." - Wikipedia.
"When the word refers to the Judeo-Christian god but does not name him directly, there is no logical or grammatical reason to capitalize it." - Grammarist.com

It seems you are mistaken. However, I understand your (and others') desire for it to be capitalised.

 

[KWED]

Because when the idea is that there is only one God, that God is THE God. It's not a matter of "deserving." It's simply a matter of using good English grammar.

So if one does not hold this belief, there is no reason to capitalise.

As I said to someone else a moment ago, it appears that your desire is to use a small g in order to stick it to monotheists. Sorry, I can't respect that. You don't get to change what is good grammar to make a point that you can easily make by using a sentence such as the one above.

The early King James Bible didn't capitalise "god". Were the producers trying to "stick it to monotheists"?

With all due respect, it seems your desire for reverential capitalisation has led you to make false assumptions about what is "good grammar".

 

[IndigoChild5559]

"Today there is no widely accepted rule in English on whether or not to use reverential capitalization." - Wikipedia.
"When the word refers to the Judeo-Christian god but does not name him directly, there is no logical or grammatical reason to capitalize it." - Grammarist.com

It seems you are mistaken. However, I understand your (and others') desire for it to be capitalised.

I'll give you the "reason." I've edited grammar books before, and I'll do it again now. "God" is effectively the name of the monotheistic God. Using a capital G is exactly the same thing as capitalizing Loke or Shiva. It looks to me like athiestic propaganda has infiltrated certain webistes. It doesn't change anything. If its a name, you capitalize it. That's the rule.

 

[Sheldon]

That is correct. For all practicle purposes, "God" is a proper noun when you are referring to the one and only, even if you don't believe in him. It is no different than capitalizing Shiva or Loki.

I disagree, the word god is just one of thousands for an atheist, and not therefore a proper noun. I might capitalise Yahweh or Jesus, just as I would Thor or Apollo, but not god.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

So if one does not hold this belief, there is no reason to capitalise.

I do not believei in Thor, but I still capitalize the word. Why? Because it is a name, a label that refers to one specific god. In monotheism, "God" functions as the name for God. It has nothing to do with your personal beliefs, just as Thor had nothing to do with mine.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I disagree, the word god is just one of thousands for an atheist, and not therefore a proper noun. I might capitalise Yahweh or Jesus, just as I would Thor or Apollo, but not god.

A name/proper noun is a word that applies to one specific person, place, or thing. Thus "God" is no different than "Zeus," since when it is capitalized is referring to a very specific god.

 

[Sheldon]

No, if you are not capitalizing the monotheistic God, whether he be the Jewish version or the Deistic version or the Lakota version, you are not using good English grammar.

I don't believe there is a monotheistic god, so calling it "the" monotheistic god might apply to your belief, but I hold no such belief, thus to me the word god is never a proper noun, as it is one of many thousands.

 

[Sheldon]

I do not believei in Thor, but I still capitalize the word. Why? Because it is a name, a label that refers to one specific god. In monotheism, "God" functions as the name for God. It has nothing to do with your personal beliefs, just as Thor had nothing to do with mine.

Yes Thor is a name, but god to an atheist is a generic term.

 

[Sheldon]

A name/proper noun is a word that applies to one specific person, place, or thing. Thus "God" is no different than "Zeus," since when it is capitalized is referring to a very specific god.

Again I disagree, as the word god to an atheist like myself does not apply to one specific thing. Zeus is specific, whereas to an atheist like myself god is generic.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That is correct. For all practicle purposes, "God" is a proper noun when you are referring to the one and only, even if you don't believe in him.

Yes and no. It can be either.

God is a god, so I could speak of "the Jewish God" or "the Jewish god" and both would be correct. Your religion has a god; your religion's god is referred to as "God" (edit: among other names/titles/etc.)

It is no different than capitalizing Shiva or Loki.

Right. And likewise, there are situations where capitalizing "god" isn't appropriate. I see some monotheists go overboard and capitalize "god" every single time they use the word, which tends to get in the way of clear communication.

 

[night912]

I didn't say "a plurality or a majority of a sect holds to the tenets of the sect they've joined". I said name anything other than God in the known universe where 99% of ALL humans believe falsely.

It's being used in the same context. Even though the majority believes in a particular thing as being true, the fact of the matter is that it's actually not true, which is the belief of the minority. So your excuse above is useless in defending your argument.

Also, I already gave an example and showed why your argument is irrational in post #309. Feel free to explain why the majority was correct in my example.

 

[Sheldon]

That would be incorrect English. I don't believe in Santa Claus, but I still capitalize it because it is still a proper noun.

There is only one Santa Claus, there are literally thousands of gods.