Quote:
Originally posted by chavos
*sigh...
God. Abstract concept. I have connection with God, other people may have more or less such connection. It's something I cannot grasp, yet I know it when I have it. I have connection through church, and connection trough my own mind. There's nothing supernatural or vague about God, it just is. I can prove that I am in connection with God by showing that I am in possession of certain insights or relationships that non-connected people do not posess. After all, that's what God is all about : the "right" relation with the world around us.
|
sorry, but this is just vague philosophical dribble. "The right relation with the world". Bullocks. God is a creature, all-powerful, all-knowing; he created us all. God is all about this creature. Worship of said god, following it's holy books: *religion* would be about the "right relationship".
I've been thinking about this, and I'd say we should expand the sentence a bit: "I believe in God" versus "I believe in freedom".
1) I believe in God: you're saying that you think there *is* a super-natural being, god (even if there's no evidence, by the way). You're not saying that god would be a good idea, because such a statement would be silly.
2) I believe in Freedom: you're saying that you think freedom *is a good idea*. Saying "I think there is freedom" would be a silly statement. You like the effects of freedom (you can do what you want), and belief it should be expanded, or that everyone should be free.
In essence, the "belief" part of the sentence is not the same for both concepts. Hence the "I believe in love" - you're not saying that you think love exists... hell, you can see it exists, you can even prove it exists. You're saying that, for example, you believe two people will eventually fall in love with each other.
Just because *I* cannot say it properly doesn't mean there's no difference. If you really want to understand the difference, go look up some mid-1960's English philosophers - they loved wordgames like this. As happens so often, *words* are the cause of the question here, not the logical problem behind it.