Fla. man says Home Depot fired him over God button

[Achilles]

So, your problem was the name he gave to what he believes as something higher than himself?

 

My problem is that this...

 

There are people who are not religious that believe in God, and I'd say God is not necessarily a religious concept.

 

...is a contradiction (at least so far as any standard definition for the word "religious" goes). Either GTA has invented his/her own definition for the word "religious" (which I've simply asked him/her to define for us so that we can make sense of the argument) or he/she is, in fact, putting forth a contradiction.

[purifier]

Originally Posted by Achilles

My problem is that this...

 

 

GTA's Quote:

There are people who are not religious that believe in God, and I'd say God is not necessarily a religious concept.[/Quote]

 

...is a contradiction (at least so far as any standard definition for the word "religious" goes). Either GTA has invented his/her own definition for the word "religious" (which I've simply asked him/her to define for us so that we can make sense of the argument) or he/she is, in fact, putting forth a contradiction [/Quote]

 

 

 

Hmmm, well let's take a little looksie in "Oxford's Dictionary and Thesaurus" and see how it defines it........

 

 

religious 1. devoted to religion; pious; devout. 2. of or concerned with religion. 3. of or belonging to a monastic order. 4. scrupulous; conscientious ( a religious attention to detail). 5. a person bound by monastic vows. religiously or religiousness

 

(other words): churchgoing, God-fearing, holy, exact, precise, conscientious, rigorous, strict, fastidious, meticulous, faithful, punctilious.

 

 

 

 

^^^^^^

Well seems to me like a whole different meaning than what your talking about Achilles. And if I understand this correctly, the definition itself leans more towards the worship and paying homage to the entity or god, etc..... totally different from just acknowledging any god's existence.

 

Anyway, I just can't see any contradiction in GTA's statement like your saying. Because he's just talking about believing, and only believing, in a supernal entity and not worshiping it or going to church in a faithful religious fashion like most people.

[Achilles]

Hmmm, well let's take a little looksie in "Oxford's Dictionary and Thesaurus" and see how it defines it........

 

Indeed, lets.

 

religious 1. devoted to religion; pious; devout. 2. of or concerned with religion. 3. of or belonging to a monastic order. 4. scrupulous; conscientious ( a religious attention to detail). 5. a person bound by monastic vows. religiously or religiousness

 

Now let's take a look at which of these are most likely applicable to the conversation:

 

religious 1. devoted to religion; pious; devout. 2. of or concerned with religion.

 

What commonality do we see here? Both definitions are based on another word: religion. So let's look that up too

 

1 a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance

2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices

3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness

4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

 

The contradiction is that GTA argues that you can have a belief in god and not be religious. Per your own source, to be religious is to have religion and religion is explicitly the worship of god or the supernatural. None of the other definitions seem applicable to the argument (since the argument was, specifically, belief in god without religion rather than religion without belief in god).

 

 

(other words): churchgoing, God-fearing, holy, exact, precise, conscientious, rigorous, strict, fastidious, meticulous, faithful, punctilious.

 

Indeed. Per your own analysis of the term you have determined that god and religion are intertwined (so far as the abrahamic monotheisms are concerned). So what was your point again?

 

Well seems to me like a whole different meaning than what your talking about Achilles.

 

I guess the trick is to be able to determine which ones are applicable and which ones are not.

 

And if I understand this correctly, the definition itself leans more towards the worship and paying homage to the entity or god, etc..... totally different from just acknowledging any god's existence.

 

And I would not say that there is a significant difference in believing in a god and worshipping one, so far as defining "religion" goes.

 

Anyway, I just can't see any contradiction in GTA's statement like your saying. Because he's just talking about believing, and only believing, in a supernal entity and not worshiping it or going to church in a faithful religious fashion like most people.

 

I hope my post has helped.

[Tommycat]

You can believe in a god or gods, but not worship them. Devil worshipers believe in God but obviously do not worship Him. Some religions themselves do not have a god. One can be religious and not believe in God.

 

Perhaps you are just confused in that one can hold a belief but not be religious about it.

 

GTA was implying that a person can be religious without following any specific religion, which by his standards qualifies as being non-religious as they do not follow any established doctrine.

 

You don't choose what definition someone else is using. They choose it. Especially when clarifying on a specific contradiction such as this. Perhaps he could have said, "One can believe in God without adhering to any established religion," to make it clear to you what he meant.