Re: Let's Cut Out this Childish Bickering

Subject:

Comments:
: : From Mr. Edgar's remarks concerning my conceptions of "God" and your passionate defense of him, I can only assume that pereceiving "God" in a "myriad of ways" means some specific dictionary definition of God as prescribed by Mr. Edgar. : The first principle of the AUC actually says - : 1. God's presence is made known in a myriad of ways. Religion should promote a free and responsible search for truth, meaning, communion and love. : Please note the absence of quotation marks enclosing the word God which is used here in its traditional dictionary defined sense. This first principle does not in fact speak about perceiving the meaning of the word God in a myriad of ways as you are apparently (mis)interpreting it. It would seem that your own grasp of the plainly sated English words of this principle is quite flawed. Perhaps you should take your own spiteful advice and really seriously consider taking a basic English language course... : : He has made it clear that my conception of "God" is not what the AUA would consider as "God". : Actually I haven't quite done that because you have not really made clear just what your conception of an in quotation marks "God" is... Certainly however your in quotation marks "God" may well be no God at all as I have already pointed out. In fact you have openly stated that you don't even know quite what you mean yourself when you use the word "God"... : : That is not acceptable to me. So, I am out of here. : I could have sworn you said I am out of here a few days ago... : : I strongly encourage Dean and the AUC Board of Directors to re-formulate their first principle to reflect that the "myriad of ways" in which "God" is manifested is in fact confined to a "dictionary" definition of "God" in so far as the AUC is concerned. : The first principle does not require any re-formulation. It is formulated quite well and should be clearly understood by the vast majority of people who have a modest grasp of the English language. : : Had I known this at the outset, I would not have wasted two years here, and certainly would not have been a member. : Is the AUC responsible for your poor understanding of plainly stated English words? I think not. : : It is strange to me that I state a belief in "God", and that I am roasted because that conception, which I chose to share, does not comply with the official dictionary definition of "God" as required by the AUC. : You were hardly "roasted" I just calmly and rationally pointed out that your in quotation marks "God" did not seem to jive with the traditional and dictionary defined meaning of the word God. : : If this sort of response is what sharing such personal ideas with you people results in, then it appears that you are as dogmatic as fundamentalist Christians and Mozlems. : I could have sworn that my simple and straightforward use of logic in calmly and rationally questioning the meaning of your in quotation marks "God" was entirely in line with the Unitarian tradition which calls upon Unitarians to subject religious beliefs to the scrutiny of Reason. : : I will not be back here to bother you people again. I *WILL* make known however to others on-line (and elsewhere) in the very strongest terms my individual experiences with the AUC, and its narrow and judgmental views in regard others' conceptions of what is (or is not) "God." : In that bona fide monotheistic Unitarians only believe in One God the AUC has little choice but to be somewhat "narrow" in what it defines as being God. From the very beginning it has always been clear that the AUC, and most if not all of its members, believe in God very much in the traditional dictionary defined sense of the word God even if the AUC understands that the presence (dare I say reality?) of this One God is known to humanity in a myriad of ways. : : Again, I emphasize, Dean and company need to make CLEAR to newcomers that "myriad" of ways in which "God" is manifested is confined to that "myriad" as contained, according to Mr. Edgar, in the dictionary, and that other conceptions are not acceptable, or even viewed as depictions of "God." : First of all let me re-emphasize that I do not speak for the AUC as an official spokesperson in an elected leadership position so it is an error for you to represent my personal opinions expressed here as official AUC policy. Secondly please note that the first principle of the AUC doesn't say anything about a "myriad" of ways in which "God" is manifested and it most certainly doesn't say anything about the word God being interpreted in a "myriad" of ways as you seem to think that it does or that it should... : : : Gail, I would like to thank you for your post about how the AUC accepts broad conceptions of God, and your example of polytheism. : As Gail has pointed out she never said anything about polytheism. This is the AUC not the APC... Gail spoke about pantheism which she may be confusing with panentheism. This web site explains the difference - : http://websyte.com/alan/pan.htm : : Unfortunately, your co-members disagree in terms of what *I* may have as a belief system, and this has been made crystal clear. Thus, it is blatantly apparent that unless *my* "God" is also the same as the "dictionary definition" of "God", that *I* am not welcome here, and that such conceptions of "God" as may be different are not conceptions of "God" at all. It has also been made clear that freethought is viewed as an elistist sort of thing, and that is not acceptable to me either. : Once again you are misrepresenting what people actually said.

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: