Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!


  1. Nov 12, 2003 #1
    back in history we choose the word "GOD". why? and what made us choose this word any connect it with "a power that knows everthign ,see's everything and created everything?" , why did'nt we choose a word like "tick or butterface?" and this brings another question why?
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 12, 2003 #2
    Thats a similar question as asking why the sky blue, why not any word it all would descrbe the same thing. Thats why I ask the question is it blue, is it the sky, is It? Do we really no what the sky is? Yes we can describe the sky based on other descriptions of functions that affect it. Do we know it though?
  4. Nov 12, 2003 #3
    No it isn't that simple. If you have watched Indiana Jones you know that the hebraice (how do you spell that ?) is Jewa. Which means something like Father of "Please-Look-Up-In-Your-Bible". Then we translated it into other languages........................

    hmmm..........not very good explanation

    Well the best answer is always: BECAUSE

  5. Nov 12, 2003 #4
    you may not be aware but GOD is represented by different words in different languages....:smile:
    or is this a specific english language thread?
  6. Nov 12, 2003 #5
    There's no way you can convince one who was born color blind that the sky is blue.
  7. Nov 13, 2003 #6
    the devil in the works

    just to move the point along , when the word GOD was choosen , what about Devil or evil again some one chose that and some one had linked it to doing bad things (that is a matter of what point of view you are seening from) but all these questions can there every be a straight answer?
  8. Nov 13, 2003 #7
    Here's one. "Divine insperation"

  9. Nov 13, 2003 #8
    Of course you can! Even someone who is blind!
  10. Nov 13, 2003 #9
    The original term in Hebrew was 'El' with the plural 'Elohim' - yes plural because the early Hebrews were polytheists, which is why Yahweh refers to 'himself' in Genesis as 'we' and 'us'.

    I'm not sure but I think 'god' has Germanic roots and similarly did not refer to a specific all-powerful being but to any deity.
  11. Nov 14, 2003 #10
    For the blind or color blind fellow to truly believe you is impossible. if they never even seen color or at all then how can you explain to them that nothing is something? Come up with that answer and you solve alot of physics problems.
  12. Nov 14, 2003 #11
    If they have never even seen a colour, how could they possibly contradict you (or hold a contrary opinion) when you told them the sky was blue? They would probably have to take your word for it, and unless they had reason to doubt your word, they would probably accept it and thus believe that they sky is blue. You don't have to experience something directly to believe it. I've never seen an atom, but I believe they exist.
  13. Nov 14, 2003 #12

    Another God

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    This question is either confused in itself, or it is just confusing.

    You are either asking a question on the origin of words, or you are asking a question about how meaning and conceptual linking of words occurs.

    In the first instance, the origin of words can fairly safely be assumed to be a long winded gradual evolution of sounds that have come to our modern word. AS such, it is also undoubtable that this evolution will continue and these words will be different in the future. All that matters in any case is that everyone in any given society agrees that 'sound X' means the same thing. In this case the sound of someone saying 'God' has been connected to the idea of an unknown creating figure.

    In the second instance, the concept would have existed in themind before the word/noise was created for it. For instance, take an easier example, the original word for tree would have been created when a tribe agreed upon a sound that indicated 'This thing that i am pointing to right now which is tall with leaves and stuff'. Point to a tree, make noise, repeat until everyone gets it. The concept exists in the mind because of our interaction with it (whether that be on a physical level, or on an intellectual level), the need to ascribe a noise to that concept only arises because we want other people to know of our thoughts.

    Does this help at all?
  14. Nov 14, 2003 #13
    Maybe God just told us his name, translated it into several different languages and that was that.:wink:
  15. Nov 15, 2003 #14
    but taking ones word and experincing it for your self has a big differnce. Same goes to one who has never seen a god. yet there is no absolute truth to a gos existing. And if someone esle tells the blind man that the sky is green then who is he to believe? then he ask someone esle what color is the sky and he says it gray. sure eventually he would get the point when most people answer blue like how you get the point when scientist report atoms as true. What good would his beliefs be when he is asked to press the blue button? He would have to accept life without color and see things for what they are to him and not others. Living life with out color should mean you can not truely believe the sky is blue or the button is blue. Hence i use the word truely believe because you can somewhat believe the sky is blue but when it comes down to it you don't know what the hell their talking about when they say the sky is blue.
  16. Nov 15, 2003 #15

    You don't have to have direct sensory experience of something to believe it. I've never been to New York, but I believe it exists. The alternative would beg too many questions - a worldwide conspiracy to convince me that a city exists - come on! Most of our beliefs are culturally and socially introduced, not personally experienced.

    Furthermore, just because you experience something directly doesn't mean you experience it as it really is. I look up at the sky and I 'see that it is blue', but that doesn't mean that the sky in-itself, is blue. In fact, the sky is not blue, it just has an average wavelength of visible light in an area of the spectrum that our retinas and CNS represent in a particular way, which we refer to as 'blue'. The world in-itself has no colour.

    Similarly, just because I might have a 'feeling of God' does not mean that the real cause of my feeling was 'God' or that the god is something that exists beyond my own mind. Things are not always as they seem - this is why the human race has developed ways to reduce observer bias and test the nature of things.
  17. Nov 15, 2003 #16
    I see said the blind man.

    Well you speak of belief and i speak of absolute belief. Both explanations are totally different so i assume we see things the same way but misunderstood our explanations. Like how belief in New York is with me too. But i can not absolutely believe it because even if it seems impossible that the world conspires against you it is still a possibility.
  18. Nov 15, 2003 #17
    Is there anything you can absolutely believe? The age-old philosophical question.

    And there is a difference between belief and knowledge.

    My point was that direct experience does not lead to necessarily justify belief - this is the difference between belief anf knowledge -knowledge is true whereas belief just refers to a mental state.

    But this is going off at 90 degrees from the original topic of this thread.
  19. Nov 15, 2003 #18
    I can absolutely believe that anything is possible.
  20. Nov 15, 2003 #19

    Another God

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    OK, lets say you can absolutely beleive anything you want, but can anyone absolutely believe anything which is also actually true?

    Thats what he really wants to know.

    (Because 'anything being possible' is not absolutely true.)
  21. Nov 16, 2003 #20
    I didn't say i believe anything i want. Anything is possible is not only a good thing but also bad. Anything is possible can mean mass death, plagues, war, every ones right thumb disappearing etc.. etc..

    So if anything is possible so is absolutely believing something that is actually true. But what I'm saying is that absolute belief in something is bias. I like to believe things on two terms, both views. Because their would be an infinite reasons why that belief could cease to exist and another infinite reasons why it should stick. So you see my friend believing in something is like cutting that idea in half. You don't get the whole. You can keep cutting and cutting and hope to see the answer like how most people are trying to do when seeking meaning or answers. But unless you decide that all right is right and wrong is right and right is wrong and wrong is wrong then you got yourself a headache but you also got an answer.
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2003
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?

Similar Discussions: Gods
  1. IF God (Replies: 41)

  2. God ! (Replies: 2)

  3. Why not God? (Replies: 97)

  4. Who is god? (Replies: 14)