Religious Exclamations

[The Magic Pudding]

A swear word has to sound and feel good when uttered in extremus.
A god to be successful needs a name that can be shouted in appeal.
So I think a god's name is likely to make a good profanity.
Ah Vishnu, I've burnt the toast!

[AnimatedDirt]

A swear word has to sound and feel good when uttered in extremus.
A god to be successful needs a name that can be shouted in appeal.
So I think a god's name is likely to make a good profanity.
Ah Vishnu, I've burnt the toast!

Another Atheist that appeals to a god to make "good profanity".

The humorous thing to me is that  using "God damn it/you", "Oh God", "Jesus Christ", "Christ Almighty"...and the like, is an appeal to the Christian God...the very one most Atheists are against and abhor the most.

[Davin]

I asked you what kind of power you were talking about, to which you asked me to tell you. So I told you what kind of power you were talking about. I'm sure you get it by now. It was a humorous attempt to show how you avoided the question and continue to avoid the question.

The OP is not directed at the Theist...it's directed at the Atheist.  I already told you why ME using these curses is more appropriate as I believe in God.  *You don't.  So...the question remains.

I'm not the OP. Conversations would be way too limited if they were restricted to only the OP. This is a public board. I'm remaining on topic. You're avoiding answering a question. Just say you don't want to answer it or that you can't answer it, but just avoiding it is useless.

"Unicorn damn you" and "god damn you" are equal statements in that both a unicorn and a god do not exist.

I agree...from the Atheist point of view.  THE QUESTION THEN REMAINS, why does the Atheist continue to use "God" instead of employing something with more logical meaning to the Atheist?

Exclamations are emotional. And to answer your question again, so that the question no longer remains: They're just words, there is no reason to restrict ones exclamations to everything but god just because one is an atheist, theists certainly don't make only religious exclamations.

No, that is my question to you. You've yet to answer the question.

And just above, I've given the answer for at least the third time.
Now it's your turn to answer WHAT "God" does to qualify the curse(s)?  What power is there in the word, "God" that makes it more meaningful to the Atheist in that he/she continues to invoke power to something non-existent??
My answer:
[spoiler:38z4893j]I believe in God.
Make that 4 times I've answered.[/spoiler:38z4893j]

The power that you're talking about that is given when someone uses religious exclamations is: "I believe in God."

Do you see how that makes no sense? That is not an answer to the question. That's like:

Q) Hey, how long until dinner is ready?
A) Tomato juice.

[AnimatedDirt]

The power that you're talking about that is given when someone uses religious exclamations is: "I believe in God."

Do you see how that makes no sense? That is not an answer to the question. That's like:

Q) Hey, how long until dinner is ready?
A) Tomato juice.

WHAT IS YOUR QUESTION?

[Davin]

WHAT IS YOUR QUESTION?

You stated:

The point being that to use these words as exclamations, as curses, as swear...is to give these words/names power.

What kind of power are you talking about?

I thought it would have been clear by now, since I've asked the question since you stated that on page 1.

[AnimatedDirt]

The point being that to use these words as exclamations, as curses, as swear...is to give these words/names power.

What kind of power are you talking about?

I thought it would have been clear by now, since I've asked the question since you stated that on page 1.

Ok...here is the answer YET AGAIN (5th time).  I THOUGHT it was clear by now after repeating myself almost a half-dozen times.

As a Christian, it is clear I believe in God, SO to use these curses/exclamations is LOGICALLY CORRECT from the standpoint of belief IN God.  What "power"?... is of no consequence in the grand scheme of the question...but to be specific on one curse, "God damn you/it", it is specifically the power to damn (see Damnation).

So in contrast, and as I've questioned throughout this thread, WHAT power is it that the Atheist invokes in using these curses/exclamations?  It has already been established that "God" gives more "oomph" and that even if the Atheist replaces "God", then he/she does so with another god.  WHY?  If "God" does not exist, why doesn't a rational, free thinking, logically-minded, superior in thought, philosophy, science,...much more intelligent mind shed this primitive thinking already, once and for all, like he/she did with the notion of "God" and/or religion?  If the Atheist is able to shed the blinders of Christianity and ultimately the belief in the Abrahamic God by intelligence superior to that of the believing man...why do *you invoke God's power (the Abrahamic God) to qualify *your speech, *your curses, *your exclamations of amazement, wonder, anger, happiness...?

Did you get the answer this time?

[Davin]

The point being that to use these words as exclamations, as curses, as swear...is to give these words/names power.

What kind of power are you talking about?

I thought it would have been clear by now, since I've asked the question since you stated that on page 1.

Ok...here is the answer YET AGAIN (5th time).  I THOUGHT it was clear by now after repeating myself almost a half-dozen times.

As a Christian, it is clear I believe in God, SO to use these curses/exclamations is LOGICALLY CORRECT from the standpoint of belief IN God.  What "power"?... is of no consequence in the grand scheme of the question...but to be specific on one curse, "God damn you/it", it is specifically the power to damn (see Damnation).

Being that no one gets damned, I'd think you see that there is no damnation power in the words. So against your original statement, using the words does not give them power, they'd only have power if god were real and the person making the exclamation believed in the god. Even if this god were real, it seems that it going around damning everything people commanded it to, goes against the concept. Which still means that saying "god damn you" has no power. That is unless you think that this god is to serve at mans request.

This however does not answer what kind of power an atheist gives the words by using them as exclamations.

So in contrast, and as I've questioned throughout this thread, WHAT power is it that the Atheist invokes in using these curses/exclamations?

As I have answered throughout this thread: I just don't limit my exclamations by excluding all religious terms. It's that simple. Jesus means no more to me than Sekhmet. Pretas has no more meaning to me than elves. God is equal to dancing waffles. They're all not real, they're all fair game, they're all powerless words.

It has already been established that "God" gives more "oomph" and that even if the Atheist replaces "God", then he/she does so with another god.

Established by whom? Not by me. Even if I were to accept an opinion presented by someone else, as far as I've seen, the "oomph" is no different than "fuck", "shit", "bitch", etc... So if you're going to use that as your "established" point, you must take the whole thing, not just the bit of it you like. Which means it was equally "established" that god means no more than "fuck", "shit", "bitch", etc...

WHY?  If "God" does not exist, why doesn't a rational, free thinking, logically-minded, superior in thought, philosophy, science,...much more intelligent mind shed this primitive thinking already, once and for all, like he/she did with the notion of "God" and/or religion?

Why should anyone treat this notion of "god" and/or religion any more special than any other mythology or just any other words? I see no reason to give religious exclamations any special consideration either for using them or against using them.

If the Atheist is able to shed the blinders of Christianity and ultimately the belief in the Abrahamic God by intelligence superior to that of the believing man...why do *you invoke God's power (the Abrahamic God) to qualify *your speech, *your curses, *your exclamations of amazement, wonder, anger, happiness...?

Putting aside your snide remarks, there is no invoking of power going on. If I say "Jesus slap this goat!", the goat is not going to be slapped by Jesus, showing there is no power in the words. Power in the words would mean that the words would be able to do something, like a spell. Of course nothing happens no matter how much I say things, thus demonstrating the absence of power in the words.

I'm not sure how I can be more clear. An atheist using religious exclamations are invoking nothing. It appears that you're implying that by me saying "god damn it" that I'm some how thinking that a god is actually going to damn it. Nothing can be further from reality. Those are just words with no more power than any other words. I've said several times that there is no power in them and that there is no invocation going on. The reason why I use the words is because I don't exclude things from my vernacular. I don't put any extra effort into selecting religious terms and I don't put any extra effort into not using them. They get no special consideration from me, because to me, they are not special. If I went out of my way to avoid using the terms, that would mean that I consider the words special in some way because I would be giving them consideration that I don't give other words. I use religious exclamations the same way I use non-religious exclamations, there is no difference to me which word(s) I select.

Did you get the answer this time?

This time being the first time you've answered the question? Yes.

[AnimatedDirt]

Being that no one gets damned, I'd think you see that there is no damnation power in the words.

And your absolute proof against this is...?  Likewise, you would say I have no absolute proof of God.  So we stand on equal ground.  Your claim is that God is equal to, "Sekhmet, Pretas,...[and] elves" YET you don't employ the use of THESE words to dignify or establish meaning behind such exclamations.  In fact, you're arguing TO use them...odd isn't it considering your world view.?

So against your original statement, using the words does not give them power, they'd only have power if god were real and the person making the exclamation believed in the god.

Again...says the Atheist with no absolute proof.

Even if this god were real, it seems that it going around damning everything people commanded it to, goes against the concept. Which still means that saying "god damn you" has no power. That is unless you think that this god is to serve at mans request.

You're right.  God does not damn everything His created wishes be damned.  The POWER is in that God (if he exists as you even admit to not being sure) does have the power to do so if His will deems it.

This however does not answer what kind of power an atheist gives the words by using them as exclamations.

I think you've answered very well and have established the power an Atheist directly OR indirectly invokes in using such exclamations.

As I have answered throughout this thread: I just don't limit my exclamations by excluding all religious terms.

Yet *you've been intelligent enough to deem God and/or religion "of the delusional"?

It's that simple. Jesus means no more to me than Sekhmet. Pretas has no more meaning to me than elves. God is equal to dancing waffles. They're all not real, they're all fair game, they're all powerless words.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating.  You say one thing, but do the opposite.

Established by whom? Not by me. Even if I were to accept an opinion presented by someone else, as far as I've seen, the "oomph" is no different than "fuck", "shit", "bitch", etc... So if you're going to use that as your "established" point, you must take the whole thing, not just the bit of it you like. Which means it was equally "established" that god means no more than "fuck", "shit", "bitch", etc...

You're quite right again, but only if the exclamations are limited to those and God isn't invoked.  This, however, is not true.

Why should anyone treat this notion of "god" and/or religion any more special than any other mythology or just any other words? I see no reason to give religious exclamations any special consideration either for using them or against using them.

Do you see reason to give God any special consideration?  The fact is that you do so by the continued use, and worse, the arguing TO CONTINUE to invoke a non-existent God's non-existent power.  Be it to damn, or by name to exclaim importance.

Putting aside your snide remarks, there is no invoking of power going on.

So YOU say.  The fact that you don't use "Sekhmet, Pretas,...[and] elves" to make exclamations but instead INSIST on the Christian God to do the "work" instead is proof you do invoke His power.  Snide remarks?  Apparently you deny all the times on this forum that Atheists claim superior thinking skills, free thinking?  Heck Stevil in this post suggests we (Christians) don't think for ourselves.  Snide remarks?  Simply stating the truth as evidenced by the majority on this forum.

If I say "Jesus slap this goat!", the goat is not going to be slapped by Jesus, showing there is no power in the words. Power in the words would mean that the words would be able to do something, like a spell. Of course nothing happens no matter how much I say things, thus demonstrating the absence of power in the words.

It's not in the literal actions that the power lies, but in the potential action that the power lies.  God (if He exists) can slap the goat.  Will He is a different question all together.

I'm not sure how I can be more clear. An atheist using religious exclamations are invoking nothing.

Contrary to your disagreement, we've established by many more Atheists that have added to this discussion that they do, by substituting "God" for another "god" when they don't believe in either.

It appears that you're implying that by me saying "god damn it" that I'm some how thinking that a god is actually going to damn it. Nothing can be further from reality.

We agree!  But then that is not the point.  The point is that the person uttering these curses/exclamations is uttering a curse hoping/wishing that they be damned.

Those are just words with no more power than any other words. I've said several times that there is no power in them and that there is no invocation going on. The reason why I use the words is because I don't exclude things from my vernacular. I don't put any extra effort into selecting religious terms and I don't put any extra effort into not using them.

You do exclude religion in practice, don't you?  You do convey on the believer that he/she must be deluded, or brainwashed, don't *you?  I know *you do...simply read the Troll thread.

They get no special consideration from me, because to me, they are not special.

Prove this by selecting among the many other "god" available...even the ones made up to ridicule the believer!

If I went out of my way to avoid using the terms, that would mean that I consider the words special in some way because I would be giving them consideration that I don't give other words. I use religious exclamations the same way I use non-religious exclamations, there is no difference to me which word(s) I select.

I disagree.  You avoid religion and its beliefs.  By your own words, you do so because you do consider it special in some way?
And we're back at square one.  Why not do as you do in religious practice?  Avoid religious practice.  Your practice is inconsistent and illogical based on your beliefs (non) and standing.

This time being the first time you've answered the question? Yes.

Several times.  Read back.

[Davin]

Being that no one gets damned, I'd think you see that there is no damnation power in the words.

And your absolute proof against this is...?  Likewise, you would say I have no absolute proof of God.  So we stand on equal ground.  Your claim is that God is equal to, "Sekhmet, Pretas,...[and] elves" YET you don't employ the use of THESE words to dignify or establish meaning behind such exclamations.  In fact, you're arguing TO use them...odd isn't it considering your world view.?

Again...says the Atheist with no absolute proof.

I don't need any more proof for this claim than I need for my claim that things do not fly away from the earth without being propelled. If you think that I'm arguing for using the words, then you're not really seeing my point. My point is that the words are no more significant that any other choice of words. Neither for choosing to use them or choosing not to use them.

You're right.  God does not damn everything His created wishes be damned.  The POWER is in that God (if he exists as you even admit to not being sure) does have the power to do so if His will deems it.

Exactly my point, there is no power in the words even if there were a god.

I think you've answered very well and have established the power an Atheist directly OR indirectly invokes in using such exclamations.

So do I; that there is no power in them.

Yet *you've been intelligent enough to deem God and/or religion "of the delusional"?

I have not, do not attribute the words of someone else to me.

Established by whom? Not by me. Even if I were to accept an opinion presented by someone else, as far as I've seen, the "oomph" is no different than "fuck", "shit", "bitch", etc... So if you're going to use that as your "established" point, you must take the whole thing, not just the bit of it you like. Which means it was equally "established" that god means no more than "fuck", "shit", "bitch", etc...

You're quite right again, but only if the exclamations are limited to those and God isn't invoked.  This, however, is not true.

You can't say I'm right when saying that "god" has an equal "oomph" to "fuck", "shit" and "bitch" then say that it is only so if "god" is not said. This is a contradiction: either they are equal or they are not.

Do you see reason to give God any special consideration?  The fact is that you do so by the continued use, and worse, the arguing TO CONTINUE to invoke a non-existent God's non-existent power.  Be it to damn, or by name to exclaim importance.

No, I do not see any reason to give any god or any religious terms special consideration over any other words or terms.

So YOU say.  The fact that you don't use "Sekhmet, Pretas,...[and] elves" to make exclamations but instead INSIST on the Christian God to do the "work" instead is proof you do invoke His power.

The fact is that I do use Sekhmet, Pretas, elves, Santa Claus, Kevin Bacon, Tom York, b.b. gun, aardvark, Kirk Hammett, sandwich and any other seemingly random concept that pops into my head at the time I'm going to use an exclamation. The point I'm making is that I don't use religious exclamations exclusively, nor even as a majority of my exclamations.

Snide remarks?  Apparently you deny all the times on this forum that Atheists claim superior thinking skills, free thinking?  Heck Stevil in this post suggests we (Christians) don't think for ourselves.  Snide remarks?  Simply stating the truth as evidenced by the majority on this forum.

I'm not here to defend any opinion, idea, concept or anything else that someone else brought up, only my own. If you want to discuss the ideals of other people, discuss it with them.

If I say "Jesus slap this goat!", the goat is not going to be slapped by Jesus, showing there is no power in the words. Power in the words would mean that the words would be able to do something, like a spell. Of course nothing happens no matter how much I say things, thus demonstrating the absence of power in the words.

It's not in the literal actions that the power lies, but in the potential action that the power lies.  God (if He exists) can slap the goat.  Will He is a different question all together.

Then there is no power in the statement. If the action doesn't rely on the statement, then the statement is useless. I'd bet $282,560,012 that even if all the people on earth said "Jesus slap this goat" a thousand times each, that the goat would not be slapped by Jesus. So where is the power in the words?

Contrary to your disagreement, we've established by many more Atheists that have added to this discussion that they do, by substituting "God" for another "god" when they don't believe in either.

Again, I'm not going to defend what anyone else said, only what I say.

It appears that you're implying that by me saying "god damn it" that I'm some how thinking that a god is actually going to damn it. Nothing can be further from reality.

We agree!  But then that is not the point.  The point is that the person uttering these curses/exclamations is uttering a curse hoping/wishing that they be damned.

I don't, I say it sometimes because it's funny, sometimes because not saying anything doesn't let others around me know that I am frustrated and sometimes because I feel like saying something seemingly random. Never because I actually want something damned. Most of the time I say "<whatever or excluded> damn you" in jest to family and friends.

Those are just words with no more power than any other words. I've said several times that there is no power in them and that there is no invocation going on. The reason why I use the words is because I don't exclude things from my vernacular. I don't put any extra effort into selecting religious terms and I don't put any extra effort into not using them.

You do exclude religion in practice, don't you?

In the same way I don't play the tuba in practice.

You do convey on the believer that he/she must be deluded, or brainwashed, don't *you?

No, I don't.

I know *you do...simply read the Troll thread.

You do not know I do because I've never said such a thing.

They get no special consideration from me, because to me, they are not special.

Prove this by selecting among the many other "god" available...even the ones made up to ridicule the believer!

And any other term/word.

If I went out of my way to avoid using the terms, that would mean that I consider the words special in some way because I would be giving them consideration that I don't give other words. I use religious exclamations the same way I use non-religious exclamations, there is no difference to me which word(s) I select.

I disagree.  You avoid religion and its beliefs.

In the same way I avoid modern country music.

By your own words, you do so because you do consider it special in some way?

No, I do not consider it in some special way. Those are my own words.

And we're back at square one.  Why not do as you do in religious practice?  Avoid religious practice.  Your practice is inconsistent and illogical based on your beliefs (non) and standing.

Demonstrate this. I do not go to churches because they do not offer anything I need/want. I don't avoid churches or religion, there is just no reason to go to them. I treat religion and churches the same way I treat everything else. I don't avoid religious practices, I just don't perform them.

This time being the first time you've answered the question? Yes.

Several times.  Read back.

I have read back, this was the first time you've answered my question. From the first time you avoided it, I had been making comments about you avoiding it, until you finally answered it.

[Whitney]

Is the growing length of this thread proof that swear words do have power?  

I can't remember if I ever responded but I don't use religious exclamations....it was almost not even a habit other than "oh god" and I think I have taken that one out of my vocabulary (don't remember using it recently) because 1) I reminds me of high school students 2) it doesn't make sense since I'm not trying to appeal to one

But I also try to generally avoid swear words and only save them when I need to add emphasis in the proper context...otherwise they lose their impact (that and those who swear all the time are perceived as being less intelligent and I prefer to be viewed as intelligent)

[Extropian]

When using a religious exclamation, the atheist is merely showing his unconcern with religious niceties and a patronising attitude toward the religious.

This, I thoroughly approve of.

Extropian

[The Magic Pudding]

A swear word has to sound and feel good when uttered in extremus.
A god to be successful needs a name that can be shouted in appeal.
So I think a god's name is likely to make a good profanity.
Ah Vishnu, I've burnt the toast!

Another Atheist that appeals to a god to make "good profanity".

The humorous thing to me is that  using "God damn it/you", "Oh God", "Jesus Christ", "Christ Almighty"...and the like, is an appeal to the Christian God...the very one most Atheists are against and abhor the most.

Ye right, and if I say "Stone the crows, the dingoes have eaten me didgeridoo" I'm literally calling for a culling of crows.
I'm not likely to have occasion to say that though.

[Extropian]

As for the odd atheist sending subliminal messages of faith when his curses call upon divine authority.............

In the past the first reaction of the theist has been, BLASPHEMY!.......followed closely by dire threats of fire and brimstone for one who used god's name in vain. Christian doctine now seems to be not only accommodating to this blasphemy but is contriving to brand it involuntary piety!

Which leads to the question; When the theist, confronted with a bunch of unruly kids chasing balls into his beautifully manicured broccoli patch, mutters through gritted teeth, "Jeeezus bloody christ!" and then bellows, "You kids get out of there, come on, no playing in the vegie garden."

................Is that blasphemy or is it involuntary piety?

Extropian

[terranus]

I would challenge that the word used in swearing doesn't matter, whether it's fuck, god or gosh. It's the intent that matters. Ever see one of those orbit gum commercials?

Words are just words. Their meanings change over time. Saying something with the intent of insulting someone or using a particular deity's name in vain doesn't. Intent remains the same.

[hismikeness]

...context...

...literally ...

...subliminal messages...

...intent...

Come one now... it seems none of those well reasoned points matter much, because this here argument (for the last 6 pages) has solely been about semantics.