Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
As a premise i will call "God" the Judeo-christian God that most Christians believe in. I will also take the approach of God as what some Christians (and by that i mean fundies) i encountered use, which is that Creation is true, and Jesus was his Son.
Any time you talk to a theist about God, they will systematically say the same thing: God has higher means than us, and we cannot understand his nature. But the thing is that it is God himself who said that he had higher means. So why do they believe in it ? What evidence do they have that suggests God, if he exists, has higher means than humans ?
Now my question is: how do they know it is true ? If i told someone i was the greatest genius that ever was, they would consider my nature, my actions, and then decide if my claims were true.
Points in favor of God being superior are that he has supernatural powers, that he can perform miracles. These are valid points, if you accept the existence of supernatural phenomenons, as to God having more than human attributes.
However in the Bible itself, there is evidence suggesting that God, in fact, does not have higher ways than us, and may well be either a malevolent being, or a human-like being.
-He is always said to be all-loving and forgiving. This would mean that he feels at least some human emotions.
-He created man "in his image and likeness". If "image" means appearance, then, to me, "likeness" means the intelligence and emotions that men have, like anger, jealousy, but also kindness and compassion.
-He regretted making man, so he created the Flood. This means that he can feel regret (a "bad" emotion) and can make mistakes (making him fallible)
-The 10 Commandments start by statements that he is to be followed at all times. He is clearly a jealous God.
-The Bible says that he does not simply say "believe in me and you will be saved", he says "if you do not believe in me, you will burn in Hell". This means he is a cruel God, with unjust sentences.
-He is capable of lying: he told Adam and Eve that they would die should they eat the forbidden fruit. Although this has been said by theists that they mean a "spiritual death", he still did not tell them the truth about what would happen if they ate the fruit. He also lied to Abraham when he told him he had to sacrifice his son to him. Even though he did not mean it, it does show that he is capable of lying, a quality shared with humans.
-If he is all-loving, would he not do anything do prevent his beloved children from going to Hell ? The only response is that he is testing us, and has a higher plan, which brings this following question:
-If he knows everything, why would he need to test us ? Should he not know what will happen ? And if he does, and knows the person will be sent to Hell, he is not all-loving.
-His "creation" is not perfect. for example, our eyes fail many of us, forcing us to wear glasses, or even be blind. Some of us are born with genetic deficiencies, some die seconds after they are born. Species of animals and plants disappear every year without any intervention from man, meaning that not only man, but all of life, is not perfect.
As a conclusion, i can say that if the God of the Bible is real (which i highly doubt), believing he is all-loving and cannot be comprehended is something that only relies on His own words, which are shown to sometimes be lies. As such, if he exists, he is no better morally than any of us.
So God is not understandable because he says he is LOL
Humans had to work out what God is. Start from anywhere and you pretty quickly come to the conclusion that you can't know everything. God, to be God, has to be bigger. As humans we are only able to think of God in human terms. God is bigger than that of course, so we think we can give him some of our attributes that we could see fitting with a divine nature.
God can't lie. It isn't in our logical construct of him. & we can know for sure that our logical construct of 'God' is perfect. If it isn't, we need to improve it.
God makes perfect sense or humans are unable to make sense.
If you think the best efforts of humans to make sense = make believe, then that describes your own position on human ability. Personally I believe what I reason to be
(June 10, 2010 at 7:40 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: So God is not understandable because he says he is LOL
Humans had to work out what God is. Start from anywhere and you pretty quickly come to the conclusion that you can't know everything. God, to be God, has to be bigger. As humans we are only able to think of God in human terms. God is bigger than that of course, so we think we can give him some of our attributes that we could see fitting with a divine nature.
God can't lie. It isn't in our logical construct of him. & we can know for sure that our logical construct of 'God' is perfect. If it isn't, we need to improve it.
Yes but you just admitted that our understanding of God has to be a man-made construction. So...if what we know about God is made by man, including his love for humanity, then how do you know anything about God ? Answer, you don't so basically there is no evidence for that "being" outside of what man created...and if so, how do you know there is such a thing ?
You can't know, otherwise it would defeat the human logic of the God concept.
Only humans could ever communicate to other humans what they worked out about God right? This doesn't mean that men made God. It just means men worked out what God is.
June 10, 2010 at 8:09 pm (This post was last modified: June 10, 2010 at 8:09 pm by Paul the Human.)
Yes. You are correct. Then, as time went by, men learned more and more about the natural world. They learned more and more explanations that were not 'god', after all. And now, in this day and age, there is very little left that needs 'god' as an explanation. We have come a long way since 'working out what god is'.
Completely the opposite. God was and is a pure concept. Fools came along thinking that science offered the same explanations when in reality it was a different subject. some people still hold on to such stupid notions. Only idiots replace God with Science, and vice versa.
As a premise i will call "God" the Judeo-christian God that most Christians believe in. I will also take the approach of God as what some Christians (and by that i mean fundies) i encountered use, which is that Creation is true, and Jesus was his Son.
Any time you talk to a theist about God, they will systematically say the same thing: God has higher means than us, and we cannot understand his nature. But the thing is that it is God himself who said that he had higher means. So why do they believe in it ? What evidence do they have that suggests God, if he exists, has higher means than humans ?
Now my question is: how do they know it is true ? If i told someone i was the greatest genius that ever was, they would consider my nature, my actions, and then decide if my claims were true.
Points in favor of God being superior are that he has supernatural powers, that he can perform miracles. These are valid points, if you accept the existence of supernatural phenomenons, as to God having more than human attributes.
However in the Bible itself, there is evidence suggesting that God, in fact, does not have higher ways than us, and may well be either a malevolent being, or a human-like being.
-He is always said to be all-loving and forgiving. This would mean that he feels at least some human emotions.
-He created man "in his image and likeness". If "image" means appearance, then, to me, "likeness" means the intelligence and emotions that men have, like anger, jealousy, but also kindness and compassion.
-He regretted making man, so he created the Flood. This means that he can feel regret (a "bad" emotion) and can make mistakes (making him fallible)
-The 10 Commandments start by statements that he is to be followed at all times. He is clearly a jealous God.
-The Bible says that he does not simply say "believe in me and you will be saved", he says "if you do not believe in me, you will burn in Hell". This means he is a cruel God, with unjust sentences.
-He is capable of lying: he told Adam and Eve that they would die should they eat the forbidden fruit. Although this has been said by theists that they mean a "spiritual death", he still did not tell them the truth about what would happen if they ate the fruit. He also lied to Abraham when he told him he had to sacrifice his son to him. Even though he did not mean it, it does show that he is capable of lying, a quality shared with humans.
-If he is all-loving, would he not do anything do prevent his beloved children from going to Hell ? The only response is that he is testing us, and has a higher plan, which brings this following question:
-If he knows everything, why would he need to test us ? Should he not know what will happen ? And if he does, and knows the person will be sent to Hell, he is not all-loving.
-His "creation" is not perfect. for example, our eyes fail many of us, forcing us to wear glasses, or even be blind. Some of us are born with genetic deficiencies, some die seconds after they are born. Species of animals and plants disappear every year without any intervention from man, meaning that not only man, but all of life, is not perfect.
As a conclusion, i can say that if the God of the Bible is real (which i highly doubt), believing he is all-loving and cannot be comprehended is something that only relies on His own words, which are shown to sometimes be lies. As such, if he exists, he is no better morally than any of us.
I have to say I understand Fr0d0's perspective and completely agree (no big surprise there hunh , I just wouldn't use the word idiots).
@ Rwandall- God can be both known and unknown. Let me try and explain that:
Take things back to Newton and Galileo. He saw that something made things fall and called that gravity. No one knew exactly why that force happened or how to measure it. We as humans saw something identified it, attempted to define it and then sought the why. Gravity was therefore known to exist (observe and identify) but the concept was incomplete from that perspective and aspects or reasons why were unknown (define). Then as other general knowledge and measuring systems like mathmatics developed, we had general relativity. Now from the modern perspective we understand even more about gravity (vis. quantum gravity and the M-theory), but it still doesn't exactly explain 100% of everything. Do we say we know nothing about gravity? No we say our concept isn't complete, but we have a working model. The same applies to the Concept of God. While the theists concept of God is a work in progress and not complete, we have a working model. There may be disagreements as to certain aspects, in those instances simplification of definition is usually the easiest aproach. On to your actual points:
I agree with your point about considering nature, actions and then deciding if claims are true.
1 "-He is always said to be all-loving and forgiving. This would mean that he feels at least some human emotions"
He's also attributed with being vengeful, wrathful, jealous ,etc. They're all personifications and descriptors and not identifiers, I ignore them all. One of the other threads I went into more detail on this subject.
2-"He created man "in his image and likeness". If "image" means appearance, then, to me, "likeness" means the intelligence and emotions that men have, like anger, jealousy, but also kindness and compassion."
More personification. If we're to interpret image as anything impersonal, I'd say it refers to a will and consciousness and the abilities to decide and have cause and effects in this universe through actions.
3-"He regretted making man, so he created the Flood. This means that he can feel regret (a "bad" emotion) and can make mistakes (making him fallible)"
Regret is another personification, but I'll roll with it. I would say itt's not regret for his mistakes he
is percieved to punish us, more it's a sadness for our choice to disobey. Giving us the ability to decide and thus learn isn't a mistake, I think it's a key to his purpose for us.
4- Your comment on the 10 commandmesnt or any rules on the Bible being cause for jealous is another personification and actually quite silly. If someone said, "Hey, I want to give away 20 bucks to everyone. Come over here and form a single file line, no cutsys, and when you get to the front I'll give you a 20." God has set up some guidlines for us to get his reward. Not everyone's goning to get in line. Not everyone wants to wait in line. Not everyone cares about getting a 20. Is the person giving out 20's jealous that you notin his line? No his is the only line in town. He may be saddened that you're not going to getin line, but he won't force you.
5-As for lying, why would God need to lie, that's what he made Lucifer for. Theophanies (manifestations of God) were often accomplished through intermediary angels that spoke God's word in the first person. If God actually spoke I think the sky would explode, I don't remember the exact reference.
6-"If he is all-loving, would he not do anything do prevent his beloved children from going to Hell ? The only response is that he is testing us, and has a higher plan, which brings this following question"
No that's not the only response. He'd do anything except break free will. He's all-loving, but we have the choice to accept or reject that Love and therin is the basis for sin.
7-"If he knows everything, why would he need to test us ? Should he not know what will happen ? And if he does, and knows the person will be sent to Hell, he is not all-loving. "
Perhaps if he wanted perfect little automaton, we'd have no free will and know everything from birth and live forever? If we are to learn what is truly good and his will and differintiate that from what is bad or evil it would require diversity and free-will, and yes that could be considered a test, I'd consider it more of a learning curve though.
8-Perfection. I think we are all perfectly capable of making our own decisions in this life and then perfectly capable of iving with those consequences. One of the drawbacks to mortality if the body failing. One of the drawbacks to being addicted to crack is a dead baby. One of the drawbacks to trusting in our own meager abilities instead of God's Love is we have to struggle to survive.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
June 11, 2010 at 4:42 am (This post was last modified: June 11, 2010 at 4:43 am by Rwandrall.)
Quote:
I have to say I understand Fr0d0's perspective and completely agree (no big surprise there hunh , I just wouldn't use the word idiots).
@ Rwandall- God can be both known and unknown. Let me try and explain that:
Take things back to Newton and Galileo. He saw that something made things fall and called that gravity. No one knew exactly why that force happened or how to measure it. We as humans saw something identified it, attempted to define it and then sought the why. Gravity was therefore known to exist (observe and identify) but the concept was incomplete from that perspective and aspects or reasons why were unknown (define). Then as other general knowledge and measuring systems like mathmatics developed, we had general relativity. Now from the modern perspective we understand even more about gravity (vis. quantum gravity and the M-theory), but it still doesn't exactly explain 100% of everything. Do we say we know nothing about gravity? No we say our concept isn't complete, but we have a working model. The same applies to the Concept of God. While the theists concept of God is a work in progress and not complete, we have a working model. There may be disagreements as to certain aspects, in those instances simplification of definition is usually the easiest aproach. On to your actual points:
I agree with your point about considering nature, actions and then deciding if claims are true.
1 "-He is always said to be all-loving and forgiving. This would mean that he feels at least some human emotions"
He's also attributed with being vengeful, wrathful, jealous ,etc. They're all personifications and descriptors and not identifiers, I ignore them all. One of the other threads I went into more detail on this subject.
2-"He created man "in his image and likeness". If "image" means appearance, then, to me, "likeness" means the intelligence and emotions that men have, like anger, jealousy, but also kindness and compassion."
More personification. If we're to interpret image as anything impersonal, I'd say it refers to a will and consciousness and the abilities to decide and have cause and effects in this universe through actions.
3-"He regretted making man, so he created the Flood. This means that he can feel regret (a "bad" emotion) and can make mistakes (making him fallible)"
Regret is another personification, but I'll roll with it. I would say itt's not regret for his mistakes he
is percieved to punish us, more it's a sadness for our choice to disobey. Giving us the ability to decide and thus learn isn't a mistake, I think it's a key to his purpose for us.
4- Your comment on the 10 commandmesnt or any rules on the Bible being cause for jealous is another personification and actually quite silly. If someone said, "Hey, I want to give away 20 bucks to everyone. Come over here and form a single file line, no cutsys, and when you get to the front I'll give you a 20." God has set up some guidlines for us to get his reward. Not everyone's goning to get in line. Not everyone wants to wait in line. Not everyone cares about getting a 20. Is the person giving out 20's jealous that you notin his line? No his is the only line in town. He may be saddened that you're not going to getin line, but he won't force you.
5-As for lying, why would God need to lie, that's what he made Lucifer for. Theophanies (manifestations of God) were often accomplished through intermediary angels that spoke God's word in the first person. If God actually spoke I think the sky would explode, I don't remember the exact reference.
6-"If he is all-loving, would he not do anything do prevent his beloved children from going to Hell ? The only response is that he is testing us, and has a higher plan, which brings this following question"
No that's not the only response. He'd do anything except break free will. He's all-loving, but we have the choice to accept or reject that Love and therin is the basis for sin.
7-"If he knows everything, why would he need to test us ? Should he not know what will happen ? And if he does, and knows the person will be sent to Hell, he is not all-loving. "
Perhaps if he wanted perfect little automaton, we'd have no free will and know everything from birth and live forever? If we are to learn what is truly good and his will and differintiate that from what is bad or evil it would require diversity and free-will, and yes that could be considered a test, I'd consider it more of a learning curve though.
8-Perfection. I think we are all perfectly capable of making our own decisions in this life and then perfectly capable of iving with those consequences. One of the drawbacks to mortality if the body failing. One of the drawbacks to being addicted to crack is a dead baby. One of the drawbacks to trusting in our own meager abilities instead of God's Love is we have to struggle to survive.
The personifications are exactly my point: the God humans made is to their image, reflecting another "bigger" concept. But that concept has not, in fact, been refined over the years. We do not have a better understanding of the concept of God than we had 2000 years ago. Just an unknown "energy" that controls everything, that i have no reason to believe exists.
And if you agree that the God of the Bible's "human emotions" are a man-made construct, isn't his Love for humanity also man-made ?
This "free will" argument is also the one that has been brought up frequently by theists when i argued with them. However although we do have a choice, God, as an omniscient being, knows what the outcome of that choice will be, since he knows everything that will happen. There is no free will as far as an omniscient being is concerned.
so basically there is no evidence for that "being" outside of what man created...and if so, how do you know there is such a thing ?
