Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why Would God Care?
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 181 of 217 (395935)
04-18-2007 1:10 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by Dan Carroll
04-18-2007 12:43 PM


Dan Carroll writes:
Saying that we care about our equals, and that God thinks in similar ways as us, does not suggest that God cares about his inferiors.
Nor does it suggest otherwise.
It's an extrapolation based on the principle of if-it-walks-like-a-duck-and-quacks-like-a-duck-there's-a-good-chance-it-tastes-like-a-duck. Humans have been doing that kind of "flawed" extrapolation since before they were human.
Occasionally, you get a poisonous duck. Usually not.
We're talking about the western God, here.
"The Western God™" is too broad a description for the narrow conclusions that you insist on.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-18-2007 12:43 PM Dan Carroll has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 183 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-18-2007 1:42 PM ringo has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 182 of 217 (395937)
04-18-2007 1:36 PM
Reply to: Message 180 by Archer Opteryx
04-18-2007 1:05 PM


Re: Knowing God
If we also postulate the existence of deity that is omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent--limitless in every conceivable way, in other words--then there is no logical problem in imagining that the active interest taken by the deity in creation would be likewise limitless.
Again, ability does not equal interest. As I said above, we are able to go step on anthills, but why would we?
Sure, God would have the ability to inspect every last nook and cranny of the universe; it doesn't suggest that he would do so.
I have shown you that in rejecting this idea you are asserting a limit on divine 'care,' not its absence as you said at first.
No, I'm asserting that God's total interest is not automatically suggested by the premise, as you say it is.
And if to comes out pirple or chartreuse or candy-cane striped, you will care very much about that, too.
This, like the later cancer cells, relies on situations in which I can be hurt by a lack of interest or caring on my part. God, as always, is omnipotent, and can not be hurt.
So as far as God's concerned, there are no purple shits, or cancerous cells. There's only a normal dump and harmless mold.
A deity that could bring a universe into being is under no compulsions of any sort, whether of a biological nature or any other kind, because it is under no imaginable constraints. All actions would be voluntary.
Even then, I might etch a drawing in the sand with my foot while waiting for the bus. It's voluntary, so clearly I want to make it, but there's no impetus to check up on it once it's there. In fact, more than likely, it'll be ruined by the next time I see it. But so what?
The fact of God's omnipotence goes both ways. If God can do anything without effort, then the act of creating the universe might well be of no more interest to him than shuffling his foot around in the sand, and making pretty patterns. Nice while he's doing it, but of no interest when it's done.
Why should the source of the universe bear much resemblance to us?
*shrugs*
No real reason. But if it doesn't, then any questioning of its desires is meaningless; we can't hope to understand them one way or the other.
Edited by Dan Carroll, : No reason given.

"I know some of you are going to say 'I did look it up, and that's not true.' That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut."
-Stephen Colbert

This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by Archer Opteryx, posted 04-18-2007 1:05 PM Archer Opteryx has not replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 183 of 217 (395939)
04-18-2007 1:42 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by ringo
04-18-2007 1:10 PM


Nor does it suggest otherwise.
Nor does it suggest that there are no invisible flying elves circling my desk at this moment.
It's an extrapolation based on the principle of if-it-walks-like-a-duck-and-quacks-like-a-duck-there's-a-good-chance-it-tastes-like-a-duck. Humans have been doing that kind of "flawed" extrapolation since before they were human.
But what you're doing with the humans:equals::God:inferiors extrapolation is saying if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, there's a good chance it tastes like chicken.
"The Western God™" is too broad a description for the narrow conclusions that you insist on.
Well, I really don't have time to define the western God for you today. If we can work under the assumption that you know the gist of what I mean, and we can hash out minor differences as they come up, great. If not, oh well.

"I know some of you are going to say 'I did look it up, and that's not true.' That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut."
-Stephen Colbert

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by ringo, posted 04-18-2007 1:10 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 184 by ringo, posted 04-18-2007 2:23 PM Dan Carroll has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 184 of 217 (395942)
04-18-2007 2:23 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by Dan Carroll
04-18-2007 1:42 PM


Dan Carroll writes:
Nor does it suggest that there are no invisible flying elves circling my desk at this moment.
Exactly. And if you had postulated invisible flying elves in the OP, I would hold you to that description. Based on the God described in the OP, it is quite reasonable to expect some degree of caring.
But what you're doing with the humans:equals::God:inferiors....
That whole equals/inferiors thing is irrelevant. We're dealing with the only information we have. You can't just willy-nilly assume that God is somehow "different" just because He's "superior".
And who's to say God considers us His "inferiors" anyway?
... if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, there's a good chance it tastes like chicken.
For most tasty purposes, the difference between a duck and a chicken is minimal.
I really don't have time to define the western God for you today.
Doesn't really matter, since we're not talking about The Western God™. We're talking about the God of the OP, and He's already defined.
If we can work under the assumption that you know the gist of what I mean....
It's hard to "know the gist of what you mean" when the gist of what you say has changed substantially in just the last few posts.
If you're talking about the God formerly known as Yahweh, are we allowed to take the Bible as an accurate account of His Life and Times? If so, it contains considerable "evidence" that He does care very much about details of our lives, right down to Jimmy's nocturnal practices.
If not, I'm getting too old to play tag with the goalposts.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-18-2007 1:42 PM Dan Carroll has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-18-2007 2:40 PM ringo has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 185 of 217 (395949)
04-18-2007 2:40 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by ringo
04-18-2007 2:23 PM


Exactly. And if you had postulated invisible flying elves in the OP, I would hold you to that description. Based on the God described in the OP, it is quite reasonable to expect some degree of caring.
You don't seem to be getting what I'm saying. God is absolutely described as caring, whether in my OP, or in the Bible, or wherever. I'm not stamping my foot and insisting that this can't possibly be the case. I'm asking why it would be the case, since there doesn't seem to be any sensible reason.
If you feel like dealing with that question directly, that'd be great. If you feel like running rings around the taste of duck, or dithering about whether God is really "superior", then I hope you have fun, but I'm way too busy to play along.
Edited by Dan Carroll, : No reason given.

"I know some of you are going to say 'I did look it up, and that's not true.' That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut."
-Stephen Colbert

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by ringo, posted 04-18-2007 2:23 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by ringo, posted 04-18-2007 3:06 PM Dan Carroll has replied
 Message 189 by mike the wiz, posted 04-18-2007 5:28 PM Dan Carroll has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 186 of 217 (395955)
04-18-2007 3:06 PM
Reply to: Message 185 by Dan Carroll
04-18-2007 2:40 PM


Dan Carroll writes:
I'm not stamping my foot and insisting that this can't possibly be the case. I'm asking why it would be the case, since there doesn't seem to be any sensible reason.
I have given you two reasons (or at least two variations):
  1. The why He cares is (probably) the same as the "why" we care.
    If you want to know how His (and our) thought processes work, ask that question and maybe somebody will be able to explain it to you.
  2. God, the Artist, wants His creation to be true to His vision.
The general extrapolated answer still stands and the more specific "artistic" answer still stands. Handwaving and foot-stamping have failed to topple them.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-18-2007 2:40 PM Dan Carroll has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 187 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-18-2007 3:11 PM ringo has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 187 of 217 (395959)
04-18-2007 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 186 by ringo
04-18-2007 3:06 PM


The general extrapolated answer still stands and the more specific "artistic" answer still stands. Handwaving and foot-stamping have failed to topple them.
Of course they do. Have a great weekend, Ringo.

"I know some of you are going to say 'I did look it up, and that's not true.' That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut."
-Stephen Colbert

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by ringo, posted 04-18-2007 3:06 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by ringo, posted 04-18-2007 3:22 PM Dan Carroll has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 188 of 217 (395965)
04-18-2007 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 187 by Dan Carroll
04-18-2007 3:11 PM


Dan Carroll writes:
Of course they do.
I guess we'll leave it to the jury.
Have a great weekend, Ringo.
You, too. It's been a slice.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 187 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-18-2007 3:11 PM Dan Carroll has not replied

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 189 of 217 (396009)
04-18-2007 5:28 PM
Reply to: Message 185 by Dan Carroll
04-18-2007 2:40 PM


My take on it
God is absolutely described as caring, whether in my OP, or in the Bible, or wherever. I'm not stamping my foot and insisting that this can't possibly be the case. I'm asking why it would be the case, since there doesn't seem to be any sensible reason.
It depends, I can only answer according to the God I believe in. So I will;
Because we are a spirit like God. No other natural thing of the universe is proposed to be a spirit, to my knowledge. We are persons, God is a person. We are beings, God is a being first and foremost. We were made in his image to worship Him, to know of him, to try and find holiness
God, essentially, is our "father" in a sense. But this is New Testament, and your thread, so how far can I go with biblical answers to the question?
The NT says the stars are to glorify God in their differences. It just seems evident that a God who created us to be his children would care.
that's the only way I can answer without coming up with my own solutions. Yes, I'm not a big believer in the literal bible, inerrant word of God, anymore, but I still believe the gist of it.
---As a Christ-believer, that's my answer. Do I think you'd believe it? No.
The only way you find answers from is from the bible, and it's message to us. We know you can refute fundies, so if you're only asking for some mental masturbation, fine. Obviously that's a problem with someone like you, as you don't believe in God. Perhaps you should find answers in the bible and follow it in the following way of thought;
If this is the set of texts that answers the questions, let's see what it's answers are generally, without trying to poke holes in it, but to just see if it would answer the questions, hypothetically.
Pretending it's true, so to speak.
I look at it as a bunch of faulty texts, trying to push a message through. If books agree with other books generally, I'll follow that gist. If the author preaches something clearly unique and silly, I'll cull it and stick to the goal. Because if you start with the premise that it's a faulty book of texts all trying to convey something to us, then I find there are answers - it's whether you believe there's a possibility of the message having any truth.
It's AT LEAST logical that God could communicate through a book - to millions upon millions of people, those answers.
Okay - this isn't a thought-out post, so it's not worth poking holes in it, as I'm sure there'll be many - it's just my quick thoughts on the matter. Take it or leave it.
Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.
Edited by AdminPhat, : spelling

This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-18-2007 2:40 PM Dan Carroll has not replied

  
Neutralmind
Member (Idle past 6123 days)
Posts: 183
From: Finland
Joined: 06-08-2006


Message 190 of 217 (396345)
04-19-2007 5:16 PM


The question isn't hard
189 posts and all of them are dodging the question. It's pretty simple.
There's a God that has feelings, why would he care about us doing something that's immoral, or sinning if it doesn't hurt anyone?
I think it's an important question and I've thought about it too. I'm more of a creationist than atheist, but not by much. All this question dodging isn't doing anyone a favor.
My answer for the question would be. I have no idea why God would care about us sinning or behaving immorally if it doesn't hurt anyone. If it did hurt someone, then I can understand why God wouldn't like that. He would be concerned of us not hurting each other. Why? We are also concerned if someone hurts someone and if God has feelings even superficially like ours, he wouldn't also like anyone being hurt.
Why would we care if someone does things considered sin, that don't hurt anyone? I don't care if someone's gay or masturbates. Why would I? No one's getting hurt.

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by purpledawn, posted 04-19-2007 6:17 PM Neutralmind has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 191 of 217 (396359)
04-19-2007 6:17 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by Neutralmind
04-19-2007 5:16 PM


Not Dodging
quote:
189 posts and all of them are dodging the question. It's pretty simple.
There's a God that has feelings, why would he care about us doing something that's immoral, or sinning if it doesn't hurt anyone?
The simplest answer is that he doesn't.
You ask "Why would he care about us doing something that's immoral or sinning if it doesn't hurt anyone?" No one has shown that God does care about actions that don't hurt anyone else.
quote:
My answer for the question would be. I have no idea why God would care about us sinning or behaving immorally if it doesn't hurt anyone. If it did hurt someone, then I can understand why God wouldn't like that. He would be concerned of us not hurting each other. Why? We are also concerned if someone hurts someone and if God has feelings even superficially like ours, he wouldn't also like anyone being hurt.
Which is also what others have brought up. So why are some people concerned about the actions or thoughts of others that don't hurt them or anyone else?
If this God has feelings even superficially like ours then looking into why some people are concerned about such situations would help us understand why a God might care.
If that concern is not natural but learned, then again the odds are that God is not concerned and it is a human creation.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by Neutralmind, posted 04-19-2007 5:16 PM Neutralmind has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 192 by Neutralmind, posted 04-19-2007 6:45 PM purpledawn has replied

  
Neutralmind
Member (Idle past 6123 days)
Posts: 183
From: Finland
Joined: 06-08-2006


Message 192 of 217 (396367)
04-19-2007 6:45 PM
Reply to: Message 191 by purpledawn
04-19-2007 6:17 PM


Re: Not Dodging
You ask "Why would he care about us doing something that's immoral or sinning if it doesn't hurt anyone?" No one has shown that God does care about actions that don't hurt anyone else.
But I think we're talking about the god of the bible here. The bible clearly says that you shall not lie with another man. So the bible is against homosexuality. Which I don't see how it would hurt anyone.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by purpledawn, posted 04-19-2007 6:17 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 193 by purpledawn, posted 04-20-2007 7:24 AM Neutralmind has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 193 of 217 (396465)
04-20-2007 7:24 AM
Reply to: Message 192 by Neutralmind
04-19-2007 6:45 PM


Rest of the Story
quote:
But I think we're talking about the god of the bible here. The bible clearly says that you shall not lie with another man. So the bible is against homosexuality. Which I don't see how it would hurt anyone.
Yes it does say that in Leviticus 18:22, but a statement of law doesn't always give the reasoning behind it. Now go to the beginning of the chapter.
18:1-3
Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, "Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, 'I am the LORD your God. You shall not do what is done in the land of Egypt where you lived, nor are you to do what is done in the land of Canaan where I am bringing you; you shall not walk in their statutes.
The God of Abraham wants the Hebrews to follow him, but they have been living in Egypt for what over 300 years.
So if you don't want your chosen people to follow another religion, deem their practices bad.
Even the Egyptian religion was filled with tales of adultery, incest, homosexuality and masturbation... with hints of necrophillia!
Isn't that SOP for people? Deem the opponent or their practices bad.
So is the concern actually for the action or control issues to steer his people away from that religion?
Were these practices causing problems in Egypt that the God of Abraham wanted to avoid for his people?
To understand the laws of Leviticus we need to look at what was going on at the time to try and understand the reasoning behind the law.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by Neutralmind, posted 04-19-2007 6:45 PM Neutralmind has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 194 by Neutralmind, posted 04-20-2007 8:33 PM purpledawn has replied

  
Neutralmind
Member (Idle past 6123 days)
Posts: 183
From: Finland
Joined: 06-08-2006


Message 194 of 217 (396558)
04-20-2007 8:33 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by purpledawn
04-20-2007 7:24 AM


Re: Rest of the Story
So is the concern actually for the action or control issues to steer his people away from that religion?
Were these practices causing problems in Egypt that the God of Abraham wanted to avoid for his people?
We can't know what was God's reason(ing) for deeming those actions bad, we can just speculate. What we can know is that some actions (or even thoughts) are considered bad by the God of the Bible.
To understand the laws of Leviticus we need to look at what was going on at the time to try and understand the reasoning behind the law.
Are you saying that some of Bible's teachings do not concern us anymore but were just for the people of that time?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by purpledawn, posted 04-20-2007 7:24 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 195 by Phat, posted 04-21-2007 7:11 AM Neutralmind has not replied
 Message 196 by purpledawn, posted 04-21-2007 10:11 AM Neutralmind has not replied
 Message 197 by purpledawn, posted 04-23-2007 8:39 PM Neutralmind has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 195 of 217 (396604)
04-21-2007 7:11 AM
Reply to: Message 194 by Neutralmind
04-20-2007 8:33 PM


Re: Rest of the Story
Neutralmind writes:
There's a God that has feelings, why would he care about us doing something that's immoral, or sinning if it doesn't hurt anyone?
Which leads to some rhetorical questions:
  • Who is the definer of words and of meaning? In other words, Does God actually decree some actions as immoral and thus define for us what immoral is? (If so, we must figure out what it is about certain actions and practices that annoy God so much. After all, it is we who determined that these actions didn't hurt anyone...right?
    Neutralmind writes:
    We can't know what was God's reason(ing) for deeming those actions bad, we can just speculate. What we can know is that some actions (or even thoughts) are considered bad by the God of the Bible.
    Or....we are being told of how this God thinks by human authors of the Bible.
    Thats the thing about the Bible. I don't see it as strictly innerrant, yet I also don't see a bunch of human authors with political agendas writing it either. In overall context, the Bible describes the interactions between human thinking and reasoning and our beliefs about and/or awareness of God..(the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Father of Jesus)
    Strictly speaking, any action undertaken by a human for the purpose of pleasure, gain, or purpose would logically have to bode well for everyone else. It may be true that two men sleeping together causes no discernible harm to a village or culture, but perhaps there are other factors:
  • The impact of role models. Good or Bad?
  • The sublimation of physical passion and intimacy that may have been better vented through either of these two men going on a quest for the good of society rather than just laying around pleasuring each other.
    Thats just one example...and little Johnny is another...but in order to answer whether God would care or not, we need to examine whether or not we are doing our very best in any situation which falls under this type of scrutiny.
    Take myself. Does the amount of time I spend sleeping hurt anybody?
  • It needs to be examined by comparing what I do to what I could be doing.
  • The issue boils down to whether humans have the right to do what they want regardless of whether God cares (and society) or whether we owe our behavioral choices and allegiances to the overall Greater Good. (God included)

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 194 by Neutralmind, posted 04-20-2007 8:33 PM Neutralmind has not replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024