2007-07-13 23:27:43 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
i want ur thoughts, not ur priests, mullah's, rabbi's or swami's.
2007-07-13 23:30:09 · update #1
Egotistical just adds on to the other things he is
Murderer.
Raper.
Man.
Creator of all sin.
An all knowing being who made Lucifer.
An all knowing being that knew we would sin, and let us.
Trickster. (Issac)
Deceiver (as Jesus)
A (biblical) non-existent being.
2007-07-13 23:31:44 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's a metaphor. It's our nature to be as we are - as we "were made" - which is to "live dutifully" (it's our duty, in a sense, to keep ourselves alive, reproduce, and seek happiness) "for him" (for that's how we are and there isn't an alternative) and to "worship him" (to seek wisdom, love, peace). That's how we are, therefore it's "god's purpose." Metaphor. But it's a particular kind of metaphor ... if you say its meaning without any metaphor, your are stating a circular, obvious fact - you are merely describing reality. "We struggle to live, reproduce, be happy, and have understanding because that's our nature" is rather unsatisfying, isn't it? We use the metaphor because reality is the quintessential big deal, and the metaphor of god and his will reflects just how big a deal it is, and gives life a kind of meaning and import. Note that you cannot disprove that it's actually true - that it's all the 'will' of something called god. It's got nothing to do with an actual Big Being, Out There, with petty humanlike motives.
2007-07-14 11:32:06 · answer #2 · answered by zilmag 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well your assuming God DOES have human emotions. And how do you KNOW he make you to worship and live dutifully to him. Just because some people say it doesn't mean they even know it or that it's true. Also how can God be Lord of All, if he is only capable of good things? Lord of All implies everything, good and bad. Without unhappiness, you would never know the value of happiness. Good and bad are also subjective, what one may think to be bad, another might think to be good. So is it really bad to make us appreciate the good? O_o. And why would God need us to work for Him? He is omnipotent, so He can do it Himself if for whatever reason He needs to. Also Satan is normaly called the PRINCE of Darkness, I wonder who the king is >_>
2007-07-14 09:05:30 · answer #3 · answered by lufiabuu 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In a technical sense, yes. That is the reason why God is also known as the unmoved mover, or the ultimate cause. In here we are talking about abiding by our duties and worshipping Him so that we become like Him- the essence of the unmoved mover-wherein we are affected in a causal chain, but there is no one affecting us except for a concept or an ideal.
Furthermore, the causal effect in here is not directly/indirectly done to Him but to ourselves instead. The change, the good result is seen and manifested through us by Him as an ideal.
2007-07-14 08:12:32 · answer #4 · answered by oscar c 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
At the very least, it means God has needs, which is entirely inconsistent with the idea of God as a perfect being. By definition, a perfect being must be complete, flawless, not wanting in any way. So a perfect being cannot have interests as interests involve the pursuit of satisfaction - a perfect being must exist in a state of perfect satisfaction. It follows that nothing humans do can interest God in any way. It also follows that Christians have defined their God as incapable of having interest, cares or feelings about human beings, or anything else, come to that. My play "Sanity Crucified" is all about just this issue.
2007-07-14 07:56:39 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
if you believed in one you would be too afraid to say such a thing.
on the other hand when you have been listening to religious zealots all your life its easy to forget that most of the hype is manmade.
God, (in my case it was in the form of JESUS) laid it all out and told us how to live to please him
Really the only thing that makes it a hard life to live is all the pressure from special interest groups that say religion is wrong because it doesn't respect this or that. persons rights.
It is every persons right to believe what they will. As a gay man myself I know that a the bible condemns me as an abomination but that was well before Jesus and the authorship of those passages has been disputed for ages now.
But along came Jesus and died so that I might be forgiven my sins. That is love and all he asks of us is that we love one another as he loves us. We need only possess humility and patience and the rest will be provided. thats my own personal experience its not written that way anywhere as far as i know.
i didnt see a lot of ego in the christ story. I saw a way of life that was preferred and what pleased him is when we pleased each other and treated one another with care and respect. those are the only duties attached in the worship of Jesus Christ as I know it . If I am wrong I will surely find out
2007-07-14 06:49:40 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
God needs nothing from us, and our honor of God or our dishonor of God adds or subtracts nothing from his essential nature. The glory of God is the human person fully alive-- that is the is the ultimate meaning of what God desires in terms of worship and duty. God desires the fulfillment of the purpose of our human nature in accord with virtue, this fulfillment is expressed in part by worship and duty, both of which are acts of justice by which we acknowledge the God to whom our existence ultimately belongs.
2007-07-14 07:50:23 · answer #7 · answered by Timaeus 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think too many Priests, Imams, Monks ... have a god who is Too Small. Their god is limited to self addoration.
God is much bigger than that.
There are rules that God has, but that is to help us to live in harmony with ourselves, with God, with others and with nature.
2007-07-14 09:32:22 · answer #8 · answered by wizebloke 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Troubling question, or should be, for them as compartmentalize doctrine vs ideals.
Seems to me people who embrace the obvious doctrinal faith you are referring to are faced with a moral dilemna similar to that faced by the young German soldier described in the 'source' link.
You see here, in the descriptions provided by them of what they believe, either an ignorance of, or a deliberate choice to ignore the tenets, the history, the interpretations by their forbears, of the meaning of the words contained in their doctrine, their 'holy' books.
Frankly, if they're determined to embrace what they're determined to embrace, I can't fault them for deliberately ignoring the reality of what they've embraced.
2007-07-14 08:27:02 · answer #9 · answered by Jack P 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This is the insecure little God that people make up in their own image and likeness.
The real God needs nothing.
Love and blessings Don
2007-07-14 06:50:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋