Why is god so egoistic?

[orgaelin]

Ken - a universal truth doesn't have to be an absolute one. It's universal in it's scope, i.e. applies everywhere, but not to everything. Of course there are exceptions to the rule... I mean, I'm complicated, and I'm always right!

[LDS]

Why should it be complicated?

Its not. Look closer at what I wrote, complicated unless you know the plan of salvation. Just as explaining how a watch works would be complicated if your trainee had no experience with watches whatsoever.

I can just point to the bible and say, look, millions of people got a bit rowdy so god killed them all.

Oversimplification. It was much more than a 'bit rowdy', they were without affection. Ever see the family feuds past from generation to generation? Imagine that only much broader, not only between family to family, but within the family as well. Dont think that Noah and other prophets did not try to convince the people of the error of their ways, for angels and prophets did preach to those people, converting who they could, what more was the lord to do? How many countless generations wouldve been born to such conditions, till the people finally hearkened to their god?
It was a mercy, to all the generations afterward.

how you can love a god who would wipe you out without a second thought

If only you knew how the lord, and all the heavens weep for those who die in sin.

transgressions that he designed you to make.

False doctrine. None of us are here to fail, we are here to choose whether we will be righteous, or wicked. It is our choice.


Perspective, its all about perspective. Do you view things with the temporal mind of the natural man, or do you view things with eternity in mind?

[Ken Carman]

Let's take two observations, let's say from many, many thousand and thousands of years ago somewhere in the midwest. "Org" looks out over the landscape and says, "Looks mostly flat, no matter how far I walk... must be flat."

Now let's complicate it. Let's tell Org he's wrong because despite the flatness, the earth actually curves slowly and is oval, a ball: whatever his limited mind could comprehend. You explain to him, no matter which way he walked, if he could cross the many oceans, seas and mountain tops, he would come right back to where he is standing. Surely he would ask, "But in such a place some of us would fall because we would be upside down!" So you try to explain gravity (good luck) and earth rotation to answer more questions (HA!), and magnetism to explain even more questions... (Fat chance he'll understand that down to the molecular level.)

So is the "Razor" principle right in this case? Obviously NOT.

BTW, I still think it says "probably." I've heard it quoted many times. Guess I should Google it.

[Ken Carman]

"'Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate' or 'plurality should not be posited without necessity.' The words are those of the medieval English philosopher and Franciscan monk William of Ockham (ca. 1285-1349)." (SNIP)

"Occam's razor is also called the principle of parsimony. These days it is usually interpreted to mean something like 'the simpler the explanation, the better' or 'don't multiply hypotheses unnecessarily.' In any case, Occam's razor is a principle which is frequently used outside of ontology, e.g., by philosophers of science in an effort to establish criteria for choosing from among theories with equal explanatory power. When giving explanatory reasons for something, don't posit more than is necessary. Von Däniken could be right: maybe extraterrestrials did teach ancient people art and engineering, but we don't need to posit alien visitations in order to explain the feats of ancient people. Why posit pluralities unnecessarily? Or, as most would put it today, don't make any more assumptions than you have to. We can posit the ether to explain action at a distance, but we don't need ether to explain it, so why assume an ethereal ether?" (SNIP)


"Because Occam's razor is sometimes called the principle of simplicity some creationists have argued that Occam's razor can be used to support creationism over evolution. After all, having God create everything is much simpler than evolution, which is a very complex mechanism. But Occam's razor does not say that the more simple a hypothesis, the better. If it did, Occam's would be dull razor for a dim populace indeed."

Boy was that a short lesson in Medieval philosophy. I found this at...

http://skepdic.com/occam.html

and this...

"Occam's Razor:
one should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything." (The operative word here seems to be "necessary;" something we probably can all agree to disagree about given many different topics. :)

Found at...

http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/OCCAMRAZ.html


From my investigation so far it seems the quote we all remember may not be exactly what we thought it was. And while I believe all eras have something to teach us there is a good reason why the phrase "Medieval thinking" exists. Interesting guideline. I wouldn't start worshipping it, myself. (Not that I'm specifically suggesting anyone is...) Throughout history people have put different thinkers on some cloud up high like Einstein, Newton, probably Occam's theory (I guess he may not have been the actual source of it from what I've read so far)... saying "now we know everything about this... that... or EVERYTHING. But a hundred years or more from now I'll bet our great-whatever-grandchildren will probably snicker at our ignorance... at least until they too become the victims of such mirth.

[orgaelin]

My God Ken... you sure exhausted that one! I don't think after that anyone can call you less than an expert on Occam! In future, we should call it Carman's New Razor!



And as for you, LDS... where shall we start?!

You know there's a horrible feeling I get from posting on these forums... you know that feeling when you've come out and said something and then someone posts a counter argument that makes you realise you're really stupid, and you just wish you hadn't opened your big mouth in the first place, and there's nothing you can say to counter-counter argue cos you know they've proved you wrong?

I hate that feeling. But I like you, 'cause you never make me feel that way!

Look closer at what I wrote, complicated unless you know the plan of salvation

Ok, whatever. I'm tired of Occam's shaving equipment. But the more important point is, WHY should it be complicated?! Why do I have to know some complex plan of salvation to understand why god kills people?!

Oversimplification. It was much more than a 'bit rowdy'

Ok, I admit that was a deliberate oversimplification. You see how honest a debater I am?!

So any way, you're saying I simplified it by saying they were just a bit rowdy... in fact they were much worse, you say...

they were without affection.

Well then you'd better send god a telegram about all of womankind when they have PMT every month!

Alright, admittedly that was more funny than it was sensible. But it had to be said!

On a serious note: just what the hell does it mean that God kills every human on earth except one family just because they were "without affection"?!

Methinks you might want to expand on that term?

Ever see the family feuds past from generation to generation? Imagine that only much broader, not only between family to family, but within the family as well.

Right. I see. So kill 'em all, right? Good solution. Real efficient, problem solved in just 40 days, never to happen again. Great. Gotta love that guy for his efficiency if nothing else.

I'm so sorry to come across so mockingly. I hate it, and I'm trying to stop it, but you are making it *real* hard for me damnit! Maybe I'm just tired?

Surely families have a right to solve their own disputes? And if they get out of hand, sure, bring in the law, arrest a few. Don't kill every single one!!

Dont think that Noah and other prophets did not try to convince the people of the error of their ways, for angels and prophets did preach to those people, converting who they could

Oh well I'm glad you remember it all so well. What with it having been so long ago, and with you not even being born and all.

You're telling me that all of God's angels, and their chief human representative on earth, couldn't manage to convert or correct even one single person? Not one baby or child?

You remember the children right? The little ones who do nothing wrong untill they reach a certain age? Were the babies arguing with families and between families, stealing pacifiers and milk?

To my mind, killing children is wrong. THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION for killing an innocent child, like a baby for example. It is physically impossible for a young baby to sin. Don't you dare try to say otherwise. So WHY WHY WHY did God kill them ALL? And why do YUO support such atrocities?!

what more was the lord to do?

MERCY for Christ's sake, MERCY!

Or how about taking some of his own responsibility?! If you raise your children well, they go out into the world and contribute and be wonderful helpful people.

If you raise them badly, they go out and sin. They abuse, they rape, they fight, they steal... and it IS partially the parent's fault. ANY parent whose child does wrong knows it is their fault, just like any parent whose child does good knows it is partly they who are responsible.

God should have done better by those people before things got so bad. He should have BEEN THERE for them instead of attending to his royal throne all the time. You can't just raise your kids with nannies (or angels) you have to take a part in it yourself.

Fact is, God failed every single one of those people, he failed every old woman, every young baby, every single last one of them died because God couldn't control his temper.

(Like me right now! What a rant this is!)

And that's what it's all about isn't?! I the lord your god am a VENGEFUL god! Well he created Man in his own image and by God we are a vengeful race. When do we take vengeance for the crimes of God? When does god pay for killing innocent children?

Instead of being punished, he's being worshipped. He kills your own people in cold-blooded wrathful vengeance, and you worship him! You live your life by the rules he gave you, but thank heavens you don't live by the EXAMPLE he set you.

I'm so far from done with this post, but alas I must go. It's late, the wife's nagging, the baby's crying, etc.

Bye! ~ Org.

[LDS]

But I like you, 'cause you never make me feel that way

Glad to be of service. [I think that was an attack on me(if not please clarify), but as long as your happy ]

WHY should it be complicated?! Why do I have to know some complex plan of salvation to understand why god kills people?!

"Line upon line, Precept upon precept..."

Because often learning one doctrine opens the door to learning the next.

On a serious note: just what the hell does it mean that God kills every human on earth except one family just because they were "without affection"?!

"Therefore, if ye do not remember to be charitable, ye are as dross, which the refiners do cast out, (it being of no worth) and is trodden under foot of men."

http://scriptures.lds.org/alma/34/29#29

"hath given a commandment that all men should have acharity, which charity is love. And except they should have charity they were nothing."

http://scriptures.lds.org/2_ne/26/30#30


I've seen uncharitable people and charitable people. If the world was as bad as the book of moses describes, the flood was a mercy.

Right. I see. So kill 'em all, right? Good solution. Real efficient, problem solved in just 40 days, never to happen again. Great. Gotta love that guy for his efficiency if nothing else.

God and man have very different views of death. Death is not the end.

What with it having been so long ago, and with you not even being born and all.

Scriptures are awesome arent they.

You're telling me that all of God's angels, and their chief human representative on earth, couldn't manage to convert or correct even one single person?

They converted many. Yet there were still those whose hearts were to hard to recieve the words of Christ.

It is physically impossible for a young baby to sin. Don't you dare try to say otherwise

I'm glad we agree.

"...wherefore, little children are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin;..."
http://scriptures.lds.org/moro/8/8-24#8

MERCY for Christ's sake, MERCY

"By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water."
http://scriptures.lds.org/1_pet/3/19-20

Mercy was extended, only 8 accepted though.

God should have done better by those people before things got so bad.

They had scriptures, they had prophets, what did you want god to do,force them to live their lives the way he wanted them to? Take away their agency?

"Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh; and all things are given them which are expedient unto man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself."

http://scriptures.lds.org/2_ne/2/27#27

[OutSpokEnChilD]

ill tell you this. im 14 years old and i found your conversation very interesting. i too have questions about whether or not there truly is a god. my family is very religious. and i do believe in god. just at times when things arnt going so well in life i question a true existence. but i know in the long run i will always believe. my grandma always is saying " i can do all things through christ " and that is true. there has been a time in my life where i tried and tried and tried to do something, just to find out i had been trying all wrong. so if you are questioning... just keep on believing what you started because your first guess is usually the right one!

[Rainbow]

Originally posted by Ken Carman, "Why is god so egoistic?"

Is that the point we start a new discusion from ?
(Correct me if I am wrong, please).

I do not question God's existance.
Before we start to discuss the main issue, I would like us to "establish" :
- Who (What) is God ?

Personally, I believe that there is One God, only (!)
We refer It to the Same and One God, using different onomastics and sources.
I do not know Who (What) is God. I believe that few have had a chance to "experience contacts" with God, and even them have no clear view on God.

Then, stating that God is "egoistic" is an absurdal assumption, not to mention any "exhibits" that may be presented to support that statement.

[orgaelin]

Rainbow, it should be clear that the question is aimed at the biblical concept of God, as one who demands prayer and worship and is thus egotistical.

[Rainbow]

orgaelin

Even though, it still does not provide any answer what exactly God says, and under what terms and conditions.
That part we may guess, only.

Following all the material within the Bible very strictly (literally) is a complete misunderstanding the whole concept the Bible is about.

[orgaelin]

So, Rainbow, exactly what side of the fence are you on?! Do you believe in God, or not, or in your own concept of God?

[Rainbow]

Originally posted by orgaelin, So, Rainbow, exactly what side of the fence are you on?! Do you believe in God, or not, or in your own concept of God?

#1
I do not quite understand that.
Do you refer to the religion I represent ?
#2
I have already answered to that question.
However, I do not perceive God as many other people.

The God is not the Being with a long beard, grey hair, ect. , definitely.
That "picture" had been created (mostly by arts) as a "symbolic view" some centuries ago, instead.

Religion should teach people many positive things, while God is in the center of these events.
Faith is yet another issue, that differs within everyone.
God is a completely different aspect, where our Faith is inseparably (indissolubly) bound with It.

Is the God a Being ?
Is the God a Mind or Another (Unknown) Matter ?
WHO (WHAT) is the God exactly, that I do not know.

[orgaelin]

Um... I'm no wiser than before I asked you!

So basically what you're saying is that you know what God is NOT, but you don't know what God IS?

[Rainbow]

Originally posted by orgaelin, So basically what you're saying is that you know what God is NOT, but you don't know what God IS?

Not quite, however close to that "description".
I know that God exists. I do not know the (physical) "form".
A "form" refers to :
- matter
- shape
- control
- ect.
It is hard for me to "draw a picture" of God.
That is why saying that what God "wants", "wishes", ect. has no bases and we merely "guess" these assumptions. We barely know God, in reality.

[Gracchus]

Quote by: castille Why does the Christian god have an ego the size of a Christian priest's sex crimes record? He demands to be worshipped, threatens to execute anyone who refuses ("Hell" after all is his threat). Yet he (or she, or it) created men in the first place. So if this god created all humans....doesn't that mean he/she/it would know not all humans are going to worship him/her/it? Why he is complaining about a lack of worshippers, when he knew this would happen in the first place?

It is because, as H. L. Mencken once observed, "God created man in his own image, and man, being a gentleman, returned the compliment."

[orgaelin]

Rainbow, I have to agree, we barely know the 'guy'.

Gracchus, thanks for that quote - I am going to use that with every Christian I meet from now on!!

[CJFreeman]

I find it interesting that after 12 pages of dancing around the issue originally posed, no one has bothered to define the word worship. Perhaps that would help bring some much needed clarity to this thread.

Who wants to go first?

Christopher J. Freeman