Why does God care about some mammal species floating around in the middle of nowhere?

[stvdv]

Usually the theists do that. I don't know what God would be like.

I asked, because you asked the question "Why does God care about some mammal species floating around in the middle of nowhere?"

To answer this question of yours, I think it is a must to specify "God" (because not all agree on the same definition of God)

Unless it's a trick question:
Nobody knows God (not yet even a definition all agree on)
And God is said to be beyond words (experienced in silence)
So to claim to know "Why does God care" is kind of bizarre

The best anyone could do is guess, I think
Or give some quotes from a Scripture, which would be "hear-say"
(And even then specification is a must; as there are many scriptures)

 

[74x12]

You should be happy with this claim

It tells you a lot:
1) Many humans can't be trusted
2) Many humans don't care

So Bible proves ("in His image"):
1) God can't be trusted
2) God does not care

Knowing these fact, I see no need to prove or disprove whether "this" God exists or not; do you?

God made us in His image but we corrupted ourselves. Trying to understand God's nature by looking at negative aspects of human nature is not wise.

 

[stvdv]

God made us in His image but we corrupted ourselves. Trying to understand God's nature by looking at negative aspects of human nature is not wise.

Agreed.

Glad to meet a Christian taking it also this way. Many Christians see God quite human.

Not wise "Try understand God by looking at negative human aspects" you say.

You imply "wise if looking at pos. aspects?"

You think we can understand God?
Or "try" is the best we can?

Personally I have no clue how to (fully) understand God. Far beyond even my imagination, let alone understanding.

 

[corynski]

Why? Can anyone explain?

He doesn't, because there are no gods except the ones people make up. You haven't noticed that the omnipotent, omniscient Being that you have created in your mind has created a world where every living creature must eat another living creature to survive? And whatever is eaten, 3/4 of it is waste, and passes right thru. I live in the country where I see this scenario every day. The cats will kill and eat all kinds of creatures, from butterflies to baby vols. They bring their kill up to my feet for me to see. And they play with these victims, and it looks as if they are torturing them...... and, well, I guess they are. Baby snakes are a favorite of theirs, and toads ....... And the dogs aren't any better......

But if you begin with the realization that humans have created all the gods, then it all makes sense.......

 

[sojourner]

How is it deceptive if it's known as a fact?

This is an intuitive exercise, not a fact-finding mission.

Tell that to all the people who believed that the earth was flat.

See above. That was a fact-finding issue.

 

[sealchan]

Any evidence of this?

Sure, there is no physical evidence for God but there is plenty of cultural anthropological evidence of a belief in God. That establishes the presence of God as a belief fairly firmly.

Then we have the cross-cultural and persistent existence of the God belief. This greatly establishes the cultural usefulness of the God belief although that usefulness is still under investigation.

We can hypothesize that the sheer variety of God belief indicates that evolutionary adaptation of God belief is occurring on the psychological level and that on that level individuals are acting as agents to determine whether a particular belief will persist in the individual and whether a particular group of believers will as well.

We have God belief appearing aggressively associated to political power such that belief is associated with economic and political agency further promoting the persistence of belief.

There is probably more evidence to go into. But I should verify with you that you understand that I see God as primarily a psychological reality rather than a physical one.

 

[sealchan]

How is it deceptive if it's known as a fact?

The best deceptions always are. But, of course, we cant clearly distinguish the deceptions from the persisting truths. Truths have lifetimes often far longer than human lifetimes.

Tell that to all the people who believed that the earth was flat.

Which for a long, long time was a "known fact".

 

[Audie]

Sure, there is no physical evidence for God but there is plenty of cultural anthropological evidence of a belief in God. That establishes the presence of God as a belief fairly firmly.

Then we have the cross-cultural and persistent existence of the God belief. This greatly establishes the cultural usefulness of the God belief although that usefulness is still under investigation.

We can hypothesize that the sheer variety of God belief indicates that evolutionary adaptation of God belief is occurring on the psychological level and that on that level individuals are acting as agents to determine whether a particular belief will persist in the individual and whether a particular group of believers will as well.

We have God belief appearing aggressively associated to political power such that belief is associated with economic and political agency further promoting the persistence of belief.

There is probably more evidence to go into. But I should verify with you that you understand that I see God as primarily a psychological reality rather than a physical one.

Addictive behaviour is also x cultural and persistent
through time, as are many other psychological
issues for humankind.

That we are able to survive, betimes thrive anyway,
despite a deeply sub-optimal mind and body and
partial adaptation is no sign that these issues are
somehow a good thing.

 

[Audie]

The best deceptions always are. But, of course, we cant clearly distinguish the deceptions from the persisting truths. Truths have lifetimes often far longer than human lifetimes.



.

We could probably match you, persistent lie for
persistent truth, and quite possibly keep going
long after you'd sputtered out.

 

[nPeace]

Well for me without assuming that an all good God exists, all the evil and suffering in the world makes sense given that humans are animals too and assuming that an all good God does exist it doesn't make sense that He intervenes to stop evil and suffering on some occasions and not others. Also humans look and behave too similarly to animals for me to think that we're special.

For others, without assuming that humans are animals, and accepting what is said about God - that God is an all wise creator, it makes sense that we humans should try to learn if there is a good reason why God allows suffering.
It seems to me that humans reason, that since they don't know or understand why, then that gives them good reason to assume there is no all wise loving creator.
I would say that seems to indicate a choosing not to know, or understand.

But not everyone will be rescued

You do know why, don't you?
It's not God's fault they choose not to be rescued.

But many humans are too fallible to recognize as a saving provision. How is that their fault?

Right but with something as complex as spirituality especially given that humans are fallible can humans really be faulted for getting it wrong?

Wouldn't that be the same thing as saying, 'Well we should excuse the rapist and murderers, because we are fallible, and it's not their fault because they cannot help themselves?"
You don't believe that, do you?
That would be making an excuse. Why do some do different, or better than others?

Well actually it seems only a minority don't accept it

Let's all accept a higher power, or divine being then... since only a minority don't accept that.

Where does that leave Atheists?
Truth is not established by popular opinion, figures, or statistics, is it.

But it seems to be metaphorical


Many people say that he was being metaphorical.


Sorry about any confusion.

Why do you say it seems to be metaphorical. Is that based on what your own examination reveals, or based on what you hear others claim?
If it is based on your own research, then I would like to hear what passage exactly you find to be to be metaphorical, and why.

Don't worry about the mistake. We all make them.

 

[Jos]

To answer this question of yours, I think it is a must to specify "God" (because not all agree on the same definition of God)

Right and that's why I let theists define God

Unless it's a trick question:
Nobody knows God (not yet even a definition all agree on)
And God is said to be beyond words (experienced in silence)
So to claim to know "Why does God care" is kind of bizarre

The best anyone could do is guess, I think
Or give some quotes from a Scripture, which would be "hear-say"
(And even then specification is a must; as there are many scriptures)

Exactly and that's the point, how can anyone know what they claim is true?

 

[Jos]

He doesn't, because there are no gods except the ones people make up. You haven't noticed that the omnipotent, omniscient Being that you have created in your mind has created a world where every living creature must eat another living creature to survive? And whatever is eaten, 3/4 of it is waste, and passes right thru. I live in the country where I see this scenario every day. The cats will kill and eat all kinds of creatures, from butterflies to baby vols. They bring their kill up to my feet for me to see. And they play with these victims, and it looks as if they are torturing them...... and, well, I guess they are. Baby snakes are a favorite of theirs, and toads ....... And the dogs aren't any better......

But if you begin with the realization that humans have created all the gods, then it all makes sense.......

I don't understand how God could create such a cruel world either.

 

[Jos]

This is an intuitive exercise, not a fact-finding mission.

What's the point in using intuitions which are sometimes and even many times unreliable rather than finding truth? That makes no sense.

See above. That was a fact-finding issue.

People also intuitively believed that to be case, it wasn't about facts but just believing in what made sense.

 

[Jos]

Sure, there is no physical evidence for God but there is plenty of cultural anthropological evidence of a belief in God. That establishes the presence of God as a belief fairly firmly.

Then we have the cross-cultural and persistent existence of the God belief. This greatly establishes the cultural usefulness of the God belief although that usefulness is still under investigation.

We can hypothesize that the sheer variety of God belief indicates that evolutionary adaptation of God belief is occurring on the psychological level and that on that level individuals are acting as agents to determine whether a particular belief will persist in the individual and whether a particular group of believers will as well.

We have God belief appearing aggressively associated to political power such that belief is associated with economic and political agency further promoting the persistence of belief.

There is probably more evidence to go into. But I should verify with you that you understand that I see God as primarily a psychological reality rather than a physical one.

So why believe in something that doesn't actually exist?

The best deceptions always are.

Huh? I don't get, that doesn't make sense.

But, of course, we cant clearly distinguish the deceptions from the persisting truths.

True so how can anyone claim anything about God?

Which for a long, long time was a "known fact".

Right, which turned out to not be a fact.

 

[Jos]

For others, without assuming that humans are animals, and accepting what is said about God - that God is an all wise creator, it makes sense that we humans should try to learn if there is a good reason why God allows suffering.
It seems to me that humans reason, that since they don't know or understand why, then that gives them good reason to assume there is no all wise loving creator.
I would say that seems to indicate a choosing not to know, or understand.

But all the suffering does make sense if one doesn't assume humans are special or that any creator cares, and yes He may have good reasons for it but still, why would He also stop instances of suffering if suffering is in the world for a reason?

You do know why, don't you?
It's not God's fault they choose not to be rescued.

Or maybe they don't see any reason to believe that there's a rescuer or even no reason to believe that they need rescuing.

Wouldn't that be the same thing as saying, 'Well we should excuse the rapist and murderers, because we are fallible, and it's not their fault because they cannot help themselves?"
You don't believe that, do you?
That would be making an excuse. Why do some do different, or better than others?

No it's not the same because understanding spirituality is different from choosing to do evil, one would extremely difficult for fallible humans to do while the other isn't difficult to do and isn't impeded by fallibility.

Let's all accept a higher power, or divine being then... since only a minority don't accept that.

I'm not saying that the majority of scientists are right, I'm just saying that it's a fact that only a minority of scientists don't accept evolution.

Where does that leave Atheists?
Truth is not established by popular opinion, figures, or statistics, is it.

Right, I agree with you.

Why do you say it seems to be metaphorical. Is that based on what your own examination reveals, or based on what you hear others claim?
If it is based on your own research, then I would like to hear what passage exactly you find to be to be metaphorical, and why.

Sorry I meant to say that others deem it to be metaphorical.

 

[sealchan]

Addictive behaviour is also x cultural and persistent
through time, as are many other psychological
issues for humankind.

That we are able to survive, betimes thrive anyway,
despite a deeply sub-optimal mind and body and
partial adaptation is no sign that these issues are
somehow a good thing.

I think of addictions as maladaptive because the value of a certain substance is out of proportion to that which would foster long term adaptivity. While belief can have this quality, healthy belief tuned to what is demonstrably true should help an individual persist in their personal motivations until with a deep satisfaction they achieve their goals and feel the confidence in themselves that leaves them free to give assistance to others.

 

[Audie]

I think of addictions as maladaptive because the value of a certain substance is out of proportion to that which would foster long term adaptivity. While belief can have this quality, healthy belief tuned to what is demonstrably true should help an individual persist in their personal motivations until with a deep satisfaction they achieve their goals and feel the confidence in themselves that leaves them free to give assistance to others.

It seems to work out for a few people.

 

[sealchan]

We could probably match you, persistent lie for
persistent truth, and quite possibly keep going
long after you'd sputtered out.

How about answers for things that are currently unknown during our shared lifetimes?

 

[sealchan]

So why believe in something that doesn't actually exist?

It can help to answer questions that don't have answers or applicable science to help answer.

True so how can anyone claim anything about God?

They imagine something or take from someone else's imagination something that rings true based on their emotional need or their sense of how the world works or even should work.

Right, which turned out to not be a fact.

Monday morning quarterbacking is known to be more accurate, but less impressive.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

It appears to me that the entire universe is geared to eventually produce and support sentient life. If that's so, then it would appear that sentient life is God's ultimate purpose of creation. So then the question of why God is interested in sentient beings becomes obvious.