• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Would/Should God communicate directly to everyone in the world?

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I think most have no concept of the IQ level of God. I think most would come out of the experience confused since most do not understand God at all.
Some atheists think they are on the same level as God so God can and should talk to them like a human would talk to a human. Why does God owe them a private conversation? They are so arrogant and deluded. They have no conception of God, so they make up an imaginary god. They have no idea that they could never understand communication from God because God is so far above their level of comprehension. And when I tell them that they say I am making excuses. Excuses for what? How could an All-Powerful God who is All-Knowing and All-Wise need any excuses for what He chooses to do? They think they can order an Omnipotent God around like a short order cook. Their total lack of logical abilities is so comical yet very sad.
 

Ouroboros

Coincidentia oppositorum
Messengers of God (Prophets) have a dual nature, they are both divine and human. It is their divine mind that filters the message from God so are no mistakes.

I never said that God could not convey a message to all humans but it would be an utter waste if time because no ordinary human has a divine mind so no ordinary human could understand communication from God. Thus the limitation is a human limitation, not a limitation of God.

Why on earth would God need to communicate to every human being on earth when God can communicate to a Messenger who can get the message out to all of humanity in writing? There is no reason to do this except that some people don't like Messengers. That's just too bad though because God is the one delivering the messages and an Omnipotent God chooses how He will do that.

They are not getting communication from a faulty human, they are getting it from a Messenger of God who is infallible.

Humans certainly can understand it. All they need to know is how to read the scriptures which are written by a Messenger of God, who is a pure Source of information.
In other words, God can, but he's lazy.
 

Phaedrus

Active Member
I think it is more logically akin to one reasonably expecting a message directly from the source instead of blindly trusting a messenger full of claims. After all, if I really wanted to suspend all reason to simply believe that Zeus was a real god, I would still understand and know that just believing it does not make it true. Not for any believer or any god.

Don't get me wrong, I believe that you believe what you do, but at the end of the day your belief is only true to you because you want it to be true against reason.
 

Pudding

Well-Known Member
If God exists and God is omnipotent, hypothetically speaking God could communicate directly to everyone rather than communicating through Messengers/Prophets. By everyone I mean every one of the 7.53 billion people in the world.

1. Do you think God (if God exists) would communicate directly to everyone?
  • If you think that God would do this, please explain why you think so.
  • If you think that God would not do this, please explain why you think so.
My answer is depend on whether or not if God wants to communicate directly to everyone. I'll separate the hypothetical question in 2 scenarios and answer your question.

Q: (If God exists and if he wants to communicate directly to everyone) Do you think God would communicate directly to everyone?
A: Yes. I think God would communicate directly to everyone, because God wants to communicate directly to everyone.

Q: (If God exists and if he doesn't want to communicate directly to everyone) Do you think God would communicate directly to everyone?
A: No. I think God wouldn't communicate directly to everyone, because God don't want to communicate directly to everyone.

2. Do you think it is *reasonable* to expect God (if God exists) to communicate directly to everyone?
  • If you think that is a reasonable expectation, please explain why you think so.
  • If you think it is an unreasonable expectation, please explain why you think so.
Definition of expect: 1.4 Require (someone) to fulfil an obligation.
Definition of obligation: An act or course of action to which a person is morally or legally bound; a duty or commitment.
Definition of reasonable: 1.1 Having sound judgement; fair and sensible.

My answer is depend on whether or not it's a duty or commitment for God to communicate directly to everyone. I'll separate the hypothetical question in 2 scenarios and answer your question.

Q: (If God exists and if it's a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone) Do you think it is reasonable to expect God to communicate directly to everyone?
A: Yes. I think it is reasonable to expect God to communicate directly to everyone, because it's a duty for God to do so.

Q: (If God exists and if it's not a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone) Do you think it is reasonable to expect God to communicate directly to everyone?
A: No. I think it is not reasonable to expect God to communicate directly to everyone, because it's not a duty for God to do so.

3. Do you think that *rational people* would expect God to communicate directly to everyone?
  • If you think rational people would expect God to do that, please explain why you think so.
  • If you think rational people would not expect God to do that, please explain why you think so.
My answer is depend on whether or not it's a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone. I'll separate the hypothetical question in 2 scenarios and answer your question.

Q: (If God exists and if it's a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone) Do you think that rational people would expect God to communicate directly to everyone?
A: Yes. I think that rational people would expect God to communicate directly to everyone, because it's a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone.

Q: (If God exists and if it's not a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone) Do you think that rational people would expect God to communicate directly to everyone?
A: No. I think that rational people wouldn't expect God to communicate directly to everyone, because it's not a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone.


Summary

If God exists, if God is omnipotent:

(a) (If God wants to communicate directly to everyone). I think God would communicate directly to everyone. Why do i think God would communicate directly to everyone? I think so, because God wants to communicate directly to everyone.

(b) (If God don't want to communicate directly to everyone). I think God wouldn't communicate directly to everyone. Why do i think God wouldn't communicate directly to everyone? I think so, because God don't want to communicate directly to everyone.

(c) (If it's a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone). I think it is reasonable to expect God to communicate directly to everyone, i also think that rational people would expect God to communicate directly to everyone. Why would i think so? I think so, both because it's a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone.

(d) (If it's not a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone). I think it is not reasonable to expect God to communicate directly to everyone, i also think that rational people wouldn't expect God to communicate directly to everyone. Why would i think so? I think so, both because it's not a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone.


Short Summary
  • Title's questions: Would/Should God communicate directly to everyone in the world? (If God exists and is omnipotent)
  • If God wants to communicate directly to everyone in the world, then he would do so; vice versa.
  • If it's a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone, then he should do so; vice versa.

Currently, no any self-acclaimed-omnipotent God has communicate directly to everyone, it may because:
(i) God don't want to do so.
(ii) God have done so, but many people are spiritually blind and can't see/hear God?
(iii) Those Gods don't exist.

Now, if God doesn't exist, would humanity still exists? If Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist, would humanity still exists? If i find a book in a cave which says that the universe and humanity is create by Blue Unicorn, if Blue Unicorn doesn't exist, would humanity still exists?


Hypothetical questions:

If Flying Spaghetti Monster exists, do you think Flying Spaghetti Monster would communicate directly to everyone? Do you think it is reasonable to expect Flying Spaghetti Monster to communicate directly to everyone? Do you think that rational people would expect Flying Spaghetti Monster to communicate directly to everyone?

If Blue Unicorn exists, do you think Blue Unicorn would communicate directly to everyone? Do you think it is reasonable to expect Blue Unicorn to communicate directly to everyone? Do you think that rational people would expect Blue Unicorn to communicate directly to everyone?
 
Last edited:

Argus

New Member
1. Do you think God (if God exists) would communicate directly to everyone?

The concept of god is so vacuous as to invalidate any cogent answer.

Best we can say is "What is this god?" "Does this god have a desire to communicate?" If so, do human brains have the capacity to comprehend what may be a message? Of course, one may assume if such a god exists and wants its message to be understood in an unambiguous manner (as opposed to religious claims), it would have done so.

2. Do you think it is *reasonable* to expect God (if God exists) to communicate directly to everyone?

When talking of some provisional, unproven entity, such an answer is moot. The Fantastic Four probably thought they could expect to use reason to stop Galactus from eating earth.


3. Do you think that *rational people* would expect God to communicate directly to everyone?

Just depends. If the being is all powerful and all knowing...then I would expect it to communicate IF it had such a desire.

Then again...why would an omni being have a desire at all?
 

Argus

New Member
And you would be, because God does not speak to anyone that way, not even Prophets. They get communication from God through the Holy Spirit but I do not think it is something we can understand



Yes, God speaks to our hearts but since not *everyone* has an open heart, not everyone will get the message.
I have a problem with that myself and I believe in God, so I understand how much more difficult it would be for someone who does not even believe that God exists.

How did you determine prophets are an actual thing or that this Holy Spirit exists?

What method does one use to establish the criteria of "having an open heart?" Isn't your criteria for what is or is not such an "open heart" rather subjective?


Do you mean one who is willing to consider and analyze new claims about such things OR do you mean someone who will believe anything told them without credulity?
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I think it is more logically akin to one reasonably expecting a message directly from the source instead of blindly trusting a messenger full of claims
I think it is unreasonable to expect God, the Source of all Creation, to send messages to every human being on earth just because a numbered few atheists cannot trust Messengers, when God can easily send a message to one Messenger who can get the message out to everyone in writing that everyone can read.
After all, if I really wanted to suspend all reason to simply believe that Zeus was a real god, I would still understand and know that just believing it does not make it true. Not for any believer or any god.
And believing that God spoke to you directly would not make it true.
Don't get me wrong, I believe that you believe what you do, but at the end of the day your belief is only true to you because you want it to be true against reason.
And any belief you *might have* as the result of God communicating directly *to you* would only be true to you.
Let's get real. You could never know if it was actually God communicating to you anymore than I can know that God communicated to a Messenger. This idea that if you got it directly you would know is ludicrous. It could just as easily be a psychotic break.

Moreover, the idea that it is *against reason* to believe God spoke to a Messenger has no basis at all, since there is nothing unreasonable about it.
 

night912

Well-Known Member
A being could do that but there is no reason to believe that God does that.
We cannot know God's actions in this world so we either have faith that God acts in our best interest or not.
You cannot know god's actions but want it to be what you want it to be, so you believe that that is god's action even without knowing it. Like I said, illogical.

Nobody fully understands God, in fact we can understand very little about God.
It is a belief, not an assertion. It means nothing except to those who believe it.
That's why it's an assertion and means nothing and is easily dismissed. Just because you don't want it to be an assertion, does not make it not make it so.

Assertion:
- a statement that you strongly believe is true

ASSERTION | definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary

So that would qualify you as being an unreasonable person. I rest my case. :hammer:
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
My answer is depend on whether or not if God wants to communicate directly to everyone. I'll separate the hypothetical question in 2 scenarios and answer your question.

Q: (If God exists and if he wants to communicate directly to everyone) Do you think God would communicate directly to everyone?
A: Yes. I think God would communicate directly to everyone, because God wants to communicate directly to everyone.

Q: (If God exists and if he doesn't want to communicate directly to everyone) Do you think God would communicate directly to everyone?
A: No. I think God wouldn't communicate directly to everyone, because God don't want to communicate directly to everyone.


Definition of expect: 1.4 Require (someone) to fulfil an obligation.
Definition of obligation: An act or course of action to which a person is morally or legally bound; a duty or commitment.
Definition of reasonable: 1.1 Having sound judgement; fair and sensible.

My answer is depend on whether or not it's a duty or commitment for God to communicate directly to everyone. I'll separate the hypothetical question in 2 scenarios and answer your question.

Q: (If God exists and if it's a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone) Do you think it is reasonable to expect God to communicate directly to everyone?
A: Yes. I think it is reasonable to expect God to communicate directly to everyone, because it's a duty for God to do so.

Q: (If God exists and if it's not a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone) Do you think it is reasonable to expect God to communicate directly to everyone?
A: No. I think it is not reasonable to expect God to communicate directly to everyone, because it's not a duty for God to do so.


My answer is depend on whether or not it's a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone. I'll separate the hypothetical question in 2 scenarios and answer your question.

Q: (If God exists and if it's a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone) Do you think that rational people would expect God to communicate directly to everyone?
A: Yes. I think that rational people would expect God to communicate directly to everyone, because it's a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone.

Q: (If God exists and if it's not a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone) Do you think that rational people would expect God to communicate directly to everyone?
A: No. I think that rational people wouldn't expect God to communicate directly to everyone, because it's not a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone.


Summary

If God exists, if God is omnipotent:

(a) (If God wants to communicate directly to everyone). I think God would communicate directly to everyone. Why do i think God would communicate directly to everyone? I think so, because God wants to communicate directly to everyone.

(b) (If God don't want to communicate directly to everyone). I think God wouldn't communicate directly to everyone. Why do i think God wouldn't communicate directly to everyone? I think so, because God don't want to communicate directly to everyone.

(c) (If it's a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone). I think it is reasonable to expect God to communicate directly to everyone, i also think that rational people would expect God to communicate directly to everyone. Why would i think so? I think so, both because it's a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone.

(d) (If it's not a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone). I think it is not reasonable to expect God to communicate directly to everyone, i also think that rational people wouldn't expect God to communicate directly to everyone. Why would i think so? I think so, both because it's not a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone.


Short Summary
  • Title's questions: Would/Should God communicate directly to everyone in the world? (If God exists and is omnipotent)
  • If God wants to communicate directly to everyone in the world, then he would do so; vice versa.
  • If it's a duty for God to communicate directly to everyone, then he should do so; vice versa.
Currently, no any self-acclaimed-omnipotent God has communicate directly to everyone, it may because:
(i) God don't want to do so.
(ii) God have done so, but many people are spiritually blind and can't see/hear God?
(iii) Those Gods don't exist.

Now, if God doesn't exist, would humanity still exists? If Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist, would humanity still exists? If i find a book in a cave which says that the universe and humanity is create by Blue Unicorn, if Blue Unicorn doesn't exist, would humanity still exists?


Hypothetical questions:

If Flying Spaghetti Monster exists, do you think Flying Spaghetti Monster would communicate directly to everyone? Do you think it is reasonable to expect Flying Spaghetti Monster to communicate directly to everyone? Do you think that rational people would expect Flying Spaghetti Monster to communicate directly to everyone?

If Blue Unicorn exists, do you think Blue Unicorn would communicate directly to everyone? Do you think it is reasonable to expect Blue Unicorn to communicate directly to everyone? Do you think that rational people would expect Blue Unicorn to communicate directly to everyone?
Excellent synopsis. I have some follow-up questions for you and will get back with those later as I am on the run right now. :)
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
1. Do you think God (if God exists) would communicate directly to everyone?

The concept of god is so vacuous as to invalidate any cogent answer.

Best we can say is "What is this god?" "Does this god have a desire to communicate?" If so, do human brains have the capacity to comprehend what may be a message? Of course, one may assume if such a god exists and wants its message to be understood in an unambiguous manner (as opposed to religious claims), it would have done so.

2. Do you think it is *reasonable* to expect God (if God exists) to communicate directly to everyone?

When talking of some provisional, unproven entity, such an answer is moot. The Fantastic Four probably thought they could expect to use reason to stop Galactus from eating earth.


3. Do you think that *rational people* would expect God to communicate directly to everyone?

Just depends. If the being is all powerful and all knowing...then I would expect it to communicate IF it had such a desire.

Then again...why would an omni being have a desire at all?
You have some good questions. I have some questions and answers to your questions but I have to go to work now.
I will catch you later. :)
 

night912

Well-Known Member
I think it is unreasonable to expect God, the Source of all Creation, to send messages to every human being on earth just because a numbered few atheists cannot trust Messengers, when God can easily send a message to one Messenger who can get the message out to everyone in writing that everyone can read.

It's unreasonable to send only one message to a messenger who can get the message out to everyone in writing that everyone can read except for those who are illiterate and cannot read. A reasonable being would send one message to everyone so even the illiterate will get the same message. That way the unreasonable and cowardly people can't simply say, "It's only my belief, and not an assertion." Instead, they will prove to everyone the fact of how unreasonable they really are.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
How did you determine prophets are an actual thing or that this Holy Spirit exists?

What method does one use to establish the criteria of "having an open heart?" Isn't your criteria for what is or is not such an "open heart" rather subjective?


Do you mean one who is willing to consider and analyze new claims about such things OR do you mean someone who will believe anything told them without credulity?
You have some good questions. I do not have all the answers but I have some answers to your questions, but I have to go to work now so I will catch you later. :)
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
If God exists and God is omnipotent, hypothetically speaking God could communicate directly to everyone rather than communicating through Messengers/Prophets. By everyone I mean every one of the 7.53 billion people in the world.

1. Do you think God (if God exists) would communicate directly to everyone?
  • If you think that God would do this, please explain why you think so.
  • If you think that God would not do this, please explain why you think so.
2. Do you think it is *reasonable* to expect God (if God exists) to communicate directly to everyone?
  • If you think that is a reasonable expectation, please explain why you think so.
  • If you think it is an unreasonable expectation, please explain why you think so.
3. Do you think that *rational people* would expect God to communicate directly to everyone?
  • If you think rational people would expect God to do that, please explain why you think so.
  • If you think rational people would not expect God to do that, please explain why you think so.

I think that one can have direct communication with God but it would require a deep level of vulnerability and openness that psychologically often doesnt happen except during some form of psychological crisis. Ideally we dont want most people to be in crisis. But perhaps we all are only we have ways of avoiding resolving that crisis directly.

The crisis IMO involves coming to the end of the virtue of one's own personality and facing its fatal flaw in the context of one's future life. The MUST HAVE of ones heart and spirit meets the CANT HAVE of ones reality. God may come in to rescue our sense of personal integrity if we can jettison all that is inessential to our self-centered, immature ways of thinking.

In many cultures there had long been rituals which served to help us through the stages of transition from one part of our lives to the next. Now our rituals are threatening to become mere formalities in a bureaucratic indifference. Either that or mere celebrations without true acknowledgement of the meaning of the event except as spontaneously realized by its participants .

Marriage, I suppose, is one of the last hold outs...those people who get some form of marriage counseling, a ceremony where the families participate and the joyful isolation of the newlyweds for a honeymoon still experience the power of ritual.

God is, ideally, for our psychological health when we fall into personal or social crisis. He/She/It can be found and interacted with but it is a rarified experience.
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
Some atheists think they are on the same level as God so God can and should talk to them like a human would talk to a human. Why does God owe them a private conversation?

Because the consequences of not communicating are so DIRE? Infinite suffering or other EVIL consequences?

If you created a road, and then? Put an invisible hole in the middle of the road, but failed to put up a sign that ANYONE could read?

YOU WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DEATH, MAYHEM AND DESTRUCTION SAID HOLE CAUSED.

THIS IS THE EXACT PERFECT ANALOGY TO YOUR EVIL "GOD".
 

night912

Well-Known Member
No, it is humans who are lazy. They want a direct message from God so they won't have to go looking for God's messages.
Agreed, so instead of actually looking for god's message and see find evidence to see if it was from god, they simply make an assertion that the message from their messenger was from god because god's message came from their messenger.

See how lazy humans are? What's next, say that their assertion is not an assertion because it's just their belief, all to avoid giving reasonable evidence to their unreasonable assertion. And eventhough admitting that their belief is theirs alone and no one else's, they still expect everyone else to accept their belief as a fact and not just a belief?
 
Top