• 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!

For theists: Does God 'want'?

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
First of all, I didn't say anything about you or anyone else showing us God. Secondly, why are you assuming that I'm "blind" and that I cannot "see"?
But if this is the case, then why doesn't this "super-human intelligence" produce itself to the point whereas denial of it is pretty much impossible?
What does "produce itself" mean?
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
Why presume preternatural agency rather than preternatural catalyst?

One reason that many presume purpose and, therefore, intentionality is that they take their scripture as holy writ. For the purpose of this thread, let's assume otherwise. What I'd like to see here is an argument for purpose (and its motivation) that does not rely on scripture and/or anthropomorphic projection.
Unless one proposes a thinking entity, even one nothing close to being human in nature, I don't see how this would be possible.... Just my 2 ¢
 

Guy Threepwood

Mighty Pirate
But they inferred preternatural agency, apparently without sufficient evidence.

As most of us do today, and any explanation for our being here.. kinda has to be preternatural by definition does it not? agency or blind fluke 'catalyst'- it's probably not covered under classical physics!
 

allfoak

Alchemist
Why presume preternatural agency rather than preternatural catalyst?

One reason that many presume purpose and, therefore, intentionality is that they take their scripture as holy writ. For the purpose of this thread, let's assume otherwise. What I'd like to see here is an argument for purpose (and its motivation) that does not rely on scripture and/or anthropomorphic projection.

I am compelled by some force within me to know myself.
My purpose is clear.
My motivation is the source that compels me.
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
This is a trick question.

God always wants what the believer wants unless the believer is specifically is violating a tenant of the religion. In which case what the believer wants is to feel bad about the sin they are committing... To reinforce their belief in the god through atonement... Generally, transcendental systems see each individual having a spirit, or soul and this soul is part of "god" or a higher self. Thus, ultimately god = self... The sentiments are clear via speech....

Anyway, it is reflected in common expressions:

"God bless you" - ordering god to bless someone (There is no please on this request... )

"Amen" - so be it... It is as "we" say... But, "we" are human... (Again, isn't God the master of fates? What have you to say of it?)

"God is Great" - "We" say he is great so he is... (How do you know? :) If he's truly great he should be able to prove it himself. (More this means "we" are great in the commonly used Islamic context)

All of these ideas hint that the flesh isn't "real" and ones "soul" is ones connection and reflection to the "god." You can't tell god to do anything if you don't think this way. :) Similarly, the identity of a theist is merged with the God... Verbally assault the god and verbally insult the person because God = I, me, we. :) The self-identification blurs the lines... Just like when sports fans go crazy over a team -- they consider themselves part of the team after a point. They will spend crazy money on the games, team gear, and even physically fight the fans of other teams...

The most powerful force in the universe isn't God, but ones sense of "self"... :)

I second the notion that maybe this is an attempt for a theist to mine for reasonable explanations for their beliefs to an atheist. What the theists probably aren't seeing is this is impossible -- atheists generally only accept materialistic proofs, and for everything else they're happy with "I don't know"... A theist doesn't have faith in god so much as they have faith that part of themselves is "of god", and thus this is the impetus of faith. This is completely subjective and obviously not provable; how can you prove you are connected to a god, or that that god might even care in any small way about you? It's OK if you feel that way, but it is a logical fallacy to even try to convince others. :)

As far as the plausibility of God goes a nebulous cosmological god of infinite capability but no concern for the average spec of dust is more likely than a god that gives a damn about the relatively insignificant goings on in ones life. This is the question the theists evade -- it's really that their religious logic doesn't make sense to itself. If God creates the entire universe then why has he the concern of one speck of dust? (Aka, humans...) That doesn't even make sense within the context of The Bible, or anything else written on the matter. If he creates all the good and bad people what is sin? Seems irrelevant - god made them sin by giving them the will to. :)

If all you can do is respond with Bible verses... PLEASE don't bother to reply... I'm only interested in the opinions of people who exist and are here. ;)
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Is there a necessary relationship between intention and want? ... between want and need?
I do not think so. A slave obeys because he thinks it is the right thing to do, but he wants to be free. "I intend not to get a whipping", says he. But he doesn't want to be good for it.
There is a relationship between need and want, but it is not necessary imo.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
As most of us do today, and any explanation for our being here.. kinda has to be preternatural by definition does it not? agency or blind fluke 'catalyst'- it's probably not covered under classical physics!
But the concept of infinity is, and most cosmologists drift in that direction. I use the word "drift" since they are not sure.
 
Top