Why do believers love God?

[muhammad_isa]

..But we all know there is no answer. There is no rational way to decide, under the assumption that a God exists, which one it is.

No, we don't "all know that" ..
People believe what they believe for a variety of reasons.
You paint a picture that theists all believe in versions of random junk

 

[RestlessSoul]

Well, if you followed the thread, you will notice that I asked it.

But we all know there is no answer. There is no rational way to decide, under the assumption that a God exists, which one it is.

Ciao

- viole

That doesn’t sound very rational to me. If a person believes they have found God, it logically follows that the God which exists is the God that they have found.

 

[viole]

No, we don't "all know that" ..
People believe what they believe for a variety of reasons.
You paint a picture that theists all believe in versions of random junk

Nothing could be farther from the truth. I claim that there is no rational way yo find out what the right God is, and that has nothing to do with considering theists believing in random junk. Actually, it is not random at all, because of the above mentioned partitioning into world regions and time. If it were random junk, then we would observe a uniform distribution of beliefs. Which we do not. And that is sufficient to exclude the "random" part. Wouldn't you agree?

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

That doesn’t sound very rational to me. If a person believes they have found God, it logically follows that the God which exists is the God that they have found.

So, God has at the same time a son who kind of died for our sins, and does not have any son whatsoever.

Which is obviously a logical contradiction. Therefore, it follows that what people find has no reliability for what concerns its ontology. On account of very basic rules of logic.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Jedster]

If the Scriptures didn't tell them that God is love and should be loved, how would they even know?

And that's where this question comes in. In life what would give a person a reason to think that there is a loving God that should be worshipped and loved?

Indeed, this was my experience from an early age.

And you shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart and with all your soul.....

This is clip from the Shema prayer that Jews recite regularly.
When I was taught this at an early age, I asked my teacher if I could see God. He said that no one can see God and when I was a little older I was told that "God is beyond all understanding".

I could never understand how a person could be commanded to love something.

 

[RestlessSoul]

So, God has at the same time a son who kind of died for our sins, and does not have any son whatsoever.

Which is obviously a logical contradiction. Therefore, it follows that what people find has no reliability for what concerns its ontology. On account of very basic rules of logic.

Ciao

- viole

You could always consider the Son to be in a superposition, until the spiritual wave function (yours or his) interacts with classical variables. At that point either the wave will collapse, or it will continue to evolve - possibly both, in separate distinct universes. In the event of the collapse of your own wave function, decoherence will ensure that the nature of the Son then becomes observable. Until then, the Son may be considered to be in two or more states (alive, dead, imaginary, real) simultaneously.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I claim that there is no rational way yo find out what the right God is, and that has nothing to do with considering theists believing in random junk.

Well, why do you think that people subscribe to a certain creed?
I think that there are a variety of reasons, and that can include for rational reasons.

Some religions don't claim to have anything to do with the Divine, to start with.
..so I would ask you for what reason you ask the question in the first place?
i.e. what are you looking for?

 

[viole]

You could always consider the Son to be in a superposition, until the spiritual wave function (yours or his) interacts with classical variables. At that point either the wave will collapse, or it will continue to evolve - possibly both, in separate distinct universes. In the event of the collapse of your own wave function, decoherence will ensure that the nature of the Son then becomes observable. Until then, the Son may be considered to be in two or more states (alive, dead, imaginary, real) simultaneously.

I am thrilled that you need to appeal to QM to find a loophole to what seems to be an obvious contradiction.

Well, it happens I am a supporter of the Everett interpretation of QM.

And that would entail that both Gods exist. Actually, a plethora of Gods exist. All in their own Universe.

Alas, that would also defeat the concept of God, as being the unique owner of all that exists.

So, that will bring you back on square one. I am afraid.

Ciao

- viole

 

[RestlessSoul]

I am thrilled that you need to appeal to QM to find a loophole to what seems to be an obvious contradiction.

Well, it happens I am a supporter of the Everett interpretation of QM.

And that would entail that both Gods exist. Actually, a plethora of Gods exist. All in their own Universe.

Alas, that would also defeat the concept of God, as being the unique owner of all that exists.

So, that will bring you back on square one. I am afraid.

Ciao

- viole

Correction; it brings you back to square one. Still, it appears you are at least prepared to countenance the possibility of a metaphorical abstraction being integral to reality, suggesting your mind is not so closed after all.

 

[viole]

Well, why do you think that people subscribe to a certain creed?

Simple, I think they delude themselves, at least the vast majority of them, for the simple reason that there is no rational reason to embrace creed X vs. creed Y.

I think that there are a variety of reasons, and that can include for rational reasons.

And what are they?

Chances are that you believe in X, and not Y, because you are born in an X area. In space and time. Where people believe in X. Where your parents, your friends, your culture, believe in X.

That is all you have, I am afraid, to explain why you believe in X and not Y.

Some religions don't claim to have anything to do with the Divine, to start with.

That does not entail that they are not deluding themselves either. We have an official religion in Sweden that does not believe in a divine being, but just thinks it is a sacred act to copy files. That is an official religion in my country. On par with Christianity and Islam. It is called Kopimism.

Of course, I consider that also totally irrational.

..so I would ask you for what reason you ask the question in the first place?
i.e. what are you looking for?

Nothing. I am on a religious forum in which everyone can speak one's mind.

But why do you ask? Can't you easily annihilate them in no time on account of your close relationship with the creator of the Universe Himself? Or knowledge thereof?

I don't know you, but if someone starts challenging me on math, or physics, I would not ask why
she is asking those questions, what are her goal.... I would either annihilate them with what I know, or declare lack of knowledge for failing of giving an answer.

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

Correction; it brings you back to square one. Still, it appears you are at least prepared to countenance the possibility of a metaphorical abstraction being integral to reality, suggesting your mind is not so closed after all.

You are wrong. I am not ready to accept any metaphorical abstraction being integral to reality to be true.

I will never recognise as truth-apt any claim that does not unambigoulsly defines the terms in the claim.

In your case, the claim is so vague that it cannot be true. Actually, it cannot even be wrong.

It is nothing. Basically.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Aupmanyav]

Love Me, that I may love thee. If thou lovest Me not, My love can in no wise reach thee. Know this, O servant.

Quid pro quo. Quite restrictive. God with all his might and love cannot reach people who do not love / worship / be a servant to him. What kind of God is this?

 

[Aupmanyav]

God allows all our choices. Those choices are the reward, or are the punishment.

I cannot hate anything which does not exist. All humanity is not lovable. It has people like Caliph Ibrahim. If there is a God, why he had to make the world in this way? Love me or otherwise I send you to eternal hell or you will suffer in this life and next (although there is no proof of this next. There are Abrahamic religions which do not believe in hell but even then they warn you of bad consequences). I just do not need any privilege or reward from an imaginary God.

 

[RestlessSoul]

You are wrong. I am not ready to accept any metaphorical abstraction being integral to reality to be true.

I will never recognise as truth-apt any claim that does not unambigoulsly defines the terms in the claim.

In your case, the claim is so vague that it cannot be true. Actually, it cannot even be wrong.

It is nothing. Basically.

Ciao

- viole

I’m not aware that I have made any claim, so I’m not sure what it is you are calling nothing. Unless you are taking issue with the suggestion that the Many Worlds interpretation of QM is a metaphysical abstraction? But you will be aware of course, that the theory is as yet unfalsifiable, so if it isn’t a metaphysical abstraction, being an interpretation of data which theoretically resolves a physical conundrum, then what is it?

Anyway, I am certainly not asking you to accept anything I say as being irrefutable truth.

I am suggesting only, that if you want to broaden your understanding of what is real, and of what it is to be conscious of the reality of which you are a part, you would do well always to keep an open mind - in other words, to abandon the principle of contempt prior to investigation. That principle will only keep you in darkness.

 

[viole]

I’m not aware that I have made any claim, so I’m not sure what it is you are calling nothing. Unless you are taking issue with the suggestion that the Many Worlds interpretation of QM is a metaphysical abstraction? But you will be aware of course, that the theory is as yet unfalsifiable, so if it isn’t a metaphysical abstraction, what is it?

Could be, but it appears to need no additional requirements on the rest of the theory. Unlike yours. So, Occam might prefer it.

Anyway, I am certainly not asking you to accept anything I say as being irrefutable truth.

Well, of course you can. All you have to do is to make it so that they are irrefutable truths. Until now, you are not even close to that ideal objective. Apart from desperately looking for some loopholes in vanilla logic in QM, or whatever. With the obvious risks in venturing into fields you have no clue about.

I am suggesting only, that if you want to broaden your understanding of what is real, and of what it is to be conscious of the reality of which you are a part, you would do well always to keep an open mind - in other words, to abandon the principle of contempt prior to investigation. That principle will only keep you in darkness.

When people ask me to keep an open mind, that means, in general, that they present me with some absurdity having not the slightest evidence whatsoever. And if I do not accept them, I have a closed mind. So, what if I just laugh at that? Simple, I have no open mind, and therefore I am weak and not open to new ideas.

That is too simple, my dear.

Before I could even promote your claims above the lowest level, the default laughable one, you have to provide much more of what you have. So, what do you have, apart from what I have already seen?


Ciao

- viole

 

[PureX]

Why do believers love God?
Below are the multiple choices. You can pick one or more, or give me another reason I hadn't thought of.

(a) Because the scriptures of their religion tell them that God is good and they should love God
(b) Because they see objective evidence in the world that indicates to them that God is good and worthy of being loved
(c) Because they believe that God is good since God has been good to them in their lives
(d) None of the above because I don’t love God

I want to love God but I have to have a reason that makes sense to me, so I thought by starting this thread some people might give me some reasons that make sense to me.

Sincerely, Trailblazer.

For me, it's B and C.

Yes, we suffer. But we also experience a great deal of joy, and love, and appreciation. And most of our suffering is being inflicted unnecessarily, by us. We could choose to stop it at any time.

Every morning I get up and leave the house to go to work, I thank God (whatever God is) for the gift of life as a human being, because I get to not only live, but to be aware of my living. To enjoy the gift of living in and of itself. The gift of being, and of being aware of being. To me, that is an AMAZING thing! And then on top of that amazing gift I get to live in a time where I can drive cars to work, and use all kinds of fun and interesting tools at work that make my job so much easier and more effective. All day long I am enjoying one amazing circumstance after another that most humans couldn't even have dreamed of! How can I NOT be grateful?!? I mean REALLY grateful? All I have to do is just look around me and I will see wonderful humans doing wonderful things for and with other everywhere I look.

Yes, we suffer. Loved ones get sick and die. We get sick and die. Some of us get sick and become poisonous to everyone around us, mentally, spiritually, and physically. Greed and stupidity seem to be ruling many of our collective systems and functions. And yet everywhere I turn individuals are still helping and caring about their fellow individuals. And even for other forms of life, and for the planet. Most people still want to treat others fairly, and with respect, and actively do so. And I feel so blessed that I get to live among such humanity.

I don't know what 'God' is, or even if God is. All I know is that I feel very, very grateful for the gift of my existence. And if 'God' is what's responsible for that gift, then I love God truly and deeply for it every day I get to experience it.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Chances are that you believe in X, and not Y, because you are born in an X area. In space and time. Where people believe in X. Where your parents, your friends, your culture, believe in X..

That is among the reasons why people believe something to be true, naturally,
but claiming there can be no other reason is clearly false. There are many rational reasons also.

It is beyond the scope of the thread to go into them all,
and I'm sure you've heard most of them before, in any case.
Your idea of what is rational is clearly not the same as many others.

Nothing. I am on a religious forum in which everyone can speak one's mind.

..then you have "nothing" to find.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Could be, but it appears to need no additional requirements on the rest of the theory. Unlike yours. So, Occam might prefer it.


Well, of course you can. All you have to do is to make it so that they are irrefutable truths. Until now, you are not even close to that ideal objective. Apart from desperately looking for some loopholes in vanilla logic in QM, or whatever. With the obvious risks in venturing into fields you have no clue about.



When people ask me to keep an open mind, that means, in general, that they present me with some absurdity having not the slightest evidence whatsoever. And if I do not accept them, I have a closed mind. So, what if I just laugh at that? Simple, I have no open mind, and therefore I am weak and not open to new ideas.

That is too simple, my dear.

Before I could even promote your claims above the lowest level, the default laughable one, you have to provide much more of what you have. So, what do you have, apart from what I have already seen?


Ciao

- viole

Again, as I have made no claim that I’m aware of, I don’t know what it is you are asking me to validate or verify.

If you are asking me to prove that the material world, as it presents itself to our limited senses, is not all there is, any number of theologians, philosophers and yes, scientists, can do that better than me. Reading what they have written, with an open mind, might entail you venturing into fields you have no clue about - but one should never be afraid of venturing into the unknown; it’s the only way to learn.

 

[viole]

As for things like COVID-19, absolutely. She is a beautiful creature of the Lord to me.

Sorry, I missed that pearl.

Personally, I have no problems with Covid. As a slightly misanthropic introvert person, I love social distancing. You have no idea how cool it is for me to avoid those stupid disco parties, wedding parties, friends parties, evening dinner parties, birthdays parties, Christmas parties, and all those parties where I am supposed to be social, nice and appreciating for what my fellow primates have to say, which is usually painfully restricted to useless smalltalk and the irrelevant.

So, if I were totally selfish, I would wish this pandemic to last forever.

But I am not totally selfish. I know to belong to the tiny minority of lucky ones.

So, I am aware that many people suffered from that. Many lost their dear ones, without even being able to be close to them. Many lost their jobs, or are still afraid to. Young people are losing their best years. And they are the lucky ones. Hundred of thousands of kids are entering poverty, which will undo what we have achieved in recent years.

So, why would any of those people, the vast majority thereof can be assumed to believe in God, should love God, if Covid is a loved product of God's creation?

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

That is among the reasons why people believe something to be true, naturally,
but claiming there can be no other reason is clearly false. There are many rational reasons also.

Cool. Show me one.

It is beyond the scope of the thread to go into them all,
and I'm sure you've heard most of them before, in any case.
Your idea of what is rational is clearly not the same as many others.

Well, I am sure you are not afraid to go beyond the scope of a thread when it comes to universal truths.
So, what do you have?

..then you have "nothing" to find.

Obviously. But I lived under the delusion that you theists had something more than nothing.

My problem. I am still sort of a romantic girl.

Ciao

- viole