Obligation to God

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Ethics
  3. » Obligation to God

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Reply Sat 19 Jul, 2008 08:10 pm
As we all know, holy wars about who is right about God and creation and all that have been going on for centuries. There have been many debates as to the existence of God or a God-like figure, and much citation of the Bible, Qur'an, and other holy books for moral systems has happened. In the midst of all this, I have not seen much discussion about, if God does exist, why humans must obey what he says.

This has mainly come up as a question for me because I have quite a few moral convictions that are in direct contrast with much of the old religious teachings, such as homosexuality being OK, women being equals of men, etc. (Man, I love "etc."...it makes life so much easier.:bigsmile:).

Anyway, what are your thoughts on this? Assuming there is a god, if I, as a human, have moral convictions that differ from the Word of God in whatever form, why should I change these convictions to fit in with the Word of God?
 
Aedes
 
Reply Sat 19 Jul, 2008 08:19 pm
@Farthender,
The first task is to get beyond the issue of "assuming there is a god", which is a conclusion that can only be reached individually.

But then remember that even if you believe according to the western religious traditions, remember that God's moral dictates have been directly given only to a select few -- like Abraham, Moses, etc. The rest has been written down in scriptures, or interpreted from that which is written down in scriptures. It's not hard to believe that traditional morals (according to scriptural traditions) are not exactly how God would feel on the issue were you able to ask him.

I don't particularly believe in God, but if I did I would never be able to believe that he had as many arbitrary prejudices that humans do. In fact I think people's prejudice towards others is frankly godless.
 
Farthender
 
Reply Sat 19 Jul, 2008 08:26 pm
@Aedes,
Well said. I don't see how God could deserve our undying love and worship and all that if He (or it, or she, or them, or whatever) had some of the seemingly pointless positions that many Christian and Muslim religious authorities claim he has. I'm speaking mainly of these Western religions because I know even less about eastern ones.
 
Aedes
 
Reply Sat 19 Jul, 2008 08:40 pm
@Farthender,
In my opinion, for what it's worth, it's not about the religion. It's about the culture, and the cultural mores get absorbed into religious tradition.
 
midas77
 
Reply Sat 19 Jul, 2008 08:51 pm
@Farthender,
Farthender wrote:
Well said. I don't see how God could deserve our undying love and worship and all that if He (or it, or she, or them, or whatever) had some of the seemingly pointless positions that many Christian and Muslim religious authorities claim he has. I'm speaking mainly of these Western religions because I know even less about eastern ones.

I go with Aedes. With the claim religious fanatics labelling Words of God I doubt God will ever call himseld God the same way Marx shuns branding his philosophy Marxist.
 
Holiday20310401
 
Reply Sat 19 Jul, 2008 09:29 pm
@midas77,
Yes but how do we get society do deviate the culture from religion. And I believe the bible not to be an account of what God would actually be like so a self belief in God is wrong is it were to parallel human literature.

But at the same time, since there is no God, history is important, as there is learning, and we realise that morals and rights are not constant, and can't be. So as we can't have an outside reliance on God's account there is relating to the past for wisdom which brings us closer to what God is truly about, I think anyways.

We are obliged to read some literature but not to ever assume it is something no created other than by the human hand.
 
GoshisDead
 
Reply Mon 21 Jul, 2008 12:05 pm
@Aedes,
Quote:
The first task is to get beyond the issue of "assuming there is a god", which is a conclusion that can only be reached individually.


Agreed with the above.
If you end up assuming there is no God, then you question is moot. If you end up assuming there is a God, then work with him/her/it yourself. If there is a religion that has doctrine that feels right do it.

Quote:
Assuming there is a god, if I, as a human, have moral convictions that differ from the Word of God in whatever form, why should I change these convictions to fit in with the Word of God?


The answer is obvious after you have "assumed there is a God" with different dictates than that which you believe and practice, God by his/her/its nature and power is right and you are wrong. It ends up being beneficial for you to change your ways. So it would make sense that if you really don;t want to change your opinions you should assume there is no god, because any established "God" will differ somehow from what you want to do.
 
Farthender
 
Reply Mon 21 Jul, 2008 01:04 pm
@GoshisDead,
I think I see a miscommunication, perhaps: just to clear it up, when I say, "assuming there is a God", I meant for the sake of this conversation; I myself am agnostic and just wanted to examine this issue from a Christian/Muslim/Jewish perspective.

GoshisDead wrote:
God by his/her/its nature and power is right and you are wrong.

But why is God right? I'm not familiar with a good, sound reasoning for following what someone believes to be God's will, other than "if we do, we go to Heaven, and if we don't, we go to Hell", which seems to me to be more a selfish reason than a moral decision.

Well, I suppose one could say that since God created us, we owe him big time. But I think that if God created beings (AKA us humans) that could establish their own views on certain moral issues, then he should allow them to, rather than demanding they follow his moral system. It's similar to giving humans flight but demanding they do not fly or they get damned to Hell.

Once again, I'm using the "God created us" perspective for this conversation, I myself am undecided as to whether God exists. I'm doing this because I'm mainly interested in man's obligation to God in this discussion; if we didn't assume God existed for the sake of the discussion, the discussion would be meaningless.
 
GoshisDead
 
Reply Mon 21 Jul, 2008 02:22 pm
@Farthender,
I could have been more clear myself, If you assume there is a god with an agenda for his/her/its creation, given most traditional views of God, any fault in life direction would lie in his/her/its creations.
 
Didymos Thomas
 
Reply Mon 21 Jul, 2008 02:51 pm
@GoshisDead,
Because God's moral dictates make sense. 'Love thy neighbor as thyself'. That's not so bad, huh?

Aedes brought up the central issue here - culture. Religious strains develop in cultural contexts. The morals of the Koran were written specifically for the Arabian people who were moving from a nomadic lifestyle to an urban lifestyle and were in need of a new system to match their new environment. What's cool about this is that we can study the moral teachings of people from many cultures and incorporate the teachings useful to us in our own environment.

God is a human idea - morality is a human idea.
 
No0ne
 
Reply Mon 21 Jul, 2008 04:30 pm
@Aedes,
Aedes wrote:
The first task is to get beyond the issue of "assuming there is a god", which is a conclusion that can only be reached individually.

But then remember that even if you believe according to the western religious traditions, remember that God's moral dictates have been directly given only to a select few -- like Abraham, Moses, etc. The rest has been written down in scriptures, or interpreted from that which is written down in scriptures. It's not hard to believe that traditional morals (according to scriptural traditions) are not exactly how God would feel on the issue were you able to ask him.

I don't particularly believe in God, but if I did I would never be able to believe that he had as many arbitrary prejudices that humans do. In fact I think people's prejudice towards others is frankly godless.


A concious "god"

People just fight over the "Consciousness" of such a "god".

And "god" is the name of the christian creator of all thing's...

Muslim's would never call the maker of them self's and all thought and madder by the name "god", they call such an entitie by the name "Allah".

Even tho the concept is the same, the book's that speak of there conciousness are greatly diffrent, so people just fight over the told conciousness of there divine entitie's, even tho those entitie's are the same concept which is, the start or orgin of all thought's and madder...

(also people that are godless normaly dont care about such intelectly based thought's of a concept of where everything came from, there mostly thinking about everyday thing's of the physical kind aka money, food, water, shelter, ect.)

Intelect mean's--> Understanding of a higher knowlage.
 
Aedes
 
Reply Mon 21 Jul, 2008 07:16 pm
@No0ne,
No0ne wrote:
Muslim's would never call the maker of them self's and all thought and madder by the name "god", they call such an entitie by the name "Allah".

Even tho the concept is the same...
The word Allah in arabic is synonymous with the word "God", and Muslims who speak English use the words interchangeably. So the word is effectively the same, including the history of God as described in Biblical sources. It's actually the concept that differs, because different religious traditions alternatively describe God's role in our lives and in the world.
 
day phil
 
Reply Thu 14 Aug, 2008 12:15 am
@Didymos Thomas,
God is a concept used to describe and explain the unknown and spiritual side of life as well as to keep order in a society by offering a set of rules for which no one person must be accountable.
Some people need to believe in a higher being for their own peace of mind and I don't see a problem with that. The problem arises when groups of people claim to have a closer knowledge of god's wishes than others do (such as priests). God is within each and every person and whether you are catholic, muslim or agnostic, when you are in touch with your inner/spiritual self and have an awareness of the mystery of the world around you, then you are in touch with god. No one person can know another's god, and no person can bestow or withold godliness from another. It is all within and organized religion merely provides a framework within which to discuss our position in the world and our obligations to each other in our socitey.
To answer your question, if you disagree with your god, then it isn't really your god. You need to look within yourself to see what your inner heart tells you is right and wrong. The method is incindental, if you pray, meditate, take drugs, or just daydream under a tree it is all the same - the idea is to keep in touch with what your spirit is saying and to follow the promptings of your heart. Many people for whatever reason have lost touch with this ability, or have been brainwashed into thinking that they are unable to make such conclusions on their own and so subscribe to organized religion for guidance. Blindly following doctrines written by god only knows who (pardon the pun Wink ) that have been interpreted back and forth for hundreds and hundreds of years is not wise. All learnings must be tempered with individual experience and personal judgement.
 
averroes
 
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 12:37 pm
@Farthender,
Well said.
We don't have to follow God's rules, we choose our own paths. God loves humanity too much to have us be mindless drones blindly following whatever He says. It is our choice to follow the laws of God, even if we often fail to.
 
hammersklavier
 
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 12:48 pm
@averroes,
Knowledge is sacrifice sayeth the Gita.

For example:
Sacrificing through knowledge,
others worship my universal presence
in its unity
and in its many and different aspects.
9.15

Men who worship me,
thinking solely of me,
always disciplined,
win the reward I secure.
9.22

When devoted men sacrifice
to other deities with faith,
they sacrifice to me, Arjuna,
however aberrant the rites.
9.23

Whatever you do--what you take,
what you offer, what you give,
what penances you perform--
do as an offering to me, Arjuna!
9.27

...the disciplined man of knowledge
is set apart by his singular devotion;
I am dear to the man of knowledge,
and he is dear to me.
7.17
 
Bonaventurian
 
Reply Sat 24 Jan, 2009 12:50 pm
@Farthender,
If God is the Good, then we must will what God wills. End of story.
 
papasmurf phil
 
Reply Mon 26 Jan, 2009 09:35 am
@day phil,
Hey this is my first post. I think im gonna like this forum. All the other ones I've been at don't discuss, they just insult one another.

day wrote:

To answer your question, if you disagree with your god, then it isn't really your god. You need to look within yourself to see what your inner heart tells you is right and wrong.


You can't say what your God is or isn't. If God created you then you cannot define Him, but if you created Him them you can define Him. But to create a God out of imperfect human mind would be foolish because a God would have to be incomprehensible for Him to be God.

As the post above me says, if God wants us to do it, then we better do it. In the Book of Job, Job had gone through much suffering (losing his family, most of his wealth, and having boils) and he asked God, "Why?" God answered back and I'm paraphrasing here, "Excuse me, did you create the stars, did you create the earth, the plants the trees, and everything you see here? No, you didn't. I am God, I can do what I want. Why? because I'm God."
 
hammersklavier
 
Reply Mon 26 Jan, 2009 09:41 am
@Farthender,
Another line I found: 4.33:

Sacrifice in knowledge is better
than sacrifice with material objects;
the totality of all action
culminates in knowledge, Arjuna.

For me my obligation to God is to understand myself and the world. If God created the heavens and the earth, then the Universe, our world, and we are His writ, and thus in a sense embody Him. By understanding ourselves, we come to a greater understanding of Him.
 
papasmurf phil
 
Reply Mon 26 Jan, 2009 09:52 am
@Farthender,
True but don't take out of context. We are His creation, but we are not part God, we are made in His image. His creation shows the greatness and power of Him, but that is only part of His revelation to us. We see His greatness everyday, but a lot of people wont say that He is great, and even to a point to where He doesn't exist. The rest of His revelation to us is in Scripture.

But just to understand Him is not enough. If we understand Him then we know that we need to obey Him.
 
click here
 
Reply Wed 28 Jan, 2009 04:11 am
@Aedes,
Aedes wrote:

But then remember that even if you believe according to the western religious traditions, remember that God's moral dictates have been directly given only to a select few -- like Abraham, Moses, etc. The rest has been written down in scriptures, or interpreted from that which is written down in scriptures. It's not hard to believe that traditional morals (according to scriptural traditions) are not exactly how God would feel on the issue were you able to ask him.


Don't forget that many people believe in their religious books inerrancy, that their god would not allow for their book to become riddled with errors.
Also if you believe that God is a creation of man then he would be as how man perceives him. So there would be a balance in the morals as both are created by man from your view. So following the morals would also be a subjective decision based on the man made requirements.
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Ethics
  3. » Obligation to God
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/02/2024 at 11:35:03