What is god's purpose

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Mythology
  3. » What is god's purpose

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Krumple
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 05:01 am
I couldn't decide where to actually place this thread. I didn't want it specifically placed in christianity since I want the question to be broader even encompassing any concept of god or gods. So I placed it here.

Anyways on to the actual question that is the topic.

First of all some might just scoff at the question or completely ignore it. I think those that do are either afraid of the question or they don't actually understand what I am asking.

What I am really asking with this question is, what would god be doing if god had not created the universe? It seems that god has no purpose of existence aside from lording over humans. Or does god have a god that gives god purpose?

I really don't believe any of this stuff, but I think the question itself is something most whom believe neglect to ask let alone answer. It might be played off as god not needing or requiring a purpose but that in itself is a perfect answer as far as I am concerned. Because if a god can lack a purpose, then why can't I?
 
Victor Eremita
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 05:07 am
@Krumple,
If God exists, He must necessarily exist, as a God who came into existence, is a contingent being and is less perfect than a necessary being. So either God does not exist or He necessarily exists. If the former, then there is no purpose for God, and if the latter, His purpose is to just to necessarily exist.


In popular culture, also, a God who has no followers/worshippers is not a God, so his purpose is to have followers/worshippers.
 
Krumple
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 05:15 am
@Victor Eremita,
Victor Eremita;105114 wrote:
If God exists, He must necessarily exist, as a God who came into existence, is a contingent being and is less perfect than a necessary being. So either God does not exist or He necessarily exists. If the former, then there is no purpose for God, and if the latter, His purpose is to just to necessarily exist.


In popular culture, also, a God who has no followers/worshippers is not a God, so his purpose is to have followers/worshippers.



I am familiar with this argument. Not that I am objecting to it but I can't help but make a parallel with myspace or facebook or even youtube accounts. God just wants subscribers, and that is incredibly funny to me.
 
ahmedjbh
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 06:50 am
@Krumple,
Does God have to have a purpose? If we assume God does not exist, does the universe have to have a purpose?

Perhaps God is not a personal, knowable God, but something way beyong humanitys grasp.

Just because religions exist, it does not mean God requires us to worship him etc. Religions are generally for the benefit of man, rather than for God.
 
Krumple
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 07:06 am
@ahmedjbh,
ahmedjbh;105124 wrote:
Does God have to have a purpose? If we assume God does not exist, does the universe have to have a purpose?


the universe according to me doesnt in the least require nor need a purpose.

ahmedjbh;105124 wrote:

Perhaps God is not a personal, knowable God, but something way beyong humanitys grasp.


If it is unknowable then any and all qualities apply equally, even those for which you might object such as god is evil. If you object to such a claim then all claims are equally objectionable.

ahmedjbh;105124 wrote:

Just because religions exist, it does not mean God requires us to worship him etc. Religions are generally for the benefit of man, rather than for God.


But wait a second. If god creates humanity then sets forth a system to benefit humanity, then what is the point of NOT making it benefited from the beginning?

This circular reasoning is why I object to the concept of free will. If you are given the ability to chose what ever yet you are told a particular behavior to follow then by all means you are not under free will. You are under chose right or else. That isn't a choice.
 
salima
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 07:14 am
@Krumple,
i agree that god does not need a purpose and neither do we.

can it be that there must be intent, or god and the universe would cease to exist? people dont need meaning and purpose (i ought to know, i have been without it for decades) as long as we wake up in the morning and have the intent to do something. it may be as unimportant as going to the post office.

but suppose a person woke up and had no intention of doing anything and no thoughts came to mind (because i think they wouldnt after some time of having no intention to do anything). suppose he didnt even intend to get out of bed or go to the bathroom or eat breakfast...i dont think he would last very long.

so i am sure a god would have some intent to do something, and therefore be doing something outside of playing with us as though we were a game of chess for eons. a being that great would have to need something more than this world to keep him occupied. but the idea is that whatever it is we cant hope to imagine or guess or learn. we have a lot of smaller, less complicated questions than that which we havent yet begun to answer!
 
Krumple
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 07:37 am
@salima,
salima;105127 wrote:
i agree that god does not need a purpose and neither do we.

but suppose a person woke up and had no intention of doing anything and no thoughts came to mind (because i think they wouldnt after some time of having no intention to do anything). suppose he didnt even intend to get out of bed or go to the bathroom or eat breakfast...i dont think he would last very long.

so i am sure a god would have some intent to do something, and therefore be doing something outside of playing with us as though we were a game of chess for eons. a being that great would have to need something more than this world to keep him occupied. but the idea is that whatever it is we cant hope to imagine or guess or learn. we have a lot of smaller, less complicated questions than that which we havent yet begun to answer!


What if all needs are met? If you didn't need to eat there would be no need to eat. If you didn't need exercise there would be no need to get out of bed. If you didn't require sleep then there wouldn't be any need to be in bed. Imagine all need are met, fulfilled, and you are utterly without requirements. What then? Or should we be brave enough to ask the question, is gods only requirement to be loved?

Such a lonely existence, existing by one's self all alone in a vast emptiness with out anything. I wouldn't want such an existence. There would be no surprise, there wouldn't be any beauty in the mystery.
 
Aphoric
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 07:38 am
@Krumple,
Why must God always be the power hungry authoritarian? This concept of God appears (at least in my opinion) to stem from man's projection of his own will-to-power upon God. It seems to me that if God's purpose was truly to lord over humans, then we would all believe in God and that would be the end of it. Believe or be smited - that's pretty much how it would work. I mean, God's omnipotent, if God wanted to God could make you believe whatever God pleased.

Fortunately, you obviously have decided to believe whatever you damn well please - and have gotten off smite-free! This, I believe, is because you have been blessed with the gift of free-will. And with that free-will you have created a reality for yourself that is perfectly functional (and hopefully prosperous) without God. This, in my opinion is God's purpose - to create. Regardless of anything else, God is first and foremost the Creator, and free-will is the tool that God has given us to create our own realities, our own universes. Of course, free will also gives us the potential to destroy, but it is through these processes that we either grow closer to, or farther away from God.

Whatever we choose to do with this potential is our own responsibility and there are various rewards and consequences that we bring upon ourselves (and others) through these actions. None of this, however, suggests subversion or intrusion by a power hungry dictator-deity whose only purpose is control.

Of course, as ahmed previously stated, it's also possible that there is no intended purpose in all of this. There's an interesting concept of God the artist who simply creates here and there and none of it necessarily has to work or make sense and in the end you can interpret it as you see fit. I'd like to reiterate however, that the idea of authoritarianism in the mix just doesn't really jive when it comes to an omnipotent God.

I also disagree that if God exists it must be out of necessity, but I feel that is a discussion better suited for PM's or another discussion thread.

Krumple;105126 wrote:
But wait a second. If god creates humanity then sets forth a system to benefit humanity, then what is the point of NOT making it benefited from the beginning?

This circular reasoning is why I object to the concept of free will. If you are given the ability to chose what ever yet you are told a particular behavior to follow then by all means you are not under free will. You are under chose right or else. That isn't a choice.


But wouldn't the concept of free-will be much more objectionable if Humans simply came into being for no apparent reason than something must have created us? Such an existence would force us to accept God's existence, thus negating free-will and consequently the purpose of creation.

Although I don't agree with this argument, one could make the point that 'or else' IS still a choice. You either choose union with God or separation from God. The choice is still yours to make. An issue does arise when you consider man's limited consciousness/comprehension of the divine, thus making a decision which some theologies suggest bears eternal consequences kind of unfair, but even in light of this unfairness (because who ever said God had to be fair?), the choice is still yours.
 
Krumple
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 07:55 am
@Aphoric,
Aphoric;105130 wrote:
Why must God always be the power hungry authoritarian?


Doesn't necessarily need to be. God could just as easily be a passive unintentional participant who forgot the package in the back of the refrigerator growing humans. But to be honest, when ever we present a passive god people say, "well he does get involved just not excessively". I wonder just how they know just how much god is involved or its just something they want to believe rather than actual reality.

Aphoric;105130 wrote:

Fortunately, you obviously have decided to believe whatever you damn well please - and have gotten off smite-free!


I really don't choose beliefs. It is a lowest common denominator that gets the favor but it is never set in stone because I allow for new information to challenge the standings. Give me something good and I might just use it.

Aphoric;105130 wrote:

Whatever we choose to do with this potential is our own responsibility and there are various rewards and consequences that we bring upon ourselves (and others) through these actions. None of this, however, suggests subversion or intrusion by a power hungry dictator-deity whose only purpose is control.


What consequences? Are you talking about just in life or consequences after this life? Because one is obvious but not because of free will but because of the natural order of the world dictates it. Just like I have said before, I don't have the option to not eat and still live. I don't have the option to not play the game of picking and chosing, I must ALWAYS choose something. Where is the option not to chose?

Aphoric;105130 wrote:

Of course, as ahmed previously stated, it's also possible that there is no intended purpose in all of this.


Which is a possibility but if it is this way then it also has implications.

Aphoric;105130 wrote:

I also disagree that if God exists it must be out of necessity, but I feel that is a discussion better suited for PM's or another discussion thread.


Not sure why you think it requires a different thread because it is in line with the question.

---------- Post added 11-22-2009 at 06:03 AM ----------

Aphoric;105130 wrote:
But wouldn't the concept of free-will be much more objectionable if Humans simply came into being for no apparent reason than something must have created us? Such an existence would force us to accept God's existence, thus negating free-will and consequently the purpose of creation.


Exactly my point. Free will is a made up concept that doesn't actually exist. Just like I have mentioned there is never an option not to play the game. You must eat if you want to continue living. You have the illusion of choices but in reality you must choose. The options you have are limited. Where is the option to chose neither god nor not god? Where was my choice to not play the love god or hate god game? I didn't get that choice did I?

You see someone could ask me, who is your favorite baseball team? The question seems to be static that you must chose a team. But couldn't I just as easily say, "I don't like baseball so I don't have a favorite team." But according to your reasoning, you don't get the option to say, you don't like baseball, but instead you MUST pick a team. Therefore free will is just an illusion.

Aphoric;105130 wrote:

Although I don't agree with this argument, one could make the point that 'or else' IS still a choice. You either choose union with God or separation from God. The choice is still yours to make. An issue does arise when you consider man's limited consciousness/comprehension of the divine, thus making a decision which some theologies suggest bears eternal consequences kind of unfair, but even in light of this unfairness (because who ever said God had to be fair?), the choice is still yours.


My previous paragraph points out the flaw in the logic here.
 
salima
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 08:43 am
@Krumple,
Krumple;105129 wrote:
What if all needs are met? If you didn't need to eat there would be no need to eat. If you didn't need exercise there would be no need to get out of bed. If you didn't require sleep then there wouldn't be any need to be in bed. Imagine all need are met, fulfilled, and you are utterly without requirements. What then? Or should we be brave enough to ask the question, is gods only requirement to be loved?

Such a lonely existence, existing by one's self all alone in a vast emptiness with out anything. I wouldn't want such an existence. There would be no surprise, there wouldn't be any beauty in the mystery.


i am not really sure what you mean in the first paragraph. but i think a supreme being wouldnt require love. he might on the other hand require someone or something to love and care about...

in the second paragraph are you asking how would god have any fun if he always knew what was going to happen, and wouldnt it be boring to make up a bunch of lowly beings like us and sit watching as though we were a tv set?

one of the theories i read is that you are exactly right, the supreme being was bored and extremely lonely and that is what caused the universe to be born (and who kows how many other universes or events). if that were true, and if this being wanted surprises watching the sitcom that we are, he would give us free will-but not totally, because we are pretty dumb and dont know what might happen, we arent aware of the consequences.

is that the kind of question you are asking?
 
Aphoric
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 09:01 am
@Krumple,
Krumple;105133 wrote:
Doesn't necessarily need to be. God could just as easily be a passive unintentional participant who forgot the package in the back of the refrigerator growing humans. But to be honest, when ever we present a passive god people say, "well he does get involved just not excessively". I wonder just how they know just how much god is involved or its just something they want to believe rather than actual reality.


I've spent many hours on the issue of whether God "gets involved" or not. I tend to be inclined to think that God wouldn't impose on our free-will by interfering with our actions, choices, perceptions, or beliefs.

Krumple;105133 wrote:
What consequences? Are you talking about just in life or consequences after this life? Because one is obvious but not because of free will but because of the natural order of the world dictates it. Just like I have said before, I don't have the option to not eat and still live. I don't have the option to not play the game of picking and chosing, I must ALWAYS choose something. Where is the option not to chose?


I'm talking about in life. And are you sure about not having an option? Have you heard of a man named Hira Ratan Manik? Here's a guy who actually did exactly what you claim you cannot. He fasted for 441 days, and continued to live off of of the sun's energy and water. (link: Solar Healing Center)

This is but a purely superficial response anyway. Sure, due to certain physical properties, if you stopped eating your physical body would expire, but who says that's all there is to your life? I tend to believe that it probably isn't, and should you disagree then you're probably a physicalist, in which case I doubt that you're truly a lowest-common-denominator slave to rationality.

And, of course you must always choose something. Are you sure the option to not choose can even exist? An option is still a choice my brother. You'd still be choosing not to choose. That being said the very definition of "will" is the act or process of using or asserting one's choice. And I still assert that you are free to assert your choice as you see fit.


Krumple;105133 wrote:
Not sure why you think it requires a different thread because it is in line with the question.


I guess that's true, now that I think about it.

Krumple;105133 wrote:
You have the illusion of choices but in reality you must choose. The options you have are limited. Where is the option to chose neither god nor not god? Where was my choice to not play the love god or hate god game? I didn't get that choice did I?


Maybe I'm missing something, but what's agnosticism then? Pretty sure they're neither god nor not god, more of a maybe God.

Who says you can't be indifferent towards God? I mean as far as you're already concerned there's no such thing as God, so God has absolutely no affect on your life anyway, right? Yeah, sure, there's still a-hole ignorant obnoxious fundamentalists, but that's not God's fault, so why hate God for that?

Krumple;105133 wrote:
My previous paragraph points out the flaw in the logic here.


Are you sure the flaw in logic is mine? If so might I ask you to clarify a little better? I wouldn't be surprised if I'm just a big idiot because I'm missing something.:detective:

---------- Post added 11-22-2009 at 11:03 AM ----------

salima;105142 wrote:
i am not really sure what you mean in the first paragraph. but i think a supreme being wouldnt require love. he might on the other hand require someone or something to love and care about...


But then don't you have to ask yourself whether a supreme being who still requires something actually supreme?
 
xris
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 10:23 am
@salima,
salima;105142 wrote:
i am not really sure what you mean in the first paragraph. but i think a supreme being wouldnt require love. he might on the other hand require someone or something to love and care about...

in the second paragraph are you asking how would god have any fun if he always knew what was going to happen, and wouldnt it be boring to make up a bunch of lowly beings like us and sit watching as though we were a tv set?

one of the theories i read is that you are exactly right, the supreme being was bored and extremely lonely and that is what caused the universe to be born (and who kows how many other universes or events). if that were true, and if this being wanted surprises watching the sitcom that we are, he would give us free will-but not totally, because we are pretty dumb and dont know what might happen, we arent aware of the consequences.

is that the kind of question you are asking?
Surely Salima that description is not one we would admire. To examine gods purpose you have to consider all the consequences of this existance. We are all bemused at others descriptions and others may be confused about ours. I never find any logic in any claims put forward, they all appear to change on investigation or just become weirder. I'm not against the notion but a reason for this existance is well beyond our comprehension, if there is one.

I get a sneaky suspicion we are our own invention and we are what we dont recognise.
 
ahmedjbh
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 02:38 pm
@Krumple,
Krumple;105126 wrote:
the universe according to me doesnt in the least require nor need a purpose.

If it is unknowable then any and all qualities apply equally, even those for which you might object such as god is evil. If you object to such a claim then all claims are equally objectionable.

But wait a second. If god creates humanity then sets forth a system to benefit humanity, then what is the point of NOT making it benefited from the beginning?

This circular reasoning is why I object to the concept of free will. If you are given the ability to chose what ever yet you are told a particular behavior to follow then by all means you are not under free will. You are under chose right or else. That isn't a choice.


If the universe doesnt require a purpose, why does God?

As for your comments about God, I dont follow your reasoning. I think it is quite possible, that humanity can not fully understand God, in His nature, composition, purpose, etc. We maybe able to identify certain attributes, such as omniscience, just, eternal etc, but the why and the how is beyond us.

As for your circular reasoning arguement, to paraphrase is as follows: you say that we have the ability to do as we like, but certain choices have negative outcomes, so therefore we have no freewill.

I do not see how this can be correct, just because some outcomes are undesirable, does not remove our ability to freely choose what to do.

I favour an opinion inbetween, not absolute free will, or absolute predestination. Its as if we are placed in a car, which we can not control the speed. When we come to a junction we can choose left, right or straight on, however we must choose, and we must continue on this journey, some are driving faster than others (short life!) . The ones that choose well, arrive at a good destination, those that live life in a evil fashion, end up in an undesirable place.
 
prothero
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 03:37 pm
@Krumple,
The creation of value.
 
IntoTheLight
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 04:28 pm
@salima,
I wonder what makes the original poster think that God has a purpose or must have one?

I see that many people have brought this up as well.

-ITL-
 
Krumple
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 05:48 pm
@Aphoric,
Aphoric;105145 wrote:
I've spent many hours on the issue of whether God "gets involved" or not. I tend to be inclined to think that God wouldn't impose on our free-will by interfering with our actions, choices, perceptions, or beliefs.


But god has imposed. Let me put it another way. Let's say you are standing on the street corner contemplating crossing the street. Before you act you take out your handbook and look up what you should do. In the text it says that you should never cross the street because your god forbids it. So you wanting to follow the text do not cross the street. Therefore the only choice you made was one that was made for you. God imposed his desire of you.

Aphoric;105145 wrote:

I'm talking about in life. And are you sure about not having an option? Have you heard of a man named Hira Ratan Manik? Here's a guy who actually did exactly what you claim you cannot. He fasted for 441 days, and continued to live off of of the sun's energy and water. (link: Solar Healing Center)


I really was not talking about specifics, what I was getting at is, did you have the choice of being born? Did god come to you and ask if you wanted to play his game? Or better yet did god come to me and ask me to play his game and I said yes? I didn't have the option of NOT being born, I also don't have the option to not play the love god game. Therefore no free will.

Aphoric;105145 wrote:

This is but a purely superficial response anyway. Sure, due to certain physical properties, if you stopped eating your physical body would expire, but who says that's all there is to your life? I tend to believe that it probably isn't, and should you disagree then you're probably a physicalist, in which case I doubt that you're truly a lowest-common-denominator slave to rationality.


I am a slave to how my brain processes the world. EVERY SINGLE thing I do uses that rationality yet when it comes to the idea of god that rationality is abandoned. So why if you use it for everything else abandon it for this? That is irrational. It would be like me stepping around an invisible object because I believe it is there.

Aphoric;105145 wrote:

And, of course you must always choose something. Are you sure the option to not choose can even exist? An option is still a choice my brother. You'd still be choosing not to choose. That being said the very definition of "will" is the act or process of using or asserting one's choice. And I still assert that you are free to assert your choice as you see fit.


Do I actually have to spell it out completely? Let's use voting as an example. You can vote for believing in god or you could vote for not believing. But isn't there an option to not vote at all? No because you HAVE to play the god game. People will classify those who refuse to cast their vote into the category of not believing, but that is intellectually dishonest. A non-vote is someone refusing to play the game. But like I said, where was the option of not being born?

Aphoric;105145 wrote:

Maybe I'm missing something, but what's agnosticism then? Pretty sure they're neither god nor not god, more of a maybe God.


Agnostics only make the claim that you can't completely know or not know a god exists. They seem to technically have both a plausibility of a god existing and the possibility that there is no god. It is an option but it is not the one I am referring to.

Aphoric;105145 wrote:

Who says you can't be indifferent towards God? I mean as far as you're already concerned there's no such thing as God, so God has absolutely no affect on your life anyway, right? Yeah, sure, there's still a-hole ignorant obnoxious fundamentalists, but that's not God's fault, so why hate God for that?


You could be indifferent but that wasn't what I was referring to. You could believe in god yet care nothing for that existence but you have still played the game.

Aphoric;105145 wrote:

Are you sure the flaw in logic is mine? If so might I ask you to clarify a little better? I wouldn't be surprised if I'm just a big idiot because I'm missing something.:detective:


No you are not an idiot. I just have not presented my case specific enough but the reason I didn't was to avoid having minute details picked apart. I didn't want the examples dissected but instead I want the question reviewed. Analyze the question, break it down into it's parts and answer it like that.

Aphoric;105145 wrote:

But then don't you have to ask yourself whether a supreme being who still requires something actually supreme?


Exactly my point. It is why I ask the question. However if you say that god has no purpose then by all means I can also have no purpose. If I have no purpose then by all means my life could just be a fluke. A statistical chance that eventually happened.

---------- Post added 11-22-2009 at 03:52 PM ----------

salima;105142 wrote:
in the second paragraph are you asking how would god have any fun if he always knew what was going to happen, and wouldnt it be boring to make up a bunch of lowly beings like us and sit watching as though we were a tv set?


Wouldn't it? If this is the case then by all means god would have an incompleteness, a need or requirement. God fulfills that requirement by creating.

salima;105142 wrote:

one of the theories i read is that you are exactly right, the supreme being was bored and extremely lonely and that is what caused the universe to be born (and who kows how many other universes or events). if that were true, and if this being wanted surprises watching the sitcom that we are, he would give us free will-but not totally, because we are pretty dumb and dont know what might happen, we arent aware of the consequences.

is that the kind of question you are asking?


Exactly.

---------- Post added 11-22-2009 at 04:03 PM ----------

ahmedjbh;105175 wrote:
If the universe doesnt require a purpose, why does God?


What that question eventually leads to is whats the point of creating a universe to begin with. If there was no purpose, was it unintentional? Was it to fulfill something for god to create everything? Was god bored? Or does creating give god purpose for existence?

ahmedjbh;105175 wrote:

As for your comments about God, I dont follow your reasoning. I think it is quite possible, that humanity can not fully understand God, in His nature, composition, purpose, etc. We maybe able to identify certain attributes, such as omniscience, just, eternal etc, but the why and the how is beyond us.


All I am trying to say is if you say god is omniscient by what criteria are you using? Because as far as I can tell, any and all possible traits must be considered if you make the claim that god is unknowable. Therefore god could just as easily be wicked and evil.

ahmedjbh;105175 wrote:

As for your circular reasoning arguement, to paraphrase is as follows: you say that we have the ability to do as we like, but certain choices have negative outcomes, so therefore we have no freewill.


No it isn't about the negative outcomes. I am saying you have limited choice. Just like you only have two options in the god game. You either love god or hate god. You don't have the option to not play the game. You didn't have the option to not be born. You don't have the option to stop breathing and continue to live. You don't have the option to eat paint for food. You don't have the option to stop aging. You don't have the option to fly under your own power. You don't have the option to change your shape at will. You don't have the option to become a bolt of lightning. Do I need to go on or is my point made?

ahmedjbh;105175 wrote:

I do not see how this can be correct, just because some outcomes are undesirable, does not remove our ability to freely choose what to do.


Right. So I would only say you have free will if there was no imposing rule. If god never makes any claims as to what god wants you to do, then by that very definition you have free will. But since god gets involved in some way by suggesting, requesting, ordering, you to behave in such and such a way then by all means you have lost free will.

ahmedjbh;105175 wrote:

I favour an opinion inbetween, not absolute free will, or absolute predestination. Its as if we are placed in a car, which we can not control the speed. When we come to a junction we can choose left, right or straight on, however we must choose, and we must continue on this journey, some are driving faster than others (short life!) . The ones that choose well, arrive at a good destination, those that live life in a evil fashion, end up in an undesirable place.


Good analogy I like it. It also supports my argument. That you never had the choice to NOT get into the car. You are stuck in the seat and must play the game. Your choice has always been limited or imposed if you will allow me to use that word.

---------- Post added 11-22-2009 at 04:06 PM ----------

IntoTheLight;105207 wrote:
I wonder what makes the original poster think that God has a purpose or must have one?


I ask because there are implications to the possible answers. Answers that I feel very few people have investigated to their fullest extent. Perhaps even answers that they ignore because it would disrupt their idealistic perspective of their god concept. It is a valid question and deserves full investigation.
 
salima
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 07:32 pm
@Krumple,
Krumple;105215 wrote:


I really was not talking about specifics, what I was getting at is, did you have the choice of being born? Did god come to you and ask if you wanted to play his game? Or better yet did god come to me and ask me to play his game and I said yes? I didn't have the option of NOT being born, I also don't have the option to not play the love god game. Therefore no free will.

Do I actually have to spell it out completely? Let's use voting as an example. You can vote for believing in god or you could vote for not believing. But isn't there an option to not vote at all? No because you HAVE to play the god game. People will classify those who refuse to cast their vote into the category of not believing, but that is intellectually dishonest. A non-vote is someone refusing to play the game. But like I said, where was the option of not being born?

Exactly my point. It is why I ask the question. However if you say that god has no purpose then by all means I can also have no purpose. If I have no purpose then by all means my life could just be a fluke. A statistical chance that eventually happened.

---------- Post added 11-22-2009 at 03:52 PM ----------

Wouldn't it? If this is the case then by all means god would have an incompleteness, a need or requirement. God fulfills that requirement by creating.


What that question eventually leads to is whats the point of creating a universe to begin with. If there was no purpose, was it unintentional? Was it to fulfill something for god to create everything? Was god bored? Or does creating give god purpose for existence?

No it isn't about the negative outcomes. I am saying you have limited choice. Just like you only have two options in the god game. You either love god or hate god. You don't have the option to not play the game. You didn't have the option to not be born. You don't have the option to stop breathing and continue to live. You don't have the option to eat paint for food. You don't have the option to stop aging. You don't have the option to fly under your own power. You don't have the option to change your shape at will. You don't have the option to become a bolt of lightning. Do I need to go on or is my point made?

Right. So I would only say you have free will if there was no imposing rule. If god never makes any claims as to what god wants you to do, then by that very definition you have free will. But since god gets involved in some way by suggesting, requesting, ordering, you to behave in such and such a way then by all means you have lost free will.

Good analogy I like it. It also supports my argument. That you never had the choice to NOT get into the car. You are stuck in the seat and must play the game. Your choice has always been limited or imposed if you will allow me to use that word.



in response (i will keep each point a separate paragraph) to the statements that i have put in bold print:

if you had not been born, you would have no choice...you had to be born to make the choice and accept the responsibility.

i notice you have referred to the 'love god' game and 'the game'. it seems to me that you are one who is not playing a love/hate god game, and you have been given that choice. we were not given a choice about birth (though some people actually say we were) but we have the choice of committing suicide, and may people choose to do just that.

this third statement is interesting. do you believe that only if god had a purpose in creating you that you can have a purpose? or do you believe that you have no choice in whether or not you have a purpose, that if god had no purpose then you cannot create one for yourself? do you believe if there is no god and the universe came to be on its own as a matter of natural events, then you have free will?

what is it when a person creates art, paintings, poetry etc....is that indicative of their having to fulfill some need? i know the word need was part of what i mentioned, but perhaps it was inappropriate. perhaps it is an innate drive...

i dont see that it has to imply there is something outside of the god that he must have or create-he is simply being creative with what he already is, like a person creates a personality for himself, builds character, etc. it may be an example of his free will. he can choose to create something or not, and have a purpose or not, etc. this is where people assume his will is absolute, and i would think if it is that is why he would be called God.

whoever believes in free will would have to agree that we have limited choice. so it looks as if everyone agrees on this point, it is a question of semantics once again.

i think you may be confusing free will with absolute will. what you are saying (suggesting, ordering a particular behavior) can be no different than mother saying to little kid "ok, you can watch television but only til it is time to go to bed." or "you can go outside and play in the yard, but dont go into the street." that doesnt completely take away the will of the child, but tries to teach him how to make better decisions and how to be safe. even an absolute ruler on earth does not have absolute will. as you already mentioned, he cannot soar through the air like a bird, he cannot drink paint instead of water, etc.

your last sentence pretty much sums it all up; we do not have absolute will, but we have a limited free will and can make various choices, plus we have been given guidance. the only way i can see that we are stuck with playing the game and have no free will is if we choose to check out, commit suicide, then find there is an afterlife that we cannot escape. and that could have just as easily happened if there were no creator, and we are only the result of the normal progression of the evolution of matter.
 
Krumple
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 08:17 pm
@salima,
salima;105240 wrote:
if you had not been born, you would have no choice...you had to be born to make the choice and accept the responsibility.


Don't you mean, I had no choice in being born but still must accept the fact that I am alive? That is fine, but on top of that now I must learn about god, then I must make a new decision, accept or reject. But I am asking for a third option, I don't want to play the game. Do I have that option?

salima;105240 wrote:

i notice you have referred to the 'love god' game and 'the game'. it seems to me that you are one who is not playing a love/hate god game, and you have been given that choice.


Actually I don't want to be apart of the game. Just like if someone says, hey put on one of those uniforms, either the christian one or the atheist one and get out on the field. I'm trying to say I don't want to play.

salima;105240 wrote:

we were not given a choice about birth (though some people actually say we were) but we have the choice of committing suicide, and may people choose to do just that.


I have no desire to end my life by my own will. I know I will eventually die against my will but since that is the case I don't need to do it myself. There are other reserves as well of course. I could be wrong, I might miss out on something. To be honest life really isn't that bad that I would want out. My problem isn't actually with existing, it's with someone saying I need to choose a team.

salima;105240 wrote:

this third statement is interesting. do you believe that only if god had a purpose in creating you that you can have a purpose?


The question is really just to point out that you don't need purpose.

salima;105240 wrote:

or do you believe that you have no choice in whether or not you have a purpose, that if god had no purpose then you cannot create one for yourself?


If god has a purpose for me then by all means I wouldn't be able to choose my own purpose. I would just be living out his plan for what ever reason. But if god has no purpose then what is the motivation behind creating anything? When you create something it is usually for an outlet of either distraction or to relieve stress. It also could be an expression, an outlet to make yourself known in a way you can't do any other way. If god is doing that then god would have the same problem.

salima;105240 wrote:

do you believe if there is no god and the universe came to be on its own as a matter of natural events, then you have free will?


It would be closer to the definition. Since there is no underline good or bad actions the universe does not care what you do. If people actually believed that god would take care of all the injustice then there wouldn't be any need for us to take care of it. People really don't believe that the universe will be just so they take steps to make this existence just.

salima;105240 wrote:

what is it when a person creates art, paintings, poetry etc....is that indicative of their having to fulfill some need?


In some ways yes. When you do, it is an outlet for something. It could be emotional, it could be philosophical or it could be intellectual. Even the motivations can change even during the same project. Some might even use it as a way to escape their current reality. A way to put aside your problems doing something that won't hopefully cause any new ones.

salima;105240 wrote:

i dont see that it has to imply there is something outside of the god that he must have or create-he is simply being creative with what he already is, like a person creates a personality for himself, builds character, etc. it may be an example of his free will. he can choose to create something or not, and have a purpose or not, etc. this is where people assume his will is absolute, and i would think if it is that is why he would be called God.


I see problems with that.

salima;105240 wrote:

i think you may be confusing free will with absolute will. what you are saying (suggesting, ordering a particular behavior) can be no different than mother saying to little kid "ok, you can watch television but only til it is time to go to bed." or "you can go outside and play in the yard, but dont go into the street." that doesnt completely take away the will of the child, but tries to teach him how to make better decisions and how to be safe. even an absolute ruler on earth does not have absolute will. as you already mentioned, he cannot soar through the air like a bird, he cannot drink paint instead of water, etc.

your last sentence pretty much sums it all up; we do not have absolute will, but we have a limited free will and can make various choices, plus we have been given guidance. the only way i can see that we are stuck with playing the game and have no free will is if we choose to check out, commit suicide, then find there is an afterlife that we cannot escape. and that could have just as easily happened if there were no creator, and we are only the result of the normal progression of the evolution of matter.


Here is the thing though using your example. If your parent were to set down some rules, you actually have a third option. You can watch television but only until it is time for bed. There is another option here but with the philosophical debate you are not allowed the third option. My question is why.
 
IntoTheLight
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 09:20 pm
@Krumple,
ITL: "I wonder what makes the original poster think that God has a purpose or must have one?

Krumple;105215 wrote:
I ask because there are implications to the possible answers. Answers that I feel very few people have investigated to their fullest extent. Perhaps even answers that they ignore because it would disrupt their idealistic perspective of their god concept. It is a valid question and deserves full investigation.


You didn't answer my question at all.

I asked why you think God has a purpose.

You replied that people's answers to the question may have implications.

I didn't ask you what your motivation was for asking the question; I asked you why you think God must have a purpose.

Want to try again?

-ITL-
 
prothero
 
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2009 09:48 pm
@Krumple,
The creation of order, of complexity, of life, of mind, of experience and of value.
These things do come about in our universe. They do not come about easily. They do not come about quickly but they do come about. I would say Gods purpose is creative advance, the creation of value but it is a struggle. The "let there be ligt" version is a vast oversimplification. It was and is hard work; a struggle against the forces of chaos and entropy.
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Mythology
  3. » What is god's purpose
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/20/2019 at 03:41:56