How could they know?

Son Goku

Son Goku wrote:

Do you believe that the ancient Asháninka will be condemned because they didn't believe in the God of the Hebrew Bible?

wolfsbane wrote:

Yes. Just like the ancient Irish, the ancient British, etc. Man turned away from the True God and turned to idols. God in His justice gave them up to their rebellion. But in His mercy, He determined to save many and sent His Son to bear the justice that was due their sins. They hear His gospel and turn to Him in repentance and faith. A great number, from every nation and tribe.

Son Goku wrote:

How could they have known?
An Asháninka child didn't even know of the idea of a monotheistic God, how is it fair to condemn them?

wolfsbane wrote:

Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from
heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,

Leaving aside the question of children who die in childhood (another subject), the guilt of all mankind is established by both their practise - sin in all its forms - and their suppression of the knowledge of God that nature gives us and our consciences confirm.

I want to pick this up in separate thread.
In short I don't understand how this logical. These people were not suppressing their knowledge of God, they would have had no decent chance of formulating the notion of a monotheistic God as it was completely alien to their culture. Unless God revealed himself in different ways.

Also, in your first post you say "Man turned away from the True God and turned to idols", but this would only provide reason to punish the first generation of pagans. How could it justify those that came after them?

Medina

Son Goku, I have often wondered the same thing as you. What happened to the people who existed far away from the lands where the prophets of God first roamed. I suppose though we will never find an answer as to what happened to them, but IMHO God in His Mercy would not condemn the ignorant, only those who recognised the signs and proofs and rejected them.

Son Goku wrote:

Also, in your first post you say "Man turned away from the True God and turned to idols", but this would only provide reason to punish the first generation of pagans. How could it justify those that came after them?

I have to disagree with you here, because no one ultimately has to accept the faith of their fathers. Every generation has its own choice to make about what faith it will accept. Obviously this decision cannot be made until the individual gains a certain knowledge (I won't say age because that really is different per individual)... I suppose when an individual starts to question what it has been taught for its childhood years.

Zombrex

Son Goku wrote:

I want to pick this up in separate thread.
In short I don't understand how this logical. These people were not suppressing their knowledge of God, they would have had no decent chance of formulating the notion of a monotheistic God as it was completely alien to their culture.

The Judo/Christian God seems (according to the Bilbe) to be a great believer in inherited blame, the sins of the father effecting the son and all that.

The logic is that because the decendents of Noah turned their backs on God, and began worshiping other idols, those who worship these false gods and have no concept of the one true God are punished for the betrayal of the sons of Noah.

Sure the entire concept of sin is inherited from a mistake Adam and Eve made, all of mankind is punished for their mistake.

I'm sure this makes sense to a devout Jew or Christian, but it seems rather unfair to me, and hard to reconcile with the idea that God is supposed to love everyone.

The idea of punishing future generations for the mistakes of current ones is a common theme in a lot of religous from the time, including the Greek, Roman and Egyptian religous, so I doubt it seemed strange to anyone at the time.

dubwhite

Medina wrote:

IMHO God in His Mercy would not condemn the ignorant, only those who recognised the signs and proofs and rejected them.

Please forgive my ignorance here, I'm not a religious person. If you think that God would not condemn the ignorant, would it be better for the ignorant to remain so, thus avoiding any chance of being condemned? Also, would it not have been better for mankind to have been created with an awareness of God, so as to rule-out the need for prophets, priests, etc?

stevejazzx

Son Goku wrote:

I

Also, in your first post you say "Man turned away from the True God and turned to idols", but this would only provide reason to punish the first generation of pagans. How could it justify those that came after them?

No not if the next generation remains the same. Under the logic propsed by wolfsbane man in his ignorance would be puinishable for not embracing and understanding god. Again though, this leads to contradiction. An all loving God, all knowing god would would essentially be creating or be allowing to be created, generation after generation only to punish them.
At this juncture christians say 'well that's where free will comes in'. Its up to man to make the correct moral decisions. This might include educating himself first. But in the case of tribes the procedure and indeed conditions for free will don't exist as they do in western society. So do they get treated the same? Well under the belief of single true god it would appear they might, unless you propose that god forgives their ignorance but then if this is the case why even have them exist, what purpose would they serve to humanity.
That God has given humans free will to make their own decision seems contradictory to the god of the bible who interacts quite frequently with earth bringing punishment and reckoning for sinners. But if God doesn't intend on interacting with humans anymore instead allowing them free will, why didn't he begin the world like this?
Why set down ancient text outlining the stroy of his son only to disasapear from life in modern times? The people who existed in Jesus's times didn't have to endure the same the test of faith in belief of god as many of them witnessed miracles first hand, like the lepers he cured. So a cured leper goes off and devoutly lives by the teaching s of God, there is no test of faith.
So the breakdown is that people living now in these scientific times with a greater understanding of how the world might have been created are suppose to believe in a invisible god from ancient times who requires our faith no matter what.
Although we are able to categorically show many texts passed on throughout time as being essentially myths and legends, we still hold the supernatural stories of the bible in strict regard taking it for truth?
Further still that of all the religons that are known to exist we are to suppose that only one is true. The others are just myths and legends we say.
So we end up with a God of the bible who punishes and a modern God who forgives, endless inconsistencies and believing in stories only fit for childern or remote tribes.

Medina

Wicknight wrote:

The Judo/Christian God seems (according to the Bilbe) to be a great believer in inherited blame, the sins of the father effecting the son and all that....

Wicknight I think you are confused on the idea of original sin which is what you are talking about here...

First of all.. we don't believe in the inheritance of blame of the sins of the father...if God wishes to punish family of a believer, then this is a test to see if the believer will turn to God or turn away from God during times of trouble.

Wicknight wrote:

...........Sure the entire concept of sin is inherited from a mistake Adam and Eve made, all of mankind is punished for their mistake.

Original sin..'inherited from Adam and Even'..true. But this basically means that every human being is born not with sins already committed, but God has the knowledge to know that every human being WILL sin. I don't just mean 'has the capability to sin' because thats how God chose to create us, but that they will actually sin. Point out anyone to me who is not a prophet of God who does not sin....impossible...that is what original sin is.

Medina

dubwhite wrote:

Please forgive my ignorance here, I'm not a religious person. If you think that God would not condemn the ignorant, would it be better for the ignorant to remain so, thus avoiding any chance of being condemned?

I think Yes it would be better for their salvation in my opinion to be ignorant rather than to reject it. But God wants us all to worship Him, yet some nations may have had no guidance, who knows. So possibly believing, and worshipping and sinning there is still a greater reward for that than being ignorant (as the individual believed and worshipped). It is only those who reject it who would definitely be condemned unless God grants them mercy.

Remember that the person must have not made a 'choice' here, must never have questioned it within himself.The likelihood is that most individuals make a choice or question their taught religion in their life.

dubwhite wrote:

Also, would it not have been better for mankind to have been created with an awareness of God, so as to rule-out the need for prophets, priests, etc?

I think all humans have an awareness (if not a belief) that there is a higher power.Remember that Adam and Eve's sin immediately gave the need to the human race to be called back to God and away from sin. Prophets were God's mercy to us to fulfill that function. Priests are only leaders, who are supposed to set an example but often fail. Prophets had dialogue with God.

Medina

stevejazzx wrote:

An all loving God, all knowing god would would essentially be creating or be allowing to be created, generation after generation only to punish them.

God creates generation after generation of us out of mercy to give us a chance to redeem ourselves as a race by turning back to Him. God said in the Old Testament that He would not destroy the human race so long as there were 5 believers.

stevejazzx wrote:

. But in the case of tribes the procedure and indeed conditions for free will don't exist as they do in western society. So do they get treated the same? Well under the belief of single true god it would appear they might, unless you propose that god forgives their ignorance but then if this is the case why even have them exist, what purpose would they serve to humanity.

Why would free will not exist in tribes? Every human being was made with it. Fear is what held them maybe? It is easier to accept what you are born into than to go and find out the truth. They could serve several purposes to humanity...

Consider..if they started to believe in God as He is, then that would please God, and after all we are on this earth to love and glorify God.
It would also present an opportunity for a believer to do something magnificent for God, by preaching to them (regardless of whether they succeed).

stevejazzx wrote:

That God has given humans free will to make their own decision seems contradictory to the god of the bible who interacts quite frequently with earth bringing punishment and reckoning for sinners. But if God doesn't intend on interacting with humans anymore instead allowing them free will, why didn't he begin the world like this?

Angels believe without will. That is one of the major differences between us and them. So why create a second race? Surely it would be more pleasing to God to have a race who worship Him willingly than without will. Of course God interacts with humans everyday, people's prayers are answered, and people have a conscience..that is God interacting with us. And why give humans a free will if they have nothing to choose but God? That is possibly why God created Satan, so that we have a more difficult choice, thus the reward is magnificent for those who turn to God. God loves to forgive and loves to give mercy, but it must be sought first. If you don't seek it, you will be punished. And that applies regardless of the age or era and from past to present and there are numerous examples of it in the bible Old Testament and New Testament.

stevejazzx wrote:

Why set down ancient text outlining the stroy of his son only to disasapear from life in modern times? The people who existed in Jesus's times didn't have to endure the same the test of faith in belief of god as many of them witnessed miracles first hand, like the lepers he cured. So a cured leper goes off and devoutly lives by the teaching s of God, there is no test of faith.

Have to disagree again here. People in all ages have been tortured/murdered/martyred for their belief in God. Why? Because it threatens a man's sense of control and his ego to think they he may have been created. Jesus's disciples 'went underground' for a while after his death because they were terrified. And Paul was originally a bounty hunter for the Jews , to find and kill Christians, but later became a Christian. I think everyone goes through a test of faith, but many in different ways. Death, tragedy , famine , plague etc.

stevejazzx wrote:

So the breakdown is that people living now in these scientific times with a greater understanding of how the world might have been created are suppose to believe in a invisible god from ancient times who requires our faith no matter what.
Although we are able to categorically show many texts passed on throughout time as being essentially myths and legends, we still hold the supernatural stories of the bible in strict regard taking it for truth?

Science and the bible actually complement each other, they don't contradict each other. And remember that God chose to impart the scientific knowledge to individuals.

stevejazzx wrote:

Further still that of all the religons that are known to exist we are to suppose that only one is true. The others are just myths and legends we say.
.

'Religion' is separate to God. Remember that God exists no matter what, religions are modus operandi so to speak, instruction on how to live life according to God's way. Some religions are corrupt in some aspects (all are in their own way). The challenge is to find God at the heart of it all.

stevejazzx

Medina wrote:

Wicknight I think you are confused on the idea of original sin which is what you are talking about here...

First of all.. we don't believe in the inheritance of blame of the sins of the father...if God wishes to punish family of a believer, then this is a test to see if the believer will turn to God or turn away from God during times of trouble.

Sorry, but this is simplified nonsense. You propose to konw the workings of God for a start, which to the best of my understanding is a sin in itself.
The idea that god punishes decent peolpe to see if they will believe in him more is absurd, it would mean a comlete lack of inconsistency unless everyone is 'tested' by God in exactly the same way which clearly is not in harmony with the idea of free will.

[

Asiaprod

Medina wrote:

Original sin..'inherited from Adam and Even'..true. But this basically means that every human being is born not with sins already committed, but God has the knowledge to know that every human being WILL sin. I don't just mean 'has the capability to sin' because thats how God chose to create us, but that they will actually sin.

Then why did God make a flawed creation? Come to think of it, why did god make peple in the first place? For what purpose? And since he knows everything, why have some nations be aware of God and others not and, at least acording to Wolfsbane, condem those who are not aware of him to eternal damnation?

I am sorry and do not mean to offend but I find this whole situation very sadistic. I do not understand what God gets out of this arrangement. Why not just make perfect humans and keep them with him in heaven.

Medina

Sorry Asiaprod if I come across the wrong way here, but I do feel I have to repeat myself

Asiaprod wrote:

Then why did God make a flawed creation? Come to think of it, why did god make peple in the first place? For what purpose?
.

Because Angels are unflawed, they worship without will. God created a race who of their own free will choose to worship and glorify him

Asiaprod wrote:

And since he knows everything, why have some nations be aware of God and others not and, at least acording to Wolfsbane, condem those who are not aware of him to eternal damnation?.

I think I explained this aswell in an earlier post

Asiaprod wrote:

I am sorry and do not mean to offend but I find this whole situation very sadistic. I do not understand what God gets out of this arrangement. Why not just make perfect humans and keep them with him in heaven.

You're not offensive, just sincere but confused:) you seem frustrated but still searching? I can see from your perspective why you see it as sadistic. But its not, its a gift to us

Anyhow, IMHO this is what God gets out of it as such:
-He gets the pleasure of being worshipped by believers who chose of their own free will

-He gets to Love us ( and likewise to accept our crappy (by comparison)attempts to love Him )

-He gets to forgive, to give mercy, to help and to reward us (which He loves to do).

-He gets to show us the delights of Heaven.

Don't you love the look on someone's face when you give them a gift?
Its a bit like that only a trillion times bigger.

Medina

stevejazzx wrote:

Sorry, but this is simplified nonsense. You propose to konw the workings of God for a start, which to the best of my understanding is a sin in itself.
The idea that god punishes decent peolpe to see if they will believe in him more is absurd, it would mean a comlete lack of inconsistency unless everyone is 'tested' by God in exactly the same way which clearly is not in harmony with the idea of free will.

[

God forgive me if I'm wrong or being arrogant. To my understanding , it is explained this way in the Old Testament.

Have you considered (this is my opinion here) that perhaps to be punished by God here on earth is a blessing if it means you avoid it in the next life? I think God does this too, sometimes to the people who please Him most.

dubwhite

Medina wrote:

Have you considered (this is my opinion here) that perhaps to be punished by God here on earth is a blessing if it means you avoid it in the next life? I think God does this too, sometimes to the people who please Him most.

I don't think it's every a good thing to be punished by God, if at all possible. Can you give me a present-day example of someone being punished for a wrong-doing?

Medina

No God only knows if that happens. I just think it does. It would be a mercy anyway. I wish it would happen to me.

But you know how sometimes we say 'That's like divine justice',.. maybe thats a person who did something very bad being punished here on earth?

Dades

Medina wrote:

Because Angels are unflawed, they worship without will. God created a race who of their own free will choose to worship and glorify him

I believe the requirement that people worship him is a flaw of human nature, which has been projected onto your God. He should be bigger than that.

Medina wrote:

Anyhow, IMHO this is what God gets out of it as such:
-He gets the pleasure of being worshipped by believers who chose of their own free will

-He gets to Love us ( and likewise to accept our crappy (by comparison)attempts to love Him )

-He gets to forgive, to give mercy, to help and to reward us (which He loves to do).

-He gets to show us the delights of Heaven.

Don't you love the look on someone's face when you give them a gift?
Its a bit like that only a trillion times bigger.

It seems to me you have just described a child with a box of puppies, some dog biscuits and a stick.

Asiaprod

Medina wrote:

Sorry Asiaprod if I come across the wrong way here, but I do feel I have to repeat myself

No problem, I am loving kindness personified:D

Because Angels are unflawed, they worship without will. God created a race who of their own free will choose to worship and glorify him

Humm, the flaw I find here is that Satan was once an angel, what happened? He suddenly seemed to find a way to break loose from this worship without will.

You're not offensive, just sincere but confused:) you seem frustrated but still searching?

How sweet of you:) Frustrated and searching, aren't we all?

Anyhow, IMHO this is what God gets out of it as such.......

Nicely answered, even though they may not be my own beliefs

Medina

The Atheist wrote:

I believe the requirement that people worship him is a flaw of human nature, which has been projected onto your God. He should be bigger than that..

Would you expand on that? Its very vague , I'm not sure what you mean exactly...

The Atheist wrote:

It seems to me you have just described a child with a box of puppies, some dog biscuits and a stick.

LOL!
Whats missing here is that the puppy can run away and get some scraps of food elsewhere if he pleases, the stick can't stop the puppy running away...

Medina

Asiaprod wrote:

Humm, the flaw I find here is that Satan was once an angel, what happened? He suddenly seemed to find a way to break loose from this worship without will.

You're getting there Asiaprod, you're almost there!

God created Satan, deliberately for the purpose of his rebellion. Satan (like man lets admit) refused to bow..and so God cast him down...so that we may have a more difficult choice to make to give our lives to God....and so that He could reward us when we do

Dades

Medina wrote:

Would you expand on that? Its very vague , I'm not sure what you mean exactly...

Sure...

What I mean is - it's a very human conceit to want to be worshipped.

You say: "we are on this earth to love and glorify God" - I say - whatever else he may be don't reduce him to the level of a flawed and insecure soul requiring adoration. Where's the noble purpose?

LOL!
Whats missing here is that the puppy can run away and get some scraps of food elsewhere if he pleases, the stick can't stop the puppy running away...

Ah but the stick will be waiting for the puppy. He can't run forever...

Son Goku

Medina wrote:

I have to disagree with you here, because no one ultimately has to accept the faith of their fathers. Every generation has its own choice to make about what faith it will accept. Obviously this decision cannot be made until the individual gains a certain knowledge (I won't say age because that really is different per individual)... I suppose when an individual starts to question what it has been taught for its childhood years.

Do you really think an ancient Mayan could have suddenly said "Father, I no longer accept Tezcatlipoca or Queztecoatl. Instead I will now start worshipping Jehovah, a God our people literally could not of heard of as he orginates in a land our records or maps do not even mention."?

Scofflaw

May I add my own personal piece of puzzle?

Given God is omniscient, he must foresee all ends.

*I accept that this doesn't impinge on human free will (God knows what I will do, but I make the choice of my own free will).

If God foresees all ends, he knows who will turn to him, and who will turn from him. There is no need for testing, since God knows the outcome of the test.

If God created us, he created some of us (I'd certainly include me) knowing that we would not turn to him.

My question is essentially the same as Son Goku's - how can he punish us for something he created us knowing we would do?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Zombrex

Medina wrote:

Would you expand on that? Its very vague , I'm not sure what you mean exactly...

If God is a perfect being of goodness why does he require worship from us?

Requiring worship is a human trait of arrogence and insecurity, commonly found in the Kings of history. It seems a bit odd that God would make us, give us free will, and then require we worship Him. If a father demanded worship from a son we would consider the fault with the father.

So if we assume God is a being of perfect goodness, it is illogical to assume he requires worship from us. He most likely doesn't, since a being of perfect goodness would not require worship from anything.

Medina

The Atheist wrote:

Sure...
What I mean is - it's a very human conceit to want to be worshipped.
You say: "we are on this earth to love and glorify God" - I say - whatever else he may be don't reduce him to the level of a flawed and insecure soul requiring adoration. Where's the noble purpose?

Well you've made a pretty generalised statement there really haven't you?

Two points there:

'Human Conceit to want to be worshipped'..why is it a human conceit? The answer I think is because we don't deserve it, our pride makes us want it, but we did nothing to deserve Worship. God on the other hand created us, our loved ones, all humans and all of this world. If that isn't enough reason to worship Him I don't know what is.

I believe requirement of worship and adoration by God is not because He needs it, on the contrary we owe it to Him, and also its a methodology for us to be recalled from sin. I don't think your equation of Love + Glorification = Flaws + Insecurity really works out

Medina

Son Goku wrote:

Do you really think an ancient Mayan could have suddenly said "Father, I no longer accept Tezcatlipoca or Queztecoatl. Instead I will now start worshipping Jehovah, a God our people literally could not of heard of as he orginates in a land our records or maps do not even mention."?

No, if they hadn't heard of Jehovah then so be it. (By the way I don't know who the gods named are, I'm presuming they are gods).

In Islam there is an example of a man who before Prophet Muhammed was even born, rejected the pagan gods of the Arabs (they had 360 + gods). Instead, he said he believed in one God who created him and everyone else. He didn't give God a name , but Al-Lah (Allah) means simply 'God' whereas all the other gods had names. He didn't know how to worship Him, what was right to do/wrong to do in prayer/life etc. This man's son lived alongside Prophet Muhammed. The son asked the Prophet Muhammed something along the lines of 'Is my father condemned , because he lived before you and didn't hear the message you bring?' The Prophet Muhammed, was later told by the Angel Gabriel, that the man was not condemned and that on Judgement Day, all the people of the earth will be divided into nations, and this man will stand alone as a nation of his own, because although he didn't know the way, he believed in Him alone.

I don't know whether thats true or not, but it is the sentiment I have for your Mayans. But I think if they had dropped the idea of multiple gods and worshipped one God who created all things , themselves included that would have been enough.

How do you know some of them didn't question all this multiple god stuff? How do you know they never had a messenger that we just never heard about?

Medina

Scofflaw wrote:

May I add my own personal piece of puzzle?

Given God is omniscient, he must foresee all ends.

*I accept that this doesn't impinge on human free will (God knows what I will do, but I make the choice of my own free will).

If God foresees all ends, he knows who will turn to him, and who will turn from him. There is no need for testing, since God knows the outcome of the test.

If God created us, he created some of us (I'd certainly include me) knowing that we would not turn to him.

My question is essentially the same as Son Goku's - how can he punish us for something he created us knowing we would do?

cordially,
Scofflaw

I think this is a question we all ask ourselves at some time in our reflections. I can't say I have an answer , I can only tell you what I think.

Here's what I think:

God created us knowing we would sin, that is correct.
God does not want to punish us, thats why he told satan that He would forgive us when we seek forgiveness (more than just asking, remember God can see what's in your heart).
God puts us through troubles some as a test and yes some as a means to an end for someone else. This is sometimes a test for us, or we are part of a test for someone else.

Your question 'why bother testing?' is a huge one and only God knows the answer. I believe that God knows all the choices we will make in our lives. But we won't have choices to make unless we go through tests. And God might deem it unjust if He was to turn to us after we die and say:
'I don't have any proofs of the good / bad you did in your life, but I knew what you do , even though you don't, therefore go to hell'. And the person was never put through tests, but if they had, would have committed murder.

Do you see what I mean?

robindch

> 'Human Conceit to want to be worshipped'..why is it a human conceit? The
> answer I think is because we don't deserve it, our pride makes us want it,

No, I'd suggest a much simpler reason: our evolutionary history as a species which rewarded status with sexual success makes us want to be seen as being of high status.

> God on the other hand created us, our loved ones, all humans and all of
> this world. If that isn't enough reason to worship Him I don't know what is.

Well, my parents created me and I've no wish to set up a church to worship them five times a day and I've no doubt that they'd think I'd gone mad if I tried to. Likewise, if any kids of mine started worshipping me, I'd tell them to drop the nonsense and go get a life.

Many (most?) anthropologists agree that religions evolved from ancestor worship, specifically of the male line, so it's hardly surprising that god, to this day, is depicted as a high-status male.

Medina

Wicknight wrote:

So if we assume God is a being of perfect goodness, it is illogical to assume he requires worship from us. He most likely doesn't, since a being of perfect goodness would not require worship from anything.

Well worship here to me means, give thanks, try to do good things for God, try to be a good servant etc. So maybe you have a different definition but I certainly think He does require it

Zombrex

Medina wrote:

I certainly think He does require it

Again, that conflicts with the idea that He is a being of perfect goodness.

If someone did something good here on Earth and didn't require the reward of acknowledgement we generally consider that a very good deed, a self-less act, which is one of the highest recongised acts on the scale of moral acts. Someone giving an annoymous donation to a charity, or helping out a friend without them knowing they helped them out for example.

Even if someone does something good, nice or helpful and gets a thank you in return we still consider that a good deed, so long as the person didn't do it for the thank you.

But you run into issues of ethics once you find someone doing something good but expecting a thank you or some form of reward. That isn't to say it still isn't a good thing, but the weight we put behind someone say donating money to a hospital but demanding a wing of the hospital named after them, is a lot less than if the person had just donated the money.

If God is requiring worship from us for doing something for us (that He did because He wanted to, we had no say in the matter) then that is like him donating money to a hospital but expecting a big plaque outside the hospital telling everyone how great he is. He demands people acknowledge what He did.

If that was the actions of human it would be considered a little distastefull. So it conflicts with the idea He is perfect goodness, since what he did might be good but here was certain higher levels of goodness above what He expects.

So if someone believes that God has to be a being of perfect goodness, it is illogical to assume that He demands or expects worship from us.

Scofflaw

Wicknight wrote:

Again, that conflicts with the idea that He is a being of perfect goodness.

If someone did something good here on Earth and didn't require the reward of acknowledgement we generally consider that a very good deed, a self-less act, which is one of the highest recongised acts on the scale of moral acts. Someone giving an annoymous donation to a charity, or helping out a friend without them knowing they helped them out for example.

So if someone believes that God has to be a being of perfect goodness, it is illogical to assume that He demands or expects worship from us.

Well, you could say that God does not demand worship, but that it is right to worship God (because he is the Creator, etc), and that not doing so is evidence of a wrongful nature.

Of course, all that would prove is that you haven't read the Bible.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Medina

Wicknight wrote:

Again, that conflicts with the idea that He is a being of perfect goodness.

If someone did something good here on Earth and didn't require the reward of acknowledgement we generally consider that a very good deed,.

We can't reward God Wicknight, thats not what I'm saying.
God requiring worship does not change His perfect goodness.You're looking at it from the point of view of when a human requires worship. It's not the same and you know it. God's motivation for requiring worship is nothing like the human requirement for worship. God requires worship as we do owe it to Him as our Creator. Humans require worship because their pride and arrogance demands it.

Wicknight wrote:

But you run into issues of ethics once you find someone doing something good but expecting a thank you or some form of reward. That isn't to say it still isn't a good thing, but the weight we put behind someone say donating money to a hospital but demanding a wing of the hospital named after them, is a lot less than if the person had just donated the money.,.

Jesus said to keep your good deeds quietly to yourself basically, not to broadcast them to one and all. God sees what you do and that is all that matters. Jesus said that if you tell others, the praise and thanks you get here on earth will be all the reward you get for them, you won't get any reward in Heaven. Of course someone doing that is being proud and conceited.

Wicknight wrote:

If God is requiring worship from us for doing something for us (that He did because He wanted to, we had no say in the matter) then that is like him donating money to a hospital but expecting a big plaque outside the hospital telling everyone how great he is. He demands people acknowledge what He did. ,.

God didn't just to something FOR us , He MADE us. He decided we should have a free will. But don't you think that God is owed thanks for creating us, for creating the world for us to live in , for all the things we have and experience we have in life? Your posts are starting to make you sound like a really spoilt child. Answer the question, do you think He is owed it or not?

Zombrex

Medina wrote:

God requiring worship does not change His perfect goodness.

A being, be it a god or a human, that requires worship/reward/or thanks for the acts he chooses to do cannot be a being of prefect goodness, since he is going the acts for at least in part, selfish reasons.

Medina wrote:

God requires worship as we do owe it to Him as our Creator.

Why do we owe it to Him? Who decided that? Us or Him? If you have decided that you owe Him and want to give thanks thats great. But if He has decided you owe Him, well that is a different matter all together.

According to you He has decided we owe Him worship, yet He is the one that choose to make us. Which would mean He did it for the worship, at least in part. Which would not be a selfless act and as such it would mean he is not a being of perfect goodness.

Medina wrote:

Humans require worship because their pride and arrogance demands it.

Exactly, the same principle applies to any being, including gods. As a being of perfect goodness cannot be arrogent you either have to believe God isn't a being of perfect goodness or that He doesn't require or demand worship for his actions.

Medina wrote:

God didn't just to something FOR us , He MADE us.

And according to you He expects worship in return. Which means the act of making us was done for partly selfish reasons. Which conflicts with the idea of a perfect being.

Medina wrote:

But don't you think that God is owed thanks for creating us, for creating the world for us to live in

That is up to us to decide.

If someone wants to give thanks to God thats great, just like if someone helps me with my bags getting off the train I will happily thank them. If someone doesn't want to give thanks to God you can say that is disrespectful or ungreatful if you like.

But to expect something in return for a good deed, while not being the worst thing in the world is certainly not the highest, and it would be very hard to claim that a perfect being would demand acknowledge for the good acts they do.

If I help somene with their bags while getting off a train I'm doing it because they need help. I might get a thank you, I might not. It doesn't matter, thats not the reason I did it. A better example would be the people who work with the homeless drug users. I doubt they get any thanks from the junkies, any respect or acknowledgement. They probably get abuse most of the time. Yet they continue to do it because they aren't doing it for the acknowledgement, they are doing it to help these people.

Medina wrote:

Your posts are starting to make you sound like a really spoilt child. Answer the question, do you think He is owed it or not?

I don't believe in God, so the question is rather irrelivent.

What I do know is that if God exists, and if He is a perfect being, He would not expect worship from us. He would most likely just be happy if we could all get along with each other.

Zombrex

Scofflaw wrote:

Well, you could say that God does not demand worship, but that it is right to worship God (because he is the Creator, etc), and that not doing so is evidence of a wrongful nature.

Which a lot of people do, just like a lot of people believe its nice to say thank you to someone who helps you out. I think thats great. But as you say ....

Scofflaw wrote:

Of course, all that would prove is that you haven't read the Bible.

.. the Bible states God requires and expects worship, which is a whole different kettle of fish, and which doesn't make sense if He is supposed to be a being of perfect Goodness. How can a being of perfect goodness demand worship or thanks for something he chose to do? In fact the Bible often talks about God being a jealous and selfish God, which would also conflict with the modern Christian idea that God is all about the perfect goodness and love

Medina

Well I think we have to fundamentally agree to disagree then.

If we go with your line of thought Wicknight, tell me first of all, what 1) a human being has to gain from requiring worship and 2) what God has to gain from requiring worship.

Because I don't think God has anything to gain whereas mankind has a lot to gain. God could wipe us all out in a whisper if He wanted, He doesn't need our worship which is what I've been trying to get across all along. So how can God be selfish when He has nothing to gain from it. Or are you saying that God has a sense of pride and arrogance?!

Worshipping God is a duty for us . But a duty which He rewards heavily out of the goodness of His heart. It's living your respect for God basically and acknowledging Him as your Lord, rather than being proud and arrogant and saying 'My parents created me'. Wrong. Your parents had sex. God created the body's creation system and God allows you to grow. Where do you think you get your conscience from exactly? Do you honestly think some power of nature gave the world the order it has..and I mean in terms of life/death/creation etc?

Zombrex

Medina wrote:

1) a human being has to gain from requiring worship

Mostly an ego boost and external confirmation of their self-worth.

Medina wrote:

2) what God has to gain from requiring worship.

I'd imagine the same thing

Medina wrote:

Because I don't think God has anything to gain whereas mankind has a lot to gain.

Would that not support the idea that God doesn't require worship. He has nothing to gain from it so why require it, and being a perfect being he would not require it anyway since his actions would be purely self-less.

Medina wrote:

Or are you saying that God has a sense of pride and arrogance?!

Nope, I'm saying that God doesn't have a sense of pride or arrogence, which means he wouldn't require or expect worship for his good deeds.

Medina wrote:

But a duty which He rewards heavily out of the goodness of His heart.

Who decides it is a duty? If God has decided that because of what he did we owe him respect and worship, then it wasn't a self-less act.

If we decide that it is a duty that is a different matter, and would mean that the decision to worship God is our choice, he doesn't require that we do. It might make him happy, as getting a thank you from someone you help makes use happy, but he doesn't require or expect it.

Medina wrote:

Where do you think you get your conscience from exactly? Do you honestly think some power of nature gave the world the order it has..and I mean in terms of life/death/creation etc?

I've no idea where my conscience comes from. Am I required to know? Is there going to be a test?

Medina

Wicknight have a read of this:

http://www.rationalchristianity.net/worship.html#vain

I think it explains better than me, why worshipping God is required for our own good.

tbh

Medina wrote:

Your posts are starting to make you sound like a really spoilt child. Answer the question, do you think He is owed it or not?

As a total neutral, I think Wicknight has made some excellent points. (s)He's made some arguments I never really thought of before, but totally agree with. Your arguments are all faith-based, there is very little logic in there.

Zombrex

Medina wrote:

Wicknight have a read of this:

http://www.rationalchristianity.net/worship.html#vain

I think it explains better than me, why worshipping God is required for our own good.

Nope, but I've read other such illogical and cyclical arguments.

God requires worship only because it is the correct thing to do. Yet it is the correct thing to do only because God says it is. How does that work?

"Worship is included as part of God's command to love him, for it's a proper expression of our love for someone who is perfect"

"Proper" according to whom? God?

The idea that you can demand someone "love" you is a bit of perversion of the concept of "love". Love cannot be demanded. The idea that you demand someone express that love in the form of worship is even more a preversion of the concept of "love". Required worship is not an expression of love. Its not even close.

Which is why I find it highly unlikely that if God does exist He would expect our relationship with Him to take such a form. The Bible is incorrect on this, in my view.

Medina

Fair enough TBH you're entitled to your opinion.

I think there is a lot of logic there. But maybe not...

Medina

Wicknight, can you tell me then in your opinion, if worship is not required by God (according to you), what God should reward us for in Heaven?

Zombrex

Medina wrote:

Wicknight, can you tell me then in your opinion, if worship is not required by God (according to you), what God should reward us for in Heaven?

If I was God I would reward the people who have lead a good life, who have been kind to those around them, who have shown compassion to others in need, who have loved without expecting to be loved, and importantly to those who did this honestly, not because they expected reward in heaven.

I fail to see how worshiping God alone means anything. He doesn't need or require worship, and it doesn't necessarily by itself help anyone else.

But hey, thats just me. Wacky crazy ideas like that don't really belong in the Christian church

Medina

Wicknight wrote:

If I was God I would reward the people who have lead a good life, who have been kind to those around them, who have shown compassion to others in need, who have loved and been loved, and importantly to those who did this honestly, not because they expected reward in heaven.

But hey, thats just me. Wacky crazy ideas like that don't really belong in the Christian church

Is this not worship to God though? That's more or less the same definition I gave earlier. Living your life God's way is how to worship Him.

stevejazzx

All wicknight is saying that god if he existed would be an infinitly complex and layered spritual being transcending all basic human ideas concepts and understanding.
The god of the bible is a humanised being for the most part with human emotions like revenge etc. The idea of worshipping him comes from fear. The ancient people of this world upon seeing a strom in sky gave extra worship as they believed thier god was unhappy. Nowadays however we can attribute such things to high atmospheric pressure etc.
If an undefinable figure as one true god of the universe and all creation really existed then his awesome perfection would transcend him above all things mortal and human. Man could never describe such a being, only search for cliches in ignorant times like when the bible was written.

Dades

Yikes this thread took some catching up on...

Medina, is not worshipping God (in the common sense of the word) a sin?

Or is it okay to not praise him and just live a life that is moral under his rules?

Zombrex

Medina wrote:

Is this not worship to God though?

Not under any definition of "worship" I know.

I'm nice and kind to most people I know, I don't worship them. Well maybe Kelly Clarkson, but that I a whole different matter. I've said to much....

As The Atheist says, can you lead a moral life while not worshiping God? I believe you can (if one believes in God in the first place.) Going to church is a form of worship. It holds little specific purpose except to worship God. If you don't go to church are you an immoral person?

This goes back to the original post, people who aren't even aware of Gods existance. They can't worship God since they don't know he exists. Yet they can lead moral lives. So why would God care if they do or do not worship him

stevejazzx

The Atheist wrote:

Yikes this thread took some catching up on...

Medina, is not worshipping God (in the common sense of the word) a sin?

No. I don't believe in christainity it is, Jesus says in John 4:24, "God is a Spirit and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth."
and to be fair to Medina I think she is equating the idea of worship with that of praise and thanks, she just kinda cornered herself or pinned herself down with the word worship.

atheist wrote:

Or is it okay to not praise him and just live a life that is moral under his rules?

This is almost the question of the thread, it would be odd to live by his rules and not praise him though, as by accepting his rules(by which I take it you mean the 10 commandents) you essentially accept that he exists.

Or do you mean 'his rules' as in a generalised sense of love thy neighbour, and therefore like wicknight said by just living as a decent person. It would be an alomst double contradiction for christainity to condemn such a person, as he would be good person abiding essentially by the rules of god without ever praising him, it would be a very christian anomaly:

How do we punish this good doer?

Zombrex

Think of it this way, if someone leads a good life, but never once attends church are they doing something wrong, have they displeased God?

The Catholic church would say yes, that one must worship God by attending chruch (amoung other things), by giving thanks to him at meals, etc. They say God not only expects this, he demands it from his followers. That, to me, makes no sense.

Medina

Was just having my banana and yoghurt for lunch there...

Ok, lets see, I'll start with The Atheist

The Atheist wrote:

Medina, is not worshipping God (in the common sense of the word) a sin
Or is it okay to not praise him and just live a life that is moral under his rules?

You're not really defining 'praise' here..do you mean prayer? Worshipping God takes loads of shapes and forms, I don't think it always has to be going to church...you can go to church and be thinking about the movie you watched last night. Your heart has to worship God..as in respect, admire, have awe of Him, be grateful to Him for the things in your life and pray to Him, turn to Him when you need help, turn to Him when life bites you on the ass and your test is hard.

There are various combinations of scenarios here...but basically No I don't think it would be ok...but I think as long as you held your belief in God and when you sinned you really felt sorry about it and asked God for forgiveness then you would be among the saved, with God's mercy.

For example, pagans can live moral lives with moral ethics and if these rules also happen to be laws of God, are they sinning? Yes I think they are, because they rejected God.

Christians (lets take it for granted that they believe in God) can live moral lives with moral ethics and if these rules also happen to be laws of God are they sinning? Well of course. But if they didn't feel sorry when they sinned, then no that wouldn't be ok regardless of how mostly they live by His rules.

Morality on its own is not enough. You have to have a belief in God and worship Him by keeping Him in your daily life.

Stevejazzx wrote:

This is almost the question of the thread, it would be odd to live by his rules and not praise him though, as by accepting his rules(by which I take it you mean the 10 commandents) you essentially accept that he exists.

Exactly I think you're right, and further I think it would be near impossible

Wicknight wrote:

Think of it this way, if someone leads a good life, but never once attends church are they doing something wrong, have they displeased God?

The Catholic church would say yes, that one must worship God by attending chruch (amoung other things), by giving thanks to him at meals, etc. They say God not only expects this, he demands it from his followers. That, to me, makes no sense.
.

I don't think you can go to hell for not going to church. It's only worth going if your heart is in it. But I think one should worship God by attending church with a willing heart and the desire to please God. But if you can't then find another way. Humbling yourself before God by pleasing others and not losing it when people anger you for His sake is probably just as good...there was no such thing as 'mass' when Jesus lived.

Zombrex

Medina wrote:

Your heart has to worship God..as in respect, admire, have awe of Him, be grateful to Him for the things in your life and pray to Him
... attending church with a willing heart and the desire to please God.

Thats a pretty good definition of "worshiping" and is exactly what I would feel God wouldn't demand you do, if he is a being of perfect goodness

God wouldn't demand that you admire him. He wouldn't demand that you are in awe of Him. He wouldn't demand you to be greatful to Him. He wouldn't demand you have desire to please Him.

You might be in awe of him, you might admire him, you might be greatful to Him for your existance and you might have a desire to please Him. You might consider all these traits to be necessary to call oneself a Christian.

But if He is truely a being of perfect goodness He would not expect, require or demand any of the above. If you do them you do it because you want to, God doesn't expect you to.

stevejazzx

Medina wrote:

I don't think you can go to hell for not going to church. It's only worth going .

oh you can!:eek:
depends what kinda of genrealised, humanised mood that the supreme deity is in.....you might get away it though if you can convince him that you're an honest person seeking true forgiveness, but you must not except forgiveness, this is presumption and drives god bannanas, so basically you gotta put a lotta fear in your heart and turn on the waterworks, worship night and day, (day and night, Theres an oh such a hungry yearning burning inside of me.....) and if all that doesn't work then you can become a suicide bomber, a surefire passport to a comfy afterlife

Medina

Wicknight wrote:

Thats a pretty good definition of "worshiping" and is exactly what I would feel God wouldn't demand you do, if he is a being of perfect goodness

God wouldn't demand that you admire him. He wouldn't demand that you are in awe of Him. He wouldn't demand you to be greatful to Him. He wouldn't demand you have desire to please Him.

You might be in awe of him, you might admire him, you might be greatful to Him for your existance and you might have a desire to please Him. You might consider all these traits to be necessary to call oneself a Christian.

But if He is truely a being of perfect goodness He would not expect, require or demand any of the above. If you do them you do it because you want to, God doesn't expect you to.

So if people didn't do this, it would be ok with God?
God would advocate total chaos and people doing as they pleased?

Scofflaw

Medina wrote:

So if people didn't do this, it would be ok with God?
God would advocate total chaos and people doing as they pleased?

"People doing as they please" = operation of free will. I presume he'd be happy with the idea, particularly if he created us so that we would worship him of our own free will, as opposed to the angels doing it of their nature.

It still seems entirely immoral that anyone should punish us for our nature, when they gave us that nature.

cordially,
Scofflaw