Solanalos

And also [to the Christians], does God demand worship from us humans in order for us to get into heaven?

Cross Examiner

I [of 'the Christians'] did respond directly to your oft-repeated question here; see the middle of the post. Short answer is God does not 'demand worship from us humans in order for us to get into heaven' though those who chose not to know/seek Him in this life will not be in His presence in the next. The criteria for attaining heaven is not worship, per se, it is relationship, a subtle but important distinction. Now, a right relationship naturally leads to other things like worship. For example, a knowing, grateful heart naturally seeks to exalt its benefactor. I'm not sure exactly what you're looking for, Solanalos, but please do let me know if I can clarify something.

Regards,
BGic

Mageth

Now, a right relationship naturally leads to other things like worship.

A healthy relationship is typically considered mutual and two-way. So does God worship us as well?

If not, then the relationship is hierarchical, is more one of servitude and submission than of mutual benefit, and the "worship" would seem to be a "requirement" of the hierarchy.

Cross Examiner

Even if your first premise [1] is granted, for argument's sake, what would God worship man for, exactly? Are all 'hierarchical' relationships between two entities that of served and server? What about father-son? That doesn't seem to fit your paradigm [2] well at all. Perhaps you could elucidate?

Regards,
BGic

Mageth

Originally posted by Billy Graham is cool
Even if your first premise [1] is granted, for argument's sake, what would God worship man for, exactly?

To particpate equally in the relationship? If I love someone, I compliment them at least, try to build them up and encourage them, if not necessarily "worship" them. I appreciate it when they do the same. Why should I want a relationship with a being that will at least accept "worship" from me, if not require it, while refusing to return the same? Doesn't sound like a very healthy relationship to me.

Are all 'hierarchical' relationships between two entities that of served and server? What about father-son? That doesn't seem to fit your paradigm [2] well at all. Perhaps you could elucidate?

Regards,
BGic

Well, how would God benefit from a relationship with me, exactly? What's in it for him? Perhaps you need to elucidate more on this "relationship" God is supposed to have with a human.

Note that in a healthy father-son relationship, the "worship" typically goes both ways. One wouldn't expect a son to praise his father, while his father refuses to praise his son.

Cross Examiner

God should worship man for participating 'equally in the relationship?'

God has complimented man and encouraged him yet does not worship man, as you rightly differentiate.

If God does not accept your worship then he refuses it. A perfect entity (e.g. God) that refused your acknowledgement that He is indeed perfect would actually be imperfect and would not, accordingly, be worthy of your attention since you would be his equal, in a certain sense, the two of you sharing imperfect natures. Similarly, a perfect entity (e.g. God) that extolled virtues in you that did not exist would be imperfect and would be, again, unworthy of your attention. Only perfection rightfully commands rightful acknowledgement from imperfection.

God cannot be improved by creation. However, love, by way of creation, is increased as beings that have been voluntarily been transformed into the image of Christ, vis-�-vis this finite experience, freely and everlastingly choose to pursue the welfare of other beings. Abstract? Yes, but I trust you gather the implication of this, you being one of the brighter bulbs -- though I can certainly explain further if need be.

The love and encouragement surely goes both ways. But these are different beasts from worship. Bear in mind that worship is, at its simplest, rightful acknowledgement.

Regards,
BGic

Mageth

Originally posted by Billy Graham is cool
God should worship man for participating 'equally in the relationship?'

Technically, I said to particpate equally in the relationship. If worship is "rightful acknowledgement", as you claim, and which seems reasonable to me, then I don't see what the problem with this would be - i.e. I don't see why God wouldn't reciprocate with rightful acknowledgement.

God has complimented man and encouraged him yet does not worship man, as you rightly differentiate.

So God doesn't give man "rightful acknowledgement"? Does man not deserve it? Because if he does to any degree and God does not, then God is not perfect. If he doesn't, then I question what a perfect God would be doing in a relationship with such a being.

If God does not accept your worship then he refuses it. A perfect entity (e.g. God) that refused your acknowledgement that He is indeed perfect would actually be imperfect and would not, accordingly, be worthy of your attention since you would be his equal, in a certain sense, the two of you sharing imperfect natures.

I'm not really questioning god's accepting our worship; I'm questioning how, if it's one-sided, it's part of a healthy relationship (or at least my concept of a healthy relationship). In any case, if "worship" is "rightful acknowledgement", then it seems a "perfect being" would have to give it where it was due as well as accept it.

Similarly, a perfect entity (e.g. God) that extolled virtues in you that did not exist would be imperfect and would be, again, unworthy of your attention.

But should the perfect entity not extol virtues in me that do exist? Surely you're not saying that god sees no "virtues" in any human? If that were true, then I would argue that a perfect god would not seek a relationship with such a being, nor desire or acknowledge any kind of "worship" from such a being, for such worship would be quite imperfect.

Only perfection rightfully commands rightful acknowledgement from imperfection.

Well, you seem to be making this a bit black-and-white. Is an imperfect being never deserving of "rightful acknowledgement"? for what virtues it may have?

Further, your use of "commands" seems to be a bit contrary to the point you seem to be trying to make about God not demanding worship. Maybe I'm just over-interpreting it, though.

God cannot be improved by creation. However, love, by way of creation, is increased as beings that have been voluntarily been transformed into the image of Christ, vis-�-vis this finite experience, freely and everlastingly choose to pursue the welfare of other beings.

But if God is perfect, is he not all or the completeness of love? How can love be increased in a "universe" with such a perfect being? Why would he desire to create a world and beings to "increase" love? That would seem to imply that, somehow, God was lacking in love. If he were indeed perfect and wasn't lacking in love, love could not be increased.

Stated differently, what benefit would a perfect God get from love from, or between, imperfect human beings?

Abstract? Yes, but I trust you gather the implication of this, you being one of the brighter bulbs -- though I can certainly explain further if need be.

I understand the implications, but it obviously raises some quesitons.

The love and encouragement surely goes both ways. But these are different beasts from worship. Bear in mind that worship is, at its simplest, rightful acknowledgement.

Again, I don't see a problem with God returning "rightful acknowledgement" to us where deserved. Being perfect, it would seem he must.

Incidentally, if you're interested in a different take on the "perfection" of God, and how God might indeed benefit from the world and a relationship with humans, you might want to read C. G. Jung's Answer to Job, if you haven't. Note that I'm not saying I necessarily agree with Jung's admittedly (primarily) emotionally-based and not theological arguments in the book, but he does present some interesting food for thought, and a possible (if not plausible) solution to the problems the book of Job and other OT accounts of God's actions that, to many, are hard to reconcile with the God of the NT.

Cross Examiner

Excellent, we agree. Problem is, most wouldn't consider God's rightful acknowledgement of man as worship of man, in the colloquial sense of worship, since the latter typically denotes exaltation of the virtue of the subject. Man, devoid of virtue compared to God's standard, subsequently does not receive worship from God, in the colloquial sense.

God does give man rightful acknowledgement but it is not worship in the sense that man worships God. Man does deserve that rightful acknowledgement that God gives him.

Which He does.

God should and does extol those virtues that man possesses, if there are any virtues of man's own manufacture for God to extol.

What virtues do the imperfect beings possess that may be extolled by a perfect being?

What do you mean by 'all or the completeness of love?'

The same way that there is more 'existence' since God's creation of other beings in possession of this very essence of existence without God, Himself, existing more as a consequence.

Perhaps for the same reason my wife and I helped to create our son. My son's existence did not alter my essence as a man in any way but his existence does precede (ontologically) a relationship in which a new bond of love has been created.

God, Himself, lacks no measure of love. Love exists eternally between the Trinity and neither our existence nor our love improves upon this internal state of affairs.

God, for all His perfection, is not all being� there are other beings that are not God (this is a no pantheism zone ). God is utterly characterized by love yet is not necessarily love itself, in a literal sense. Thus, when beings are created, He is not these beings, and when beings love other beings, He is not literally the bond of love that exists between these beings. So, love, as a thing separate from God, is increased without indicating any deficiency in the essence of God as a perfect being.

God improves in no way from imperfect beings. Altruism, another aspect of love, increases from imperfect beings voluntarily made perfect voluntarily seeking the good of others. God has an interest in altruism as He does love, without 'being' either of these things, per se, as mentioned. I've heard the analogy that God is luminance and we are mirrors who return the light to one another and to God in perfect symbiosis. Obviously, this too is extremely abstract but it may help one to understand the 'point' of Christianity, and, if Christianity is truth (not that I doubt ), this existence.

Thanks for the reference, Mageth. I'll keep that in mind. If you happened to skip to the bottom without reading my buzzing above, which is sometimes advisable, I'd be comfortable summing it all up as: God, Himself, cannot be improved upon by any external thing; another�s love, existence etc. but does create others out of His good nature so that others may yet voluntarily experience what He knows so well Himself: love. And love (altruism, self-sacrifice etc.) of course, is a great virtue.

Regards,
BGic

Singerian

I have to admit, BGic, that was a perfect portrayal of God. The only way it could have been made pefecter would be if somehow God were to exist. I mean, I know "God exists," but seriously, just between me and you, I've been thinking about an idea where God actually does exist, thus making him theoretically even richer in perfectness. That's not to say it would take anything away from the perfectitude that you presented. But if there's any way your portrayal could be improved without making it less perfect than the more perfected addition, in which God really does exist, then I think I should go for it.

Cross Examiner

Thanks, Singerian. And on that relevant note, I submit to the jury the wisdom of Ralph Wiggum:

"Dear Ms. Hoover, you have lime disease. We miss you. Kevin's biting me. Come back soon! Here's a drawing of a spider monkey. Love, Ralph"

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible!"

"Oh, boy, sleep! That's where I'm a Viking!"

"My cat's breath smells like catfood."

"When I grow up, I'm going to Bovine University!"

"You're like my mommy after a box of wine!"

"The doctor said I wouldn't have so many nose bleeds if I kept my finger outta there!"

"I bent my wookie."

If you thought that was fun, then you haven't played 'Guess which state I'm from!' I'll give you three hints:

1. Arnold Schwarzenegger is my Governor (elect)
2. I live in California
3. I own two automobiles (one is a Volvo)

I think that last one gave it away but can you name that state?

Regards,
BGic