Herbert Von Karajan

I know maybe this topic have been taken off couple of times. Theists I know boasts their God is omnipotent (no desires, no needs) and also benevolent, yet they keep their fuss by stressing I worship their God or be damned. I do not believe in such God, yet even if evidence there is that I cannot see, why must I oblige?

Isn't it better to help to save the environment than going to houses of worship and wasting time giving praises for a deity who has no desires ?

Isn't it better I spend my offerings on my church for the poor rather than fattening the paychecks of my pastor?

Isn't it better to think how to at least, think of the children instead of thinking "What would Jesus do?"

Cheerios. Hope I'm not wasting everyone's time.

Shadownought

Christians often tell me that because God is all-powerful and created the universe, we must love and worship him and never question his actions or motives.

That is complete and total nonsense.

Even if God did exist in the standard Christian form- complete with plenty of hate, genocide, and gleeful damning of people to eternal torment- I would not worship him. He doesn't deserve it.

Perchance

Hello Herbert,

I assume it's partially because of that impulse embedded in some religions towards the salvation of one's soul and personal immortality. People have been told that actions like tithing to the church, praying, and asking what Jesus would do are "safe"- that is, unlikely to get them damned. So they can do these things without thinking. Outside the fold, they may well have to walk the line between doing something good and doing something that could make them sin.

Granted, a theist would have to be fairly paranoid to worry about this all the time, but I've met some fundamentalists who would fit that description.

But I don't see any reason for someone who's not that paranoid not to do good. I assume someone who doesn't is either: a) indifferent as many people, theist or not, are; or b) hasn't thought deeply enough to see the contradictions between what he preaches and what he practices.

-Perchance.

sakrilege

This is not a naive post. Being an extheist and having 'worshiped' god, I believe it is a necessary question to ask. Some theists, just as I was, will be affected.

Gemma Therese

Herbert,

A worthy question indeed.

First, if you believe in God, you have to understand that God is infinite mystery and we will never really "grasp whhat He's all about. In the words of Augustine, "If you have understood, than what you have understood is not God." There isn't a word that can be uttered about God that does not in someway limit Him. Thomas Merton said, "Since God cannot be imagined, anything we imagine about Him is false and ultimately a lie." If you do not believe in God, such statements are meaningless, but I am answering this question from the standpoint of a theist and a Catholic.

Contrary to Shadownought's post, God has never and will never send anyone to hell "gleefully." And this is where the flaw in your question comes. You say God has no desires, but this is false. God desires the salvation of every human soul He has ever created. Then, you may ask, why was sin created, and why does He allow evil? In simple terms, it is because He does not want us to worship Him like zombies. Each soul is free to do as much or as little for god as he chooses.

I believe if we could truly understand the Perfection, Beauty, Truth and Love that is God, there would be nothing left to do but worship Him.

Hope this helps.

Gemma Therese

8of9

An examination of the concept of WORSHIP was the source of my apostasy, which led to my eventual realization that I was an atheist.

Humans made their gods in their own image. Or rather, in the image of human kings. Kneeling, fawning, flattering, showing love and fealty to powerful monarchs yielded results: favor, wealth, immortality, whatever. Quid pro quo.

In this "enlightened" age, we would frown upon both the fawners and those who would reward others based upon flattery instead of merit (or need). But who are we to hold God to the same standards we require of our fellow humans?

happyboy

well, i suppose if i was the supreme being and maker of the universe, I'D be emotionally distant, with a hair-trigger temper, a violent need for animal sacrifice, send my own beloved son to be horribly butchered, and be so insecure i'd need constant ego-masturbation.

yeah, i imagine being God would be a lot like that.

happyboy, eager for his divine ascension

Undercurrent

That may be, but such statements definitely contradict's Anselm's argument for the existence of God -- if it is not possible to even imagine a proper god-concept, whether or not the ability to imagine one implies that one exists is moot.

But I digresss,

HvK: The reason the gods imagined by the various theisms require worship is simple. No need for worship implies no need for a church, and hence, no centralized authority to organize the worship of the god.

Here some people would say that the reson for the existence of the centralized authority is just to make money and power, but I don't think that that's true in all cases. It's just that religions with centralized authority are more effective at surviving and recruiting than ones without centralized authority, so over time, they become the only ones left, when the more loose religions with less demanding gods evapourate.

In conclusion:

Insecure, worship-needing god --> religion with centralized authority --> strong religion.

Secure, do-your-own-thing-so-long-as-its-good, god --> loose belief system with no centralized authority --> factionalization, evapouration.

m.

Slumtrimpet

Gemma says:
<i>"First, if you believe in God, you have to understand that God is infinite mystery and we will never really "grasp whhat He's all about. In the words of Augustine, "If you have understood, than what you have understood is not God." There isn't a word that can be uttered about God that does not in someway limit Him. Thomas Merton said, "Since God cannot be imagined, anything we imagine about Him is false and ultimately a lie." If you do not believe in God, such statements are meaningless, but I am answering this question from the standpoint of a theist and a Catholic."</i>

and then promptly tells us exactly what her God's intentions are:

<i>"Contrary to Shadownought's post, God has never and will never send anyone to hell "gleefully." And this is where the flaw in your question comes. You say God has no desires, but this is false. God desires the salvation of every human soul He has ever created. Then, you may ask, why was sin created, and why does He allow evil? In simple terms, it is because He does not want us to worship Him like zombies. Each soul is free to do as much or as little for god as he chooses. "</i>



<i>"Hope this helps."</i>

Ummm...no. Cognitive dissonance anyone?
[I]

Perchance

I have this problem with Gemma's reply:

If any statement about God limits him, then doesn't saying he's loving or unknowable also limit him?

If you apply the criteria strictly, God either turns into an abstract concept about which it's impossible say anything, or implodes in his own contradictions. This is one of the reasons I'm an atheist to the Christian God. You can't have it both ways: Either God is utterly limitless, in which case even the statement that he is "utterly limitless" limits him, or he has some human qualities such as love, and therefore they must have limits to mean anything.

-Perchance.