[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 865 KB, 1920x1080, 1424132764077.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6594896 No.6594896 [Reply] [Original]

Do you think God ever wonders at his purpose?

Does he ever question the nature of his own existence?

>> No.6594910

>>6594896
god is purpose

>> No.6595090

>>6594896
No, He doesn't wonder at it, He's done it beyond and throughout time, and that purpose is this: to serve His Son the Spirit of Love which abounds between them.

>> No.6595134

>>6594896
What's Ein Sof, filthy goy?

>> No.6595155

God is purpose itself, the alpha and the omega, the beginning and the end. God doesn't question his own existence because his existence, more than anything else, is unquestionable- his being is inseparable from his essence, hence he knows himself through his very act of being. He doesn't suffer from the kind of divisibility and corruptibility we do, which makes it possible for us to lose sight of what we are and become disunited with our purpose.

>> No.6595174

no he doesnt because he doesnt exist lol

>> No.6595191

WHAT IF GOD WAS ONE OF US?

>> No.6595197

>>6595174
degenerate.

>> No.6595199

I wouldn't imagine so. Considering purpose as direction, then I would say God *is* direction. So he must have fulfilled purpose.

But I'm quite agnostic on God.

>> No.6595203

>>6595191
JUST A STRANGER ON A BUS

>> No.6596752

>>6594896
I hope so

>> No.6596827

God is a human construct.

>> No.6596840 [DELETED] 

what do you think of the argument that its hard for a fish at the bottom of the ocean to fathom any other world than its own? until it is cruelly torn from its own existence, it does not question its place in things. are humans like this? what does that make god?

>> No.6596853

>>6595155
good post; sounds like Thomas.

>> No.6596859
File: 2.70 MB, 500x281, 1432501395996.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6596859

>>6596827
>>6595174

>> No.6596873

>>6594896

Not if it is omniscient.

>> No.6596885

>>6595155
What good is a God that does not question itself?

What is there to make it any different to the wind, or an earthquake?

If god does not think, then why call it great?

If it does not wonder, how can it love?

What is the worth of the love of a being that has no choice but to love?

Which might accomplish all that ever was or will be with nary a sacrifice?

A man who moves mountains for love is great, a God is just doing it's job.

I would trade such "love" for the human sort in an instant.

>> No.6596898

God is a nihilist.

>> No.6596910

>>6596885
We are all fingertips of God. When you wonder if God wonders, it's as if you put your hand close to a hot kettle. You can feel the warmth, your brain doesn't feel the warmth until the tips of your fingers relay the stimuli up your spine.

Much in the same way the abundance of experiences and streams-of-consciousness present in this realm are the consciousnesses fingertips of the one eternal cosmic consciousness. When you experience doubt, in a way God experiences doubt, when you experience pain in a small way God experiences pain.

We are all one noodle of the giant Pastafarian entity, and when you have become completely self-aware. Fully knowing that you are God unrealized, you will at that moment realize you are God. You're it, and it is you.

>> No.6596922

>>6596910
Naw, I feel sufficiently alienated from my fellow humanoids that I'm about 99% certain that we're not actually shards of some gestalt overmind.

>> No.6596954

Hey guys, what if God ate Doritos? What would his favorite flavor be? Huh.

>> No.6597018

>>6595090
This kind of god is a logical absurdity, a thing cannot exist in itself.

>> No.6597030

>>6596859
I'd honestly rather wear a fedora than fool myself in to believing in some fantastic other being just to be able to cope with life.

>> No.6597046

>>6594896
Something that does not exist cannot wonder about or question something.

>> No.6597048

>>6597030
This.

>> No.6597052

>>6595155
No, it's turtles all the way down

>> No.6597053

>>6597048
It's a meme, you dip.

>> No.6597083

>>6597018
The leading theological argument seems to be "God doesn't have to follow your gay-ass 'logic' lol"

>> No.6597100
File: 385 KB, 400x386, 1412177161216.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6597100

>>6594910
>god is love
>god is purpose
>god is truth

>> No.6597109

>>6596885
>What good is a God that does not question itself?

Such a God is the ultimate good, for questions exist for lack of answer, and He is himself the Answer, lacking nothing.

>What is there to make it any different to the wind, or an earthquake?

God is wisdom himself, goodness himself, and uttermost being and love. The wind comes and goes and knows not where it goes. The earth quakes blindly, though whence its strength comes, it knows not. It is the Lord who shakes the earth and sends the wind, to speak his words to men, if they listen.

>If god does not think, then why call it great?

Why think God does not think? Indeed, all men can do is think God's thoughts after him, imperfectly, and sometimes, perversely.

>If it does not wonder, how can it love?

God is himself the wonder of being. The very fullness and integrity of finite things, which strikes us dumb with awe, is but a pale shade of his own glory. He knows the wonder of human being better than any, for he made it in his own image, hence loves it more than any. True, he wonders *at* nothing, because he lacks for nothing, but this means only that we are not objects of some monstrous appetite, but children loved for our own sake.

>What is the worth of the love of a being that has no choice but to love?

Of course he had a choice. If he had not loved you, you would not exist. You exist at all in virtue of his choice to love you- your existence is an undeserved grace. The difference is that God's love does not waver, and his choice once made stands forever. What greater worth could there be, than to enjoy such a steadfast love?

>Which might accomplish all that ever was or will be with nary a sacrifice?

He came in the flesh and died for your sins, that you might live and not perish in your evil. A greater sacrifice has none made, for none but God could afford it.

>A man who moves mountains for love is great, a God is just doing it's job. I would trade such "love" for the human sort in an instant.

A man may move the mountains for love, but he loves so in obedience to the divine will. Human love in turn is a fleeting spark of that ever-burning love which spans the infinite gulf between being and non-being. The creature who rejects the divine love for the human knows neither human love nor divine- he knows mere shadows on a wall at the bottom of a cave, followed by everlasting night.

>> No.6597111

Yes I would assume so. There must be some desire behind creation, at least

>> No.6597118

>>6594896
The only true serial killer is God.

>> No.6597123

If Jesus were alive today, would he shitpost on 4chan? If so, which boards?

>> No.6597125
File: 1016 KB, 806x770, 1413415502816.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6597125

>>6597118
WHAT THE FLYING FUCK DO YOU MEAN BY THIS STATEMENT

>> No.6597131

>>6597123
he would probably have a tumblr dedicated to his god-kin identity

>> No.6597132

>>6596954
underrated post

>> No.6597192

>>6597125
That He's responsible for all the death in the world? Of all the obscurantist "God is limited by his own perfection / made finite by his own infinity" bullshit in this thread, you had to pick the obvious statement to not understand.

>> No.6597196

>>6597192
I'm a Catholic and people summoning this kind of argument are apostolates, so worry not.

Hamburgers are not sandwiches god damnit

>> No.6597598

>>6595155
>this
Also, he is beyond existence. Existence is a part of him but he's most likely beyond existence itself. This is an extremely difficult idea to grasp because we exist and don't know how anything could be beyond existing or not existing, but that is most likely due to restrictions in our universe of existence.

Basically, if we have our 5 basic senses (along with our other senses), imagine an infinite number of senses that meld with whatever that reality is. We can't imagine it because it's like asking telling a deaf person what it's like to hear, but if we can imagine that being the case, and God is infinite in potential, then imagine there being completely different ways of being in 'reality' that cannot even compare to how we experience it now.

>> No.6597654

>>6595174

check out the fagget

>> No.6597731

>>6597192
he's not responsible for all the death and besides he's not killing in a series

read the bible son

>> No.6597735

Which god exactly?

>> No.6597739

>>6597030
Shh. Your coping is showing.

>> No.6597741

>>6597731
How is he not responsible? "Adam and Eve made a mistake" is as shitty explanation as "Christ died for your sins". Not trying to be a fedora tipper, but this type of christianity seems a bit weak to me.

>> No.6597745

>>6597109

>for questions exist for lack of answer, and He is himself the Answer, lacking nothing.

But can he answer why kids love the taste of Cinnamon Toast Crunch?

>> No.6597748

>>6597741
>How is he not responsible?

how -is- he responsible?

>> No.6597773

>>6597109
What fanciful nonsense the minds of our ancestors have wrought.

Now, i take it if I ask for evidence you're going to get teleological on my ass aren't you?

Tell me it's a matter of faith maybe?

Make it all out to be some great unknowable mystery that only reveals itself when you open your heart to God?

Now, if you believe that genuinely I shall bother you no more, because I'm not in the habit of harassing the mentally ill.

However, I think you are a disingenuous liar and that you do not believe a single word of it either.

>> No.6597774

>>6597773
worthless rhetoric

>> No.6597777

>>6597773
unfalsifiable nonsense

>> No.6597786

The Christian interpretation of God is literally incompatible with free will.

>Be all knowing God

>Capable of predicting every movement of the cosmos, past and future à la Laplace's Demon

>Creates human beings as they are, knowing full well what they will do in advance (if he doesn't he's not all-knowing)

>Send them to hell for doing exactly what you made them to do

I'm not even gonna bother trotting out the problem of Evil, because at this stage we can all probably recite it in our sleep.

>> No.6597791

>>6597774
Hello again, self-proclaimed chronic cp and scat masturbator.

You still need to broaden your vocabulary.

Repeating yourself is a sign of lack of confidence.

>> No.6597793

>>6597786

Christians would argue that since those choices people make during the course of their lives are due to free will it's not God sending them to hell but themselves. Just because God knows what a given person will do with their free will doesn't mean choices based on free will aren't being made.

Free will is such an absurd concept though I feel silly even talking about it.

>> No.6597798

>>6597793

It seems to me that the faithful are perfectly willing to debase the idea of perfection in order to accomodate such a coarse barbarous deity.

A perfect being would not create an imperfect world.

Some Gnostic type can take over from here I'm sure.

Talk about demiurges and shit.

>> No.6597830

>>6597786
>Send them to hell for doing exactly what you made them to do

lost me there

>> No.6597837

>>6597798
>barbarous

is that what you call fairness and justice?

>A perfect being would not create an imperfect world.

and he didn't

>> No.6597840

>>6597837

How the fuck can you call this world perfect in any sense? Perfect to what end?

>> No.6597849

>>6597018
I don't understand. What is the logical absurdity? Why can't a thing exist in itself?

>> No.6597857

>>6597840
no, the problem is with you saying he created it in its imperfect state

but perhaps it is perfect without regard to your liberal humanist sensibilities. i mean it allows god's will to be carried out

>> No.6597861

>>6595155
This doesn't describe anything.
>>6596910
I wouldn't ascribe such a being that correspondence. Your doubt "doubt" may not may not "reach" him as doubt. It's the problem of universals. Besides, why is there a "when" as concerns eternal beings?

>> No.6597980

>>6597773

If you ask for evidence I would point you to the Quinque Viae, the Five Ways, which stand to this day unvanquished, glorious and pristine amid the sophistries of our time. By all means investigate, for human reason is God's creature. Such are the spiritual and intellectual perils of the age, however, that you may well be weaker in reason than you suppose. There are easier ways to God than philosophy (though in my view, few as rewarding).

On faith, I would say that it goes beyond reason, but also that reason is the friend of faith, pointing toward her as reason's rightful sovereign, and never contradicting her. Faith is free and available to all, guide of rich and poor, wise and foolish alike. It is the easier path to glory, though few are humble enough these days to take it.

Far be it for me to deny, on the subject of mystery, that there are mysteries indeed in the depths of God. The fact of his existence and general character, however, are clearly revealed in what has been made, and no great mystery. The fear of the Lord is only the beginning of wisdom, the prologue to the Great Story of everlasting life.

If you lack the skill to read the Book of Nature, there is yet hope: pray sincerely and open your heart, for God doesn't want the wise for their wisdom, but wants loving children, that he may love them for ever.

Rest assured that I believe genuinely, without reservations, and shall be pleased to answer what questions you may pose. Who, after all, can know the least of the ways of God, and not be willing to share?

>> No.6597982

>>6597861
Sure it does. It describes God, the source of all reality.

>> No.6598241

>>6597980
>responding with a meme philosopher

>> No.6598256

Someone more knowledgeable should correct me on this but didn't Christian Mystics and Gnostics deal with this question?

>> No.6598261

>Trying to prove the existence of an imaginary entity by ascribing properties to that same entity

>> No.6598293

>>6597840
dunno, ask a scientist. They seem to get all wet about the universe.

>> No.6598540

>>6597849
Russel's paradox.

>> No.6598691

>>6598540
The one that points out the contradiction in naive set theory or the one about the boulder?

They're related, I guess, but the boulder paradox is plainly nonsense.

>> No.6599339

>>6597100
But if God is infinite then he is all those things, and the God most people believe in is the infinite, all-powerful etc. God.