A theoretical God (Introduction)

by dhw, Tuesday, November 12, 2024, 11:15 (9 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: the comparison with a silver back keeping a haram is terribly overdrawn. The vengeful, terrifying, angry God in this essay is not any God I know. Per Anderson, the God here belongs in the OT, as God's love appears in the NT, and we find a more intellectual approach in the Quran where God is studied through His amazing works. Then Adler tells me how to think about God as a non-human personage. That is what I have tried here.

Yes indeed, this is the OT God. And let’s face it, all three major monotheistic religions insist that their view of God is right, and history past and present has believers killing one another if they disagree. I don’t know of any religion, however, that regards the imagined eternal, sourceless creator of the universe as a human personage. They all imagine him as having certain human attributes, as described by this writer, and as described by you when you impose your own view on God of his purpose for creating life and us. The only difference is that you constantly contradict yourself. At various times you call him benevolent, omnipotent, omniscient, all-good, but inefficient, imperfect, and even forced to create what he doesn't want to create; you have him enjoying, interested, wanting a relationship, wanting to be recognized, but selfless; he probably/possibly has thought patterns and emotions like ours, but he is in no way human. The author of this article is fixated upon the negative images provided by the OT, and you lurch from one set of contradictions to another, but in your clearer moments at least you have the honesty to admit that your muddled beliefs and wishes are “schizophrenic” and in fact nobody knows the truth.