Here is something to get the brain going. It's been said that God created ALL things. Also it's been said that God is 100 precent pure/good. So God created man and it was said that because of man's sinful actions bad/evil things were created. But if God created ALL things then God created bad/evil things, not man. So by God creating bad/evil things this does not make him 100 precent pure/good.
But given that everyone was talking about a single god, we were interchanging theism and monotheism as the same.
I don't think that was intended but since this topic was started specifically focusing on the Abrahamic God, and was perpetuated with a number of monotheists joining in.
However, when your only source of "evidence" is the bible then how can I not?
Earlier in this argument you tried to argue that the bible wasn't a good source, yet you had not read it. Why don't you read the bible and come back to this argument.
This would not be so difficult for me to do if the theists would lay aside their beliefs for a moment. Should the atheists be the one's who only lay aside their beliefs then there is nothing to be done.
I have set aside my beliefs and heard your claims, now it's your turn to review our claims and actually consider them.
Alright setting aside 'god' and just focusing on, as you said " a being worth worship."
Why does a being have to be worshipped? What if this being feels differently, like we are supposed to not worship it? I suppose what I am getting at, is why do we keep prescribing human characteristics onto something that isn't what we are?
I suppose what I am getting at, is why do we keep prescribing human characteristics onto something that isn't what we are?
Because humans are awesome like that. Doesn't it show through how we treat our pets and how we anthropomorph animals in any given chance? We do it with pretty much everything around us, so why not give a given god traits we can relate to.
Why not you ask? Because it is probably further from the truth than believing this being is a brain in a vat.
It is true, but apparently it is, as you said, a security blanket. If you can relate to something, you think you know how it works, thinks, is, and that makes you more secure. If the Christian god for one is seen as an old man with a huge beard, then there is something to relate to. The unknown makes us insecure after all.
Why does a being have to be worshipped? What if this being feels differently, like we are supposed to not worship it?
That's actually a pretty good question to ask. If god/s (using god in a general term here) does exist he/she/it/they have gone out of (pronoun's) way to make it appear as if (pronoun) done exist. So it would stand to reason (pronoun) doesn't want worship.
However when we look at specific gods we can determine on a case to case basis if they god is desiring worship based on the claims that define that god.
I suppose what I am getting at, is why do we keep prescribing human characteristics onto something that isn't what we are?
I actually think our ability to anthropomorphize the things around us is how the concept of a god got started in the first place.
So would a god (general term), if existed, have to have human characteristic? No, but again we can take it on a case by case basis and determine if this is a necessary characteristic that defines that god.
That's actually a pretty good question to ask. If god/s (using god in a general term here) does exist he/she/it/they have gone out of (pronoun's) way to make it appear as if (pronoun) done exist. So it would stand to reason (pronoun) doesn't want worship.
But, wouldn't the appearance of a divine being saying "Hey, don't worship me guys" make us worship it, because it is a divine being? Just like the lack of evidence makes a huge group of people not worship them?
Mage, we are going to have to step into a meta-language to discuss that further it seems. Let me allow it soak in for a little bit. Brain is fried today.
But is Cen is touching on where I am trying to go with this. We do not have an accepted evidence of higher being/s. So, we have a higher being that hasn't made its presense known. And remember that we really have no evidence that we are meant to worship anything in the first place. So, my point here is, isn't it more likely that we should not worship a being that isn't making itself known, because if we were truly meant to worship it the circumstances would be different?
Earlier in this argument you tried to argue that the bible wasn't a good source, yet you had not read it. Why don't you read the bible and come back to this argument.
If you read carefully you'll notice I admit to reading the bible and finding it unsatisfying. Your point here is to try and imply my ignorance. I once attended a Catholic school, in that time I read the bible, I found no evidence.
So, my point here is, isn't it more likely that we should not worship a being that isn't making itself known, because if we were truly meant to worship it the circumstances would be different?
A good point. We cannot be meant to worship a higher power. The only reason we do so is to make ourselves feel better.
