Is God "Necessary"?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-05-2012, 05:05 AM
Is God "Necessary"?
Whenever I hear Christians argue for the existence of God as a "necessary being", I think to myself that they're cherry-picking their beings. A case could be made for God the Father as necessary --- obviously not a strong case in my opinion, because it fails to convince me. But how necessary are Jesus and the Holy Spirit?

Jesus had relevance to the bible for 30 years out of an infinite existence. He now "reigns with the Father", although it's apparent that the Father was doing just fine without Him. One could say that those 30 years were important, and I think a logical case could be made for this, although I don't see how God the Father coming down to Earth as a man to die would change the relevance or importance of the act.

And the Holy Spirit is the weakest case. In the OT He did precisely jack shit --- he existed in a cage, more or less. In the NT, He lives within Christians changing their hearts and whatnot, practices that a Christian would say the Father is perfectly capable of doing. If anyone is an "unnecessary being", it's this one.

So there you have it. God: 2/3 unnecessary.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-05-2012, 05:54 AM
RE: Is God "Necessary"?
Ya got that backwards. Holy Spirit is the enabler of prophets and the only "real" component of God. Tongue

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-05-2012, 08:12 AM
RE: Is God "Necessary"?
Technically, God was "necessary" for people in the past to explain natural phenomena, like how science is necessary to explain natural phenomena today.

Some theist look upon God for emotional comfort and support through their hard times. To such theists, God is "necessary" as they believe the deity guides them or metaphorically holds their hands wherever they go. They look upon God as a parental figure, and they perceive that they depend on God like how children depend on their parents. Without such support, they feel aimless and lost (This is usually the origin of the "Without God, life has no purpose" argument)

Theists believe in an afterlife, where death has no meaning. Some fear the notion of non-existence after death, while some desire justice for the wronged in the earthly plane. Usually, there is a requirement to get into the afterlife. Most afterlives require the person to do good, some require devout prayer, some require following a set of laws. By believing in God AND by coupling other requirements, the person has a chance to enter the good afterlife. This is where theists perceive God as "necessary".

Welcome to science. You're gonna like it here - Phil Plait

Have you ever tried taking a comfort blanket away from a small child? - DLJ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes robotworld's post
16-05-2012, 08:30 AM
RE: Is God "Necessary"?
A god of some kind is necessary as an ultimate, unchallengeable source of legitimacy for self-anointed rulers.
For all other purposes, they're a temporary convenience.

If you pray to anything, you're prey to anything.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Peterkin's post
16-05-2012, 08:44 AM
RE: Is God "Necessary"?
No.

He isn't necessary for morality, existence of the world, natural order, knowledge nothing really. If anything like god exists I don't think it'd be conscious. We wouldn't need to call it god. We don't need god to make predictions about the world, it'd just complicate things.

Nor does he 'necessarily exist' as that was what spinoza argued essentially. I think anyway.

Sapere aude! Have courage to use your own understanding!
Take the risk of thinking for yourself, much more happiness, truth, beauty, and wisdom will come to you that way.


Enlightenment is liberating.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ALovelyChickenMan's post
16-05-2012, 09:22 AM
RE: Is God "Necessary"?
Necessary is subjective isn't it?

As a whole no god is necessary for anything other than the worship of a god. But individuals find god necessary in their lives because I would assume they lack the ability to understand the science behind life, or the idea that there just might not be a point, or they can't cope with a lack of identity after death. Or something else entirely.

"I think of myself as an intelligent, sensitive human being with the soul of a clown which always forces me to blow it at the most important moments." -Jim Morrison
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-05-2012, 09:31 AM (This post was last modified: 16-05-2012 09:38 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Is God "Necessary"?
(16-05-2012 05:05 AM)Starcrash Wrote:  He now "reigns with the Father", although it's apparent that the Father was doing just fine without Him. One could say that those 30 years were important, and I think a logical case could be made for this, although I don't see how God the Father coming down to Earth as a man to die would change the relevance or importance of the act.


Wow. Such a can of worms opened here...the Philosophical/Ontological arguments, the Theological (Trinitarian) ones, and the (supposed) Biblical ones, all in one spot.





We can DO this. It will be fun. When we're done, it will be obvious that it's 0/3 necessary, and in fact more like

-3/3, (ie there are good reasons for disbelief), in the gods they have cooked up, (so far), anyway.

http://fas-philosophy.rutgers.edu/mlin/psr.pdf

http://www.archive.org/stream/spinozassh...t_djvu.txt

http://www.philosophy.leeds.ac.uk/GMR/re...insum.html


Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
16-05-2012, 12:11 PM
 
RE: Is God "Necessary"?
God (and I define God as the monistic entity of fundamental consciousness) is necessary for the existence of contingent things. The universe and everything in it appears to be a contingent thing. Contingent things derive their existence from some other source, but an infinite regress of sources is impossible; therefore, there must be a source of existence that is not contingent but rather has existence as part of its nature. This source we would call God (for short).

But this God is nothing at all like the God of Christianity. This God would be a very alien thing to us and our understanding. In fact, this God wouldn't be a "person" at all, since a person would simply be a limited modality of this Supreme Being. One of the reasons we can't "see" God is because we probably don't have the mental capability of understanding God, much in the same way we don't see gamma rays because our eyes don't have receptors that can distinguish gamma photons.

Jesus is a way for us to see God. Presumably he is God as a person. We can look at Jesus and see what it would be like to be God as a human being. The problem is that Jesus, Himself, is very hard to figure out. His teachings are almost impossible to fathom in that they are indiscernible (Matthew 24) or grotesquely impossible to implement (the Sermon on the Mount).

I hate the Christian Church, but that’s just on the one hand. On the other, I pity humanity: What else were we supposed to do with the teachings of Jesus Christ? Become celibate, shun wealth, and die out as a species? The teachings of Jesus Christ don’t even have relevance except in the context of a sinful world.

I have a great deal of respect for Jesus Christ. I stand in awe of the Gospel. But I don’t really understand it, not enough to make a definite statement about it anyway. Honestly, I don’t even know what it means to “believe” in Jesus Christ. Does that mean I agree with him? Fine, but how can I truly say that when I don’t understand him? Does that mean I would lay down my life and follow his teachings? Okay, but what about his other teachings that seem to indicated I’m supposed to use the talents God gave me or else end up in hell? Not to mention, I don’t understand his teachings—not all of them anyway.

Every time I examine salvation, I come up more ignorant than before. But I’m not alone—I see no evidence in the history of the world since the death of Jesus that anyone else has ever understood it either. Cases in point: the Catholic Church, The Greek Orthodox Church, The Protestant Reformation and all its denominations.

So, just like I do with God, I stand in awe of Jesus Christ, but I really can’t comprehend him.

What I believe is this: We live to learn lessons we will implement on our lucid spiritual plane after we die. Since God necessarily experiences what we experience, if we make a shameful hell out of our LSP, he forces us back into this life (which is hell) to learn more lessons, and he does this over and over again. Salvation/heaven means not having to come back for another physical life. And as whacked out as that might sound to you, guess what? I got all my ideas from the Gospels.
Quote this message in a reply
16-05-2012, 12:27 PM (This post was last modified: 16-05-2012 04:05 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Is God "Necessary"?
(16-05-2012 12:11 PM)Egor Wrote:  a. "The universe and everything in it appears to be a contingent thing"

b. Contingent things derive their existence from some other source,

c. but an infinite regress of sources is impossible; therefore, there must be a source of existence that is not contingent but rather has existence as part of its nature. This source we would call God (for short).

d. I stand in awe of the Gospel. But I don’t really understand it.

e. God experiences what we experience.


a. Because he doesn't know enough Physics. First Cause rehash. God of the gaps rehash.

b. False premise -> false conclusion. Says he has eveidence. Is not evidence. Does not know meaning of word.

c. Not proven. No evidence. OLD philosophical idea. Refuted before.

d. Obviously not. He had to re-write them, (make inprovements).

e. Most ludicrous one yet. Requires time. THE definition of Anthropomorphism.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
16-05-2012, 01:43 PM
RE: Is God "Necessary"?
Egor, say it with me:
"I don't know" and/or "we don't know"

Repeat the phrase. Get comfortable with the idea.

Then, and only then, will you begin to break free from the prison of faulty logic that you create in order to support your belief system.

You can literally live your entire life believing in things for which there is no evidence (real evidence, not subjective experience, writing, or assertion masquerading as evidence).

Or, you can let go of baseless, abstract assertions like "an infinite regress of sources is impossible; therefore, there must be a source of existence that is not contingent but rather has existence as part of its nature. This source we would call God" and get down to experiencing reality through a falsifiable lens.


Or just stick to unfalsifiable claims like these, but know that they cannot be distinguished from a whole host of other unfalsifiable claims that are themselves indistinguishable from fantasy or delusion.

Join the Logic Speaks Community

I am the unconverted
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like lightninlives's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: