Faith! What's it good for? Absolutely nothing!

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
User avatar
Physics Guy
God
Posts: 1557
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 7:40 am
Location: on the battlefield of life

Re: Faith! What's it good for? Absolutely nothing!

Post by Physics Guy »

malkie wrote:
Tue Mar 07, 2023 4:12 am
If, for the sake of argument, we agree that the god of Mormonism and/or Christianity exists, might there be fewer questions and puzzles of that sort if we stop assuming that that god is either benevolent, or rational?
In the thread about God's grace, Alphus and Omegus emphasized the impossibility of understanding a really ultimate God. I tried to argue there that such a God could still be genuinely understandable to us in part, even if it were only a vanishingly small part. Alphus and Omegus's point shouldn't just be brushed off, though. Even if there is a valid, "Yes, but" to it, as I tried to argue, it's still not going away.

Old religious traditions, like the oldest parts of the Old Testament, don't really seem to make God out (if there even is just one God) to be rational or benevolent. In such old texts I have more a sense of humans trying to deal with God the way pets deal with us: wag the tail if it looks as though food might be offered, otherwise try not to get stepped on. Obey God's commands, the old-time religion seems to say, not because they are admirable moral imperatives issued by a wise and loving being for the good of the universe, but because God is the Big Guy and we don't want to get on his bad side. Life was hard in those days. Humans were all hostages to capricious fate and religion was Stockholm syndrome.

Then after enough centuries humans kind of outgrew that, or something. Our settlements got the City Wall upgrade, life got better, and along with eating better food and sitting on better rugs, we wanted an upgraded God. So we started trying to make out that God was not only big but also good and intelligent, such that we should be obeying God's commands anyway even if God weren't there. A lot of the tail-wagging old tribal piety became embarrassing; if it was still on the books, we tried to give it an acceptable spin.

But maybe that's still pretty naïve theology. Maybe any sufficiently advanced deity, no matter how rational and benevolent, will be indistinguishable to human understanding from a jealous and capricious tribal god who makes arbitrary demands, and rewards and punishes inconsistently.

This is probably the flip side of why humans may need to have faith in a God whom we can't understand. Even if we assume that God really is rational and benevolent, it seems unlikely that God will always seem so to us. So having a more sophisticated faith in a loving and rational God, and having an old-time tail-wagging faith in a capricious tribal god, may not actually be different things. Maybe they're often going to be the same thing, as far as we are concerned.
I was a teenager before it was cool.
User avatar
malkie
God
Posts: 1478
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:41 pm

Re: Faith! What's it good for? Absolutely nothing!

Post by malkie »

Physics Guy wrote:
Tue Mar 07, 2023 1:10 pm
malkie wrote:
Tue Mar 07, 2023 4:12 am
If, for the sake of argument, we agree that the god of Mormonism and/or Christianity exists, might there be fewer questions and puzzles of that sort if we stop assuming that that god is either benevolent, or rational?
Thanks, PG - that all makes sense to me.

In the thread about God's grace, Alphus and Omegus emphasized the impossibility of understanding a really ultimate God. I tried to argue there that such a God could still be genuinely understandable to us in part, even if it were only a vanishingly small part. Alphus and Omegus's point shouldn't just be brushed off, though. Even if there is a valid, "Yes, but" to it, as I tried to argue, it's still not going away.

Old religious traditions, like the oldest parts of the Old Testament, don't really seem to make God out (if there even is just one God) to be rational or benevolent. In such old texts I have more a sense of humans trying to deal with God the way pets deal with us: wag the tail if it looks as though food might be offered, otherwise try not to get stepped on. Obey God's commands, the old-time religion seems to say, not because they are admirable moral imperatives issued by a wise and loving being for the good of the universe, but because God is the Big Guy and we don't want to get on his bad side. Life was hard in those days. Humans were all hostages to capricious fate and religion was Stockholm syndrome.

Then after enough centuries humans kind of outgrew that, or something. Our settlements got the City Wall upgrade, life got better, and along with eating better food and sitting on better rugs, we wanted an upgraded God. So we started trying to make out that God was not only big but also good and intelligent, such that we should be obeying God's commands anyway even if God weren't there. A lot of the tail-wagging old tribal piety became embarrassing; if it was still on the books, we tried to give it an acceptable spin.

But maybe that's still pretty naïve theology. Maybe any sufficiently advanced deity, no matter how rational and benevolent, will be indistinguishable to human understanding from a jealous and capricious tribal god who makes arbitrary demands, and rewards and punishes inconsistently.

This is probably the flip side of why humans may need to have faith in a God whom we can't understand. Even if we assume that God really is rational and benevolent, it seems unlikely that God will always seem so to us. So having a more sophisticated faith in a loving and rational God, and having an old-time tail-wagging faith in a capricious tribal god, may not actually be different things. Maybe they're often going to be the same thing, as far as we are concerned.
Each day, when I go out to fill up the bird feeder, the birds (and the squirrels who benefit from seeds knocked off the feeding platform) scatter. Some sit in the nearby trees, apparently watching.

I'm sure that, at some level in their tiny brains, the birds recognise that my visit to the feeder changes its state from empty to full. But do they see this hulking great scary figure as benevolent towards them? Do they see me as a "thing" that deliberately feeds them? Or have they simply learned that there is an association between my brief visit to the feeder and the availability of seeds?

What about the days that, for whatever reason, the feeder sits empty for a while - usually meaning that my wife has not noticed it's empty? Am I punishing them for some perceived evil? Or simply capricious? Do they engage in propitiating behaviours in the meantime, and we humans simply don't recognise what they are doing? And when, finally, I appear bearing their food, do they consider that their "prayers and sacrifices" have been effective?

By the way, I'm an extra-benevolent "god" to them - in addition to their seeds I also fill up a container with a mix of seeds and peanut butter - crunchy, no less :) - which some of them seem to really like.

I've been trying to figure out what might be the equivalent, in their eyes, of my helping them find lost car keys. Do any of my fellow "gods" have suggestions for me?
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details.
Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
dastardly stem
God
Posts: 2259
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:38 pm

Re: Faith! What's it good for? Absolutely nothing!

Post by dastardly stem »

Yeah..back when God was more explicitly tyrannical apparently it maybe was true people actually had faith in Him. And He was kinda sorta rewarding of faith. But as the story goes, there wasn't much use for faith. It wasn't a question of whether anyone should believe. It was all more about how much should we fear. If we fear more, than we were better, according to that old God. "yeah...I'm gonna come back down there and steal your women and food, and wreak havoc on humanity by committing atrocities to demonstrate just how weak and wimpy you guys are for the atrocities you attempt in my name," thunders God of the Old testament. Or something like that. I suppose it's of no coincidence that the alpha male of that era was a tyrant who took women as he pleased, ate vociferously, stole, commanded, and was the most vicious of warriors.

"Yeah but... " they tell me today, "that wasn't really God. That was just people's mistaken views of God. They were heavily influenced by their culture and time. It was a difficult era of human history. so it makes sense."

"Are you saying God cared about the individuals back then more than he cares about the dust particle floating in space?"

"God loves us. He loves Bill Craig..."

"Who? Ah well. What about the many believers whom He has put on ignore and whom He considers those who work iniquity, hoping, apparently, to cast them down someday? Does he love them?"

"He loves all. They just don't know how to believe correctly....or something. they deserve His judgment. So have faith in Him, so you too don't suffer from his terrible judgment."

"is it better for God to be a lustful, angry, changeable tyrant, or is it better if He's kinda nice but ultimately intends the destruction of many of his followers? I sincerely don't know. But for some reason many think He's a better guy today than He was 3,000 years ago."

"He never changes. So that means they were mistaken about Him, and we're right. Plus He loves Bill Craig so He loves us all or at least a good portion of us."

"more than the dust particle floating in space?"

"Of course...we have brains....yoohooo? Earth to stem. We can actually think about Him. So He loves us more. We can do His great work?"

"Which is?"

"Its telling people that faith is important. If you don't have faith He won't save you."

"Who wants saving? But what benefit does faith provide? "

"Salvation".

"Salvation with that terrible creature you think exists? For some reason your faith paints it worse than I orginally thought. Its hell either way. Who the hell wants to be saved knowing many others will not be saved? Sounds like a state of hell and worry for eternity that I doubt anyone really wants. Who would feel good being pampered by angels while knowing some other unfortunate soul is burning for eternity and can't escape?"

"I want it. That's why faith is important."

"Alright...I mean have at it. I still don't see what faith is supposed to do to help anyone. Surely we can trust others or trust ideas. But trust a guy who went from explicit tyrant to a soft-pedaled tyrant? 'He's not so bad anymore. He never threatens to come down and take our women, eat our food or murder us and others'. But, if you say that, what about the second coming? Isn't he coming and destruction will come as well? for some reason that's not very interesting or comforting anymore, knowing He already intends the destruction of many anyway. Peace to you, faithful believer."

"Repent and seek Him and His glory. Or you along with many others will be tortured for eternity by our very God."

"No thanks. Faith seems pointless."

for me it feels more honest to live without faith in God. It feels more real. And it feels more useful. To have faith feels selfish, dishonest and useless. Certainly don't mean to offend, but I'm still not seeing a reason for faith, as religion conceives of it.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
huckelberry
God
Posts: 2578
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:48 pm

Re: Faith! What's it good for? Absolutely nothing!

Post by huckelberry »

Physics Guy wrote:
Tue Mar 07, 2023 1:10 pm
malkie wrote:
Tue Mar 07, 2023 4:12 am
If, for the sake of argument, we agree that the god of Mormonism and/or Christianity exists, might there be fewer questions and puzzles of that sort if we stop assuming that that god is either benevolent, or rational?
In the thread about God's grace, Alphus and Omegus emphasized the impossibility of understanding a really ultimate God. I tried to argue there that such a God could still be genuinely understandable to us in part, even if it were only a vanishingly small part. Alphus and Omegus's point shouldn't just be brushed off, though. Even if there is a valid, "Yes, but" to it, as I tried to argue, it's still not going away.

Old religious traditions, like the oldest parts of the Old Testament, don't really seem to make God out (if there even is just one God) to be rational or benevolent. In such old texts I have more a sense of humans trying to deal with God the way pets deal with us: wag the tail if it looks as though food might be offered, otherwise try not to get stepped on. Obey God's commands, the old-time religion seems to say, not because they are admirable moral imperatives issued by a wise and loving being for the good of the universe, but because God is the Big Guy and we don't want to get on his bad side. Life was hard in those days. Humans were all hostages to capricious fate and religion was Stockholm syndrome.

Then after enough centuries humans kind of outgrew that, or something. Our settlements got the City Wall upgrade, life got better, and along with eating better food and sitting on better rugs, we wanted an upgraded God. So we started trying to make out that God was not only big but also good and intelligent, such that we should be obeying God's commands anyway even if God weren't there. A lot of the tail-wagging old tribal piety became embarrassing; if it was still on the books, we tried to give it an acceptable spin.

But maybe that's still pretty naïve theology. Maybe any sufficiently advanced deity, no matter how rational and benevolent, will be indistinguishable to human understanding from a jealous and capricious tribal god who makes arbitrary demands, and rewards and punishes inconsistently.

This is probably the flip side of why humans may need to have faith in a God whom we can't understand. Even if we assume that God really is rational and benevolent, it seems unlikely that God will always seem so to us. So having a more sophisticated faith in a loving and rational God, and having an old-time tail-wagging faith in a capricious tribal god, may not actually be different things. Maybe they're often going to be the same thing, as far as we are concerned.
Physics Guy , you made a thought provoking post even a bit painful.

I found myself scratching my head over the development path from old capricious god and the god of order reason and benevolence. Just as you end the thought it is clear we have not outgrown our vulnerability to capricious turns of fate. On a large scale, horrendous earthquakes or train derailments, more personal, health and relationship catastrophes demonstrate our vulnerability. Should there be God, God is inscrutable in those times. I suspect people have struggled with the two images for a long time, going back long long before any written record remains.
Meadowchik
Priest
Posts: 313
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:54 am

Re: Faith! What's it good for? Absolutely nothing!

Post by Meadowchik »

God and theism aside, humans have advanced by rejecting known options and seeking something more, something unknown and uncreated. I think faith is valuable when reality isn't good enough, and when through imagination we can make it better.
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 8980
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: Faith! What's it good for? Absolutely nothing!

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Physics Guy wrote:
Tue Mar 07, 2023 1:10 pm
malkie wrote:
Tue Mar 07, 2023 4:12 am
If, for the sake of argument, we agree that the god of Mormonism and/or Christianity exists, might there be fewer questions and puzzles of that sort if we stop assuming that that god is either benevolent, or rational?
In the thread about God's grace, Alphus and Omegus emphasized the impossibility of understanding a really ultimate God. I tried to argue there that such a God could still be genuinely understandable to us in part, even if it were only a vanishingly small part. Alphus and Omegus's point shouldn't just be brushed off, though. Even if there is a valid, "Yes, but" to it, as I tried to argue, it's still not going away.

Old religious traditions, like the oldest parts of the Old Testament, don't really seem to make God out (if there even is just one God) to be rational or benevolent. In such old texts I have more a sense of humans trying to deal with God the way pets deal with us: wag the tail if it looks as though food might be offered, otherwise try not to get stepped on. Obey God's commands, the old-time religion seems to say, not because they are admirable moral imperatives issued by a wise and loving being for the good of the universe, but because God is the Big Guy and we don't want to get on his bad side. Life was hard in those days. Humans were all hostages to capricious fate and religion was Stockholm syndrome.

Then after enough centuries humans kind of outgrew that, or something. Our settlements got the City Wall upgrade, life got better, and along with eating better food and sitting on better rugs, we wanted an upgraded God. So we started trying to make out that God was not only big but also good and intelligent, such that we should be obeying God's commands anyway even if God weren't there. A lot of the tail-wagging old tribal piety became embarrassing; if it was still on the books, we tried to give it an acceptable spin.

But maybe that's still pretty naïve theology. Maybe any sufficiently advanced deity, no matter how rational and benevolent, will be indistinguishable to human understanding from a jealous and capricious tribal god who makes arbitrary demands, and rewards and punishes inconsistently.

This is probably the flip side of why humans may need to have faith in a God whom we can't understand. Even if we assume that God really is rational and benevolent, it seems unlikely that God will always seem so to us. So having a more sophisticated faith in a loving and rational God, and having an old-time tail-wagging faith in a capricious tribal god, may not actually be different things. Maybe they're often going to be the same thing, as far as we are concerned.
Great post. I suppose, then, it doesn’t really matter what we do since he’s unknowable either way, and he can’t be bought off with 10% of your currency.

Ah! That’s why we need prophets!

Man, if God couldn’t get the 1st draft of the Book of Mormon right through an iStone what makes anyone think he cares whether or not you make rent this month?

*what follows is an interminable conversation of rationalizing and larping*

- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
User avatar
Nimrod
Star B
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2023 4:20 pm

Re: Faith! What's it good for? Absolutely nothing!

Post by Nimrod »

malkie wrote:
Tue Mar 07, 2023 4:12 am
Nimrod wrote:
Tue Mar 07, 2023 3:31 am
Not all risk taking is rewarded. The better informed risk taken is more likely to yield a reward than the less informed risk taken. So I'm not convinced that risk taking is that great of an analogy. To play into it, though, why would god reward the uninformed risk taker over the more informed risk taker?
If, for the sake of argument, we agree that the god of Mormonism and/or Christianity exists, might there be fewer questions and puzzles of that sort if we stop assuming that that god is either benevolent, or rational?
One of the tenets of Mormonism is that we humans are formed in god's image, we are his children. We find in our existence that rational thought based on the observable is more productive than mere wishful thinking (than faith). Consider the King Follett Sermon and the resulting couplet, As man now is, god once was; as god now is, man may become. Was god, when a man, hung up on evidence and rational thinking? But then became irrational god?
Apologists try to shill an explanation to questioning members as though science and reason really explain and buttress their professed faith. It [sic] does not. By definition, faith is the antithesis of science and reason. Apologetics is a further deception by faith peddlers to keep power and influence.
User avatar
Nimrod
Star B
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2023 4:20 pm

Re: Faith! What's it good for? Absolutely nothing!

Post by Nimrod »

Meadowchik wrote:
Sat Mar 11, 2023 6:52 pm
God and theism aside, humans have advanced by rejecting known options and seeking something more, something unknown and uncreated. I think faith is valuable when reality isn't good enough, and when through imagination we can make it better.
Sounds like god resides in the cinematic arts.
Apologists try to shill an explanation to questioning members as though science and reason really explain and buttress their professed faith. It [sic] does not. By definition, faith is the antithesis of science and reason. Apologetics is a further deception by faith peddlers to keep power and influence.
User avatar
malkie
God
Posts: 1478
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:41 pm

Re: Faith! What's it good for? Absolutely nothing!

Post by malkie »

Nimrod wrote:
Tue Mar 14, 2023 3:44 pm
malkie wrote:
Tue Mar 07, 2023 4:12 am
If, for the sake of argument, we agree that the god of Mormonism and/or Christianity exists, might there be fewer questions and puzzles of that sort if we stop assuming that that god is either benevolent, or rational?
One of the tenets of Mormonism is that we humans are formed in god's image, we are his children. We find in our existence that rational thought based on the observable is more productive than mere wishful thinking (than faith). Consider the King Follett Sermon and the resulting couplet, As man now is, god once was; as god now is, man may become. Was god, when a man, hung up on evidence and rational thinking? But then became irrational god?
Even if, for the sake of argument, we accept that tenet, I can see no reason to suggest that that would not be possible for a rational and benevolent person to become an irrational and evil god.

It may be a bit like expecting to predict what kind of adult a baby may become, but without knowing what range of possibilities are involved in becoming an adult.

We cannot possibly know what changes may occur for a person to become a god whose ways, we are told, are not our ways. Rationality, to a god, may be entirely different from rationality as defined by a human.

For me, that makes an evil and irrational god completely conceivable.
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details.
Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
User avatar
Nimrod
Star B
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2023 4:20 pm

Re: Faith! What's it good for? Absolutely nothing!

Post by Nimrod »

malkie wrote:
Tue Mar 14, 2023 4:01 pm
Nimrod wrote:
Tue Mar 14, 2023 3:44 pm

One of the tenets of Mormonism is that we humans are formed in god's image, we are his children. We find in our existence that rational thought based on the observable is more productive than mere wishful thinking (than faith). Consider the King Follett Sermon and the resulting couplet, As man now is, god once was; as god now is, man may become. Was god, when a man, hung up on evidence and rational thinking? But then became irrational god?
Even if, for the sake of argument, we accept that tenet, I can see no reason to suggest that that would not be possible for a rational and benevolent person to become an irrational and evil god.

It may be a bit like expecting to predict what kind of adult a baby may become, but without knowing what range of possibilities are involved in becoming an adult.

We cannot possibly know what changes may occur for a person to become a god whose ways, we are told, are not our ways. Rationality, to a god, may be entirely different from rationality as defined by a human.

For me, that makes an evil and irrational god completely conceivable.
Well, then for what are we tested by god in this 'mortal probation' before we'll be entrusted with this massive god power? Acting rationally or irrationally?
Apologists try to shill an explanation to questioning members as though science and reason really explain and buttress their professed faith. It [sic] does not. By definition, faith is the antithesis of science and reason. Apologetics is a further deception by faith peddlers to keep power and influence.
Post Reply