The Imperfect God

[_quark]

What if bad stuff happened to people simply because God did not have the power to help them? What if he/she desperately wanted to help, often tries to help, sometimes inadvertently makes things worse, but in the end, cannot do it all?

Am I alone in thinking this God would be more loving and empathetic than the popular God of today? I can relate to and look forward to meeting this God.

[_Blixa]

It has been a long time since I worked with any of these ideas and you might know about this already, but have you ever read much about Gnostic thought and Gnostic Christianity, quark?

Aristotle Smith, Stak, Chris Smith and MsJack probably have a much better grasp on these ideas than I do, if you find yourself interested and have questions.

[_quark]

Thanks Blixa. I hope they come because I would really like to read/learn more.

by the way: I meant "inadvertently makes things worse part of the time."

[_LDSToronto]

Quark,

This song will put everything into perspective for you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwSE2rnQRcs


H.

[_huckelberry]

A book , The Eternal Smile by Par Lagerkvist presents this idea directly and with some beauty. I am unable to see any connection with gnostic thinking here. However I think that the past century has seen new imaginative versions of gnosticism so perhaps somewhere a connection has been forged.

I believe any realistic view of God is going to start see limitations at least those created by the initial decision to create. Those may be quite serious.

Only the God who suffers with us can be a help for us.

[_Blixa]

A book , The Eternal Smile by Par Lagerkvist presents this idea directly and with some beauty. I am unable to see any connection with gnostic thinking here. However I think that the past century has seen new imaginative versions of gnosticism so perhaps somewhere a connection has been forged.

I believe any realistic view of God is going to start see limitations at least those created by the initial decision to create. Those may be quite serious.

Only the God who suffers with us can be a help for us.

huckleberry, I was just trying to think of other perspectives on "god" that quark might want to check out. I didn't have any necessary link between his OP and gnosticism. Lord knows I'm not up to speed on current gnostic thought....

[_huckelberry]

Blixa, I do not want to obstruct any fishing for different perspectives. I think your suggestion to look at qnostic views makes sense. I am partial to orthodox lines of thought but I like to question them and their interpretations. I do not think that considering Gnostic thought a bad thing. It at least presents reason to reflect that Christain thoughts about God are not an unchanging all knowing answer. It might be a reminder that Christian thoughts are a result of humans thinking about questions and puzzles.

Actually some people express an enthusiasm about Gnostic ideas that I am at a loss to appreciate. Perhaps some orthodox talk about theism make God so remote and all powerful that any alternative has some attraction.

[_quark]

Oh my!
http://www.gnosis.org/gnintro.htm

Gnostics have their own -- perhaps quite startling -- view of these matters: they hold that the world is flawed because it was created in a flawed manner.

Many religions advocate that humans are to be blamed for the imperfections of the world. Supporting this view, they interpret the Genesis myth as declaring that transgressions committed by the first human pair brought about a “fall” of creation resulting in the present corrupt state of the world. Gnostics respond that this interpretation of the myth is false. The blame for the world’s failings lies not with humans, but with the creator.

Once the initial shock of the “unusual” or “blasphemous” nature of the Gnostic explanation for suffering and imperfection of the world wears off, one may begin to recognize that it is in fact the most sensible of all explanations.

[_Blixa]

Blixa, I do not want to obstruct any fishing for different perspectives. I think your suggestion to look at qnostic views makes sense. I am partial to orthodox lines of thought but I like to question them and their interpretations. I do not think that considering Gnostic thought a bad thing. It at least presents reason to reflect that Christain thoughts about God are not an unchanging all knowing answer. It might be a reminder that Christian thoughts are a result of humans thinking about questions and puzzles.

Actually some people express an enthusiasm about Gnostic ideas that I am at a loss to appreciate. Perhaps some orthodox talk about theism make God so remote and all powerful that any alternative has some attraction.

When I was first introduced to Gnosticism as an undergrad, though an atheist and not directly interested, I found such thinking odd but interesting. I don't know how I'd judge it now that I'm still an atheist, but much more wholeheartedly interested in religious narrative. I suppose in this post I was reminding myself, as well as quark, about things to read up on...

[_MrStakhanovite]

What if bad stuff happened to people simply because God did not have the power to help them? What if he/she desperately wanted to help, often tries to help, sometimes inadvertently makes things worse, but in the end, cannot do it all?

Am I alone in thinking this God would be more loving and empathetic than the popular God of today? I can relate to and look forward to meeting this God.

The limited view of God is a tricky one, and I’m not sure it could really work. The first problem I foresee is one of worship, would we worship a powerful alien force if we knew of it’s limitations? Could one be justified in that worship?

The second problem that comes to mind is that, if God is some how impotent to stop evils, how can we be guaranteed that it is possible for God to actually have the power to reward people with an afterlife.