God's Job Description Form

Delete

What is the job of the owner of a car? The same abstract applies.

Delete

Namaste,

That is the job of the driver. I said the “owner”.

I had considering using, “owner of a bat”, but thought you might think the owner must be the batter. I thought perhaps of the owner of a house, but then you might think that the owner must live in the house. I settled on a car, even though I suspected you might think that the owner would necessarily be dedicated to some presumed purpose for his possession.

If you owned a big rock in space, what is your job?

Likewise, if you owned Creation, what is your job?

I thought this was appropriate:

Delete

The owner is the employer, not an employee. The owner doesn’t have a “job”. God doesn’t have a job as though answerable to the Creation’s whims.

God deals with possibilities not given in experience .so we are talking beliefs. The transcendence sort of beliefs . its that sort of beliefs. The basis for acceptance of these beliefs . This is roughly the topic you’re looking for. .

Thomas Reed . William James. . Hume.

The basis of theological beliefs . philosophy of religion. wide subject matter .

Reed starts with the idea of the world – since theological beliefs have something in common with ordinary beliefs .

Reed talks of two principles at work. The principles of veracity and credulity. A tendency to speak the truth and to accept what others say as the truth . Without that tendency communication breaks down and society flounders no cooperative behavior. He goes…. even a liar speaks a hundreds truth for every deception .

The tendency is foundational when it comes to a child . Trust is what the child has to bring to the class room. without that the child is not educable .

James talks about the will to believe . " the primitive impulse to affirm the reality of all that’s conceived "

We start life by believing everything. Then life changes that and the child grows and realizes he shouldn’t believe everything.

The personal claims on beliefs get complex as you grow up. billions of cells . selection process . self interest there too. … mind is challenged . Thoughts clash . absolutes become problematic. Abstractions and philosophical insufficiencies are turned away from . prgamtism sets in as the absolutes and the abstraction are hard to hang on to in an organic world with needs and whatnot and and and and

Listen this all very crudely put . but this is where you start with these two stalwarts , reed and James. William james not james in this forum. The other James , William James . . eventually you should be able to come some kind of resolution regarding this problem of whats god job.

:laughing:

If there is Something out there, I would think that its role is to simply "Be’.

The rest is up to us. Or one might simply say that its role is inspiration…and no more. :laughing:

Hi,

Thanks very much for this comment. It help me to think about my ideals.

Tks again and pls keep posting.

A job implies God answering to a higher purpose or principle. If there is such a higher principle, that would be God.

The car analogy isn’t valid. Cars don’t have consciousness, much less free will as God or a driver does.

God’s purpose or intent was the creation of a rational natural universe that could naturally spawn sentient creatures with free will that they could exercise rationally in that natural universe. God’s self-given purpose is to maintain that free will by not undermining the rational universe with irrational, supernatural events. His “job”, what He intends to do here, is only to watch. For our part, we will never have any idea whether God exists or not until we are able to acquire knowledge from that so far, impenetrable obstacle to knowledge, the Big Bang. If the universe was created, that would be the only supernatural event, but supernatural characteristics must remain (by design?) on the other side.

If you ask what was God’s motivation for such a creation, I as a person spawned in God’s image, a sentient spirit, can think of only one thing–companions with free will. Angels (completely mythical beings) could never be tested by temptation knowing that an all powerful God exists and is everywhere. Lucifer’s rebellion would be an absurd situation and he would have known it. We will never be able to program a computer or robot with free will. All we can do is create and program a robot which can program/reprogram itself. But in doing so, it would merely become one of us, in our and God’s image, sentient.

God’s job is to troll everybody on earth and prod them to kill each other over him. Nothing flatters Him more than when somebody blows themselves up just to kill somebody else who believes a different version of Him exists. So He goes around on His magic carpet, convincing this group of one thing and convincing that group of another, and then He just sits back and watches the fireworks! Oh what a life!

Could an agent who forgave all others unconditionally be deity? That agent would be a ‘soft touch’ and could preside only over anarchy and chaos.

A History of God: The 4,000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity and Islam by Karen Armstrong

Spoken like a true nihilist. At least materialists believe in something. Bleak.

i’m not a nihilist, i just like saying degrading things about God. i love Him. He understands. We’re buddies. We play like that. 'Cept when we’re hanging out, his only come-back to my insults is “faggot”. Stupid God, can’t even think of a good come-back.

It was more than just “playing” with God, it was throwing all humans into the same pit. And why do you assume God can or should do anything about it? God, if He exists, is laissez faire. The “faggot” is coming from you. And if you’re regretting the luck of the draw, how would you like to have been born to a woman on a train to Auschwitz? Life ain’t fair, deal with it.

boy what a nonsequitur.

It would have been except for what you said in the previous post.

nonsequitur

nonsequitur. i didn’t say “God should” anything.

no, that faggot is coming from most of the people that believe in him, who aren’t as laissez faire and who don’t think he’s as laissez faire as you’d like to think.

i don’t even know what this is referring to. at all. this is the biggest nonsequitur of the whole post. wtf are you talking about?