The Greatest Commandment

Discuss arguments for existence of God and faith in general. Any aspect of any orientation toward religion/spirituality, as long as it is based upon a positive open to other people attitude.

Moderator:Metacrock

The Pixie
Posts:852
Joined:Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:54 pm
Re: The Greatest Commandment

Post by The Pixie » Sun Mar 12, 2017 3:44 pm

met wrote:Again, it is what what is is -- it doesn't have to be what you expect -- and it takes the form of narrative rather than "instruction."
If it is not what would be expected, then we have to wonder why. The most likely scenario, it seems to me, is that the Bible is not from an all-knowing, all-powerful god.
Maybe God doesn't just hand out orders, isn't part of (what Michel Foucault described as) this repressive, militarized/bureaucratized industrialized culture. But then again, maybe it's just as well for you if he or she isn't...
Have you read the Bible? Large chunks are supposed God handing out orders. Again, the most likely scenario, it seems to me, is that the Bible is not from an all-knowing, all-powerful god.

Jim B.
Posts:1445
Joined:Fri Aug 23, 2013 2:36 am

Re: The Greatest Commandment

Post by Jim B. » Sun Mar 12, 2017 6:34 pm

The Pixie wrote: I asked if you could think of a scenario, and by that I meant a scenario with some basis is reality. You appear to have taken that to mean I am asking about some imaginary situation, and so chose to emphasise the word "imagine" twice.
No, I meant "imagine" as in a scenario that I think actually occurs. Are you claiming that my scenario never happens? Do you think that out of 7 billion humans, that this scenario sometimes occurs? Egoism is arguably the strongest psychological drive; in fact, I would say that there's no human action or decision that cannot be atributed primarily to ego-centrism at least sometimes. This includes belief in God.
So you are talking about someone having extreme devotion to himself? What does that mean? Or someone who loves himself intensely? Or someone who admires himself? This idea that an individual worships himself is a cliche that theists trot out, but I question whether it has any basis in reality. Sure, it is easy to picture someone with a big ego, an over-inflated opinion of himself, perhaps you even know someone like that, but have ever met someone you could (without exageration) say he worships himself? I certainly have not.
Remember that words ave more than one meaning. recall the second entry I cited is not "worship" in the sense of regarding oneself literally as a god or god-like being. And yes, I have known people like this, people whose self-admiration is the central driver of their actions, people such as certain presidents of the US. This cuts across any atheist/theist divide. I'm not making a blanket claim about atheists. Most atheists, the vast majority, have not come to their atheism for this reason. But I would say that there are some atheists who have, as well as some theists, some objectivists, some vegans, some flat-earthers, etc.
Because you are imagining scenarios with no basis in reality.
This makes no sense. Because I used the word "imagine", which you misunderstood, you assume I'm referring to ALL atheists as coming to their atheism out of self-worship?!? You're doing the very thing you accuse theists of doing to you. "Imagine" refers to a mental process, as in thinking or conceinving of something, not to the object of that process, ie unicorns or elves. Can you imagine why some people steal food? Yes, out of hunger.
Not moral or morally binding in the same way? What does that mean? Can you list all the ways there are for something to be moral? Or to be morally binding? Which apply to the greatest commandment?
Super-erogatory would be a moral category but not binding in the same way as the injunction against murder. There could be a moral rule to be completely compassionate to all sentient creatures; this would be the highest ideal one could strive for and one, in fact, ought to strive for it. But if one doesn't reach that ideal, and even if one doesn't really try, wouldn't mean one is guilty as one would be guilty of murder.
So the answer to whether it is immoral to not love God is no. That is all you had to say.
I have. It's your obstinate obtuseness and your apparent eagerness to keep drawing up the old battle lines that's dragged this ridiculous conversation out this far. Wouldn't you feel better if you took off your armor at least occasionally?

User avatar
met
Posts:2813
Joined:Mon Jun 16, 2008 1:05 pm

Re: The Greatest Commandment

Post by met » Mon Mar 13, 2017 2:53 pm

The Pixie wrote:[
Have you read the Bible? Large chunks are supposed God handing out orders. Again, the most likely scenario, it seems to me, is that the Bible is not from an all-knowing, all-powerful god.
Lawd! That's the whole issue we been discussing on this thread? Law vs. Love etc? The scholar Dominic Crossan has put out some interesting thoughts here, so perhaps you could look them up....

(The Xian tradition never made the claim the Scriptures were "from" God in the same sense as the Quran in Islam, at least not until pretty recently. The letters of Paul -eg - are obviously not strictly letters dictated to Paul by God, but are "from" Paul and even include personal and temporal comments from him.

This "personal touch", tho, is compatible with the core Gospel narratative -- which is, you know, some sort of "personal visit by God" type of thing.....)
If it is not what would be expected, then we have to wonder why. The most likely scenario, it seems to me, is that the Bible is not from an all-knowing, all-powerful god.
I think your concepts of all-powerful and all-knowing might be a bit limited?

Do these concepts necessarily infer mindless obedience and a lack of a need for thought on the part of 'subjects'?

Such requirement would suggest ....what? ... on the part of any all-powerful, all-knowing entity .... similar insecurities to our own worldly elites with their tenuous and temporary grasp on "power"?

I think your position here likely reflects more on your own background in (as Foucault said) a repressive & militaristic culture than anything else. If someone or something has "power" you expect to be ordered about?
The “One” is the space of the “world” of the tick, but also the “pinch” of the lobster, or that rendezvous in person to confirm online pictures (with a new lover or an old God). This is the machinery operative...as “onto-theology."
Dr Ward Blanton

Post Reply