I NEED food and water. I WANT a 1959 Cadillac (not pink). You don't see any difference here?
Logically, those who have no needs want nothing (some call it a "bliss: and others just "dead").
No, that can't be right since needs are limited and wants are virtually unlimited. God needs for nothing, but He surely wants innumerable things to happen within time. God does not need us. His existence and way of existence would be unaffected based on whether we ever came into existence. However, it is clear that He wants us to be here, else He would not have created, and that He wants to save His elect to be with Him in Heaven.
If we stick with the limited concepts and words we have, knowing that God needs nothing, we must conclude that if God does want something, it is for no reason whatsoever!
Not at all. While we may not always know WHAT His reasons are we can be sure THAT He has reasons, or else He is a random and directionless God. The Bible certainly does not teach that.
And that would create a God who does things randomly and without a purpose. So, you see, our minds and words cannot explain why whatever created this existence does what it does, because our own words are anthropomorphic.
OK, on some level we are sort of on the same wavelength. But here they are not OUR words, they are God's words given to us as His choice for us to understand according to our limitations. Of course we can't understand on God's level, but we CAN meaningfully understand on the level God has given us. Otherwise, it's all just a big tease.
FK: For one thing God wants us to understand (eventually) every jot and tittle in the Bible.
Really? And I thought He is telling us that we need to love God and others as ourselves.
Yes, the Bible gives us the HOW about loving Him and others. Jesus also specifically taught that we should learn the scriptures:
Matt 22:29 : Jesus replied, "You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God.
The way to avoid error is to know God's word.
God doesn't want us to understand. God leads; men follow. When Jesus says things so that we may understand, he is referring to "understanding" in the heart, in the spirit He taught. He gave sermons, He performed miracles. He did things. He didn't have group discussions and Bible study groups, FK.
What, content is irrelevant and what feels good in the heart is all that matters? Paul spends most of the NT dealing directly with content, not mysticism and feel-good vague notions. Of course God wants us to understand. Why else would He bother to communicate with us (if you believe that He does)? I want my dog to understand content to the best of his capability. Why would God want less for us?
***Oh I see, we are back to not speaking the same language, FK. Look up the definition of a “want” or a “need” and you will see that it they are inseparably connected to each other.
I NEED food and water. I WANT a 1959 Cadillac (not pink). You don’t see any difference here?***
Different uses of the word ‘want’.
desire: feel or have a desire for; want strongly; “I want to go home now”; “I want my own room”
privation: a state of extreme poverty
have need of; “This piano wants the attention of a competent tuner”
hunt or look for; want for a particular reason; “Your former neighbor is wanted by the FBI”; “Uncle Sam wants you”
lack: the state of needing something that is absent or unavailable; “there is a serious lack of insight into the problem”; “water is the critical deficiency in desert regions”; “for want of a nail the shoe was lost”
need: anything that is necessary but lacking; “he had sufficient means to meet his simple needs”; “I tried to supply his wants”
wish or demand the presence of; “I want you here at noon!”
be without, lack; be deficient in; “want courtesy”; “want the strength to go on living”; “flood victims wanting food and shelter”
wish: a specific feeling of desire; “he got his wish”; “he was above all wishing and desire”
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
The use of the word ‘want’ by kosta is defined by 2, 3 and 5.
***However, it is clear that He wants us to be here, else He would not have created, and that He wants to save His elect to be with Him in Heaven.***
Clarify if you would, with the logic just demonstrated, how the elect is not defined as the entire human population. If you would, please.
***But here they are not OUR words, they are God’s words given to us as His choice for us to understand according to our limitations. Of course we can’t understand on God’s level, but we CAN meaningfully understand on the level God has given us.***
In an orderly progessive fashion, to the abilities of humans to absorb that information.
***Of course God wants us to understand. Why else would He bother to communicate with us (if you believe that He does)? I want my dog to understand content to the best of his capability. Why would God want less for us?***
We are not dogs. God wants for all mankind to love Him with all our hearts, minds and souls. Dogs cannot. God gives us the ability to understand and the information to understand.
If your dog does not wish to understand or is incapable, do you whip out your .44 magnum and blow his head off? To carry the analogy to the next level, why would God do the figurative same to us if we cannot understand Him or love Him as He wishes?
You are looking at this on a surface, artificially separating essential needs (to breathe, eat, sleep, etc.) with non-essential ones (desires).
All needs, however, have a cause. Needs can be physiological or psychological. A need is that which moves you to action, that gives rise to your will to act, regardless if it is physiologically necessary (for survival) or not.
If we look at God as a being with no needs, essential or otherwise, then His will has no cause. In other words, God wills "just because," for no reason whatsoever!
And since we say that God the Father is without cause, it follows that everything He does and wants is without cause, for He is the cause of everything, including your needs and wants, as the Creed says "all things visible and invisible."
This is how lunacy about God is born and grows into pantheistic caricature of God in the Eastern religions or a fairy-tale deity of pagans and, apparently, some Christians .
There is another twist in this anthropomorphic lunacy that men have created about God: being Transcendent and Eternal, God has already thought of, created and decided on all things for all times and has nothing else to create or think or want. He did all the work, "thinking" and "wanting" from all eternity, before the world existed.
We can say this because we consider God to be perfect. Being "perfect," by the definition and meaning of the word, means to be complete or finished. Nothing can be added to or or substracted from it. Again, our words cannot adequately describe anything that is what we call spiritual; no amount of words will adequately describe God, just as no amount of words will describe love.
One must wonder if there really is such a thing as love. I am almost certain that if we would describe it or image it somehow, it would be a variety of loves, each suited to every man's fancy.
We cannot understand God, FK. We can only speak of God in human terms thinking of Christ. Not a burning bush, a rumbling volcano, the Sun, the lightning, etc., but only through Christ. That's why He says in the Gospels that we can go to the Father only through Him, through His image. That's why we can interpret the rets of the Bible only through the Gospels and ot the other way around.
There is nothing in the Bible that says that. This is something the Protestants/Baptists imply by their (human) definition of what "inspired" means.
Besides, I have already told you this before, any other religion claims that God wrote their holy books too. You have dismissed that without any proof because there isn't any.
Yes, the Bible gives us the HOW about loving Him and others. Jesus also specifically taught that we should learn the scriptures: Matt 22:29 : Jesus replied, "You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God.
No, not "we." He is telling this to the Sadducees, a priestly class, who were expected to know the Scriptures the way you'd expect a physician to know anatomy or a lawyer to know the law. It's their job. It's not everyone "job" to know the scriptures, FK. Nowhere does the Bible say it is. That is the Protestant/Baptist superstition known as the sola scriptura.
The way to avoid error is to know God's word
How can you know the "God's word" if there is no agreement on what that knowledge entails? There are thousands of denominations that interpret "God's word" differently, the "core beliefs" notwithstanding, and even there (such as the Holy Trinity) it is not universal among so-called "Christians."
Each and every Christian or "Christian" sect uses precisely the same "God's word" you and I are using, to support their sectarian beliefs, and each assumes being absolutely right.
As I said, He didn't have Bible study sessions. He came to Peter and said "Follow Me!" End of discussion. There was nothing to understand.
Paul is trying to "explain" this mysterious faith to Greeks and Romans, accustomed to philosophy and reason, and he is using the approach they can grasp. But what is he "explaining," FK? That Christ rose from the dead? Is that an "explanation?" Or is it a profound mystery that requires blind belief? Or hat with His Blood He paid for our sins? Or that by being dunked into the water we are mysteriously "born-again" and the "elect" of God?
And don't tell me that being told that all your past, present and future sins have been forgiven because you call on the name of the Lord, and that your salvation is assured no matter what you do for the rest of your life is not a "feel-good" notion that appeals to our human nature!
I think that is incorrect, FK. We want our dogs to obey by recognizing the command. We can euphemistically say that the dog "understands" but that is the fallacy of anthropomorphizing our pets as well.
It's simply Pavlovian reflex "learning" (actually recognition). You have the bell and you have the food. Bell becomes a "word" for food. Even flatworms learn, FK. You can train them with light. I don't think we would ever imply that our flatworms (if you have such "pets") somehow "understand" our flashlight signals