Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Forest Keeper; MarkBsnr; stfassisi; irishtenor; Dr. Eckleburg; Gamecock; wmfights
I NEED food and water. I WANT a 1959 Cadillac (not pink). You don't see any difference here?

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.

6,411 posted on 07/09/2008 6:53:23 AM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6408 | View Replies ]


To: kosta50; MarkBsnr; stfassisi; irishtenor; Dr. Eckleburg; Gamecock; wmfights
FK: I NEED food and water. I WANT a 1959 Cadillac (not pink). You don't see any difference here?

You are looking at this on a surface, artificially separating essential needs (to breathe, eat, sleep, etc.) with non-essential ones (desires).

Knowing that lurkers are reading I am going by common usages of terms and not allowing Reformed theology to be painted as holding that God has needs. That is what you were trying to do and so I must object. :)

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!

If YOU want to say that God has needs that's fine, but I ain't goin' there. :) It looks like by your terms a "need" can also be described as something desired which the needer does not have. What does God not have that He desires?

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.

I don't see any problem here. We just must be careful not to assume that the Creation consumes God. That is, He existed just fine before the Creation, and just because He created does not mean His existence has been damaged somehow.

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.

I don't wonder about it at all, of course there is love. It is irrelevant that we can't know it fully. This is the problem with the all or nothing approach. One is always left with NOTHING. For some reason some people are dissatisfied with "adequate and good per God's will". They want it all or they want nothing to do with it. Their loss. But it also leads to bad theology, a theology without a base. I do not understand why these people shun true knowledge only because it is not exhaustive.

6,420 posted on 07/09/2008 8:48:01 PM PDT by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6411 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson