The modern god

Phlegmak

Phlegmak

Deity
Joined
Dec 28, 2005
Messages
10,966
Location
Nowhere
In Ben Stein's unintelligent movie, there was this exchange:

Richard Dawkins: The Old Testament god is a cruel, genocidal, [many more adjectives] being.
Ben Stein: But why not believe in the modern, loving god?

I thought Ben Stein's sentence was really powerful. "The modern loving god". He put into words thoughts that Christians seem to have but have not spoken. Today's modern loving god is a totally new version of the same god. In my opinion, it's a totally new god and a totally new religion from the ancient, violent god(s).

In Skeptic magazine, I read this once. "Farming societies tend to have a polytheistic religion. Shepherd societies tend to have a monotheistic religion." So now I think I can add, "Modern industrialized societies with relatively high standards of living tend to have a monotheistic religion with a loving god." Even Hindus have told me there is only one god.

So, whaddya think? Am I crazy?
 
So you're saying we're free to believe in whatever god we made up at the moment? Sounds about right to me.
 
The 'modern' God, as described by many rigorous theological debates, seems to be more robust a concept. It's more internally consistent, apparently.

This is what I've been told by people who spend a great deal more time thinking about it. To me, it still seems like "the Klingons from Enterprise are more reasonable than the Klingons from Star Trek", maybe so, I guess.

Of course, the god that the theologians describe is certainly not the god that many people try to worship: there's more picking-n-choosing there.
 
Phlegmak said:
Even Hindus have told me there is only one god.
Click to expand...

Well the Hindu "gods" are supposed to be avatars, of the three principle gods, Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva, who in turn represent three aspects of the One God: Creation, Preservation, and Destruction, respectively. Though there are many, many, many sects of Hinduism, and it can be hard to really define what is and what isn't Hinduism.
 
taper said:
So you're saying we're free to believe in whatever god we made up at the moment? Sounds about right to me.
Click to expand...
I'm saying that the god people worship is a function of the society the people live in. god is malleable. These are words that anthropologists have known for decades or centuries, but it finally dawned on me that the same applies to Christianity.
 
Um, just for the record I for one have never stated that God can't be vengeful, wrathful, and so on. You don't just chuck the entirety of the OT because it may not feel all warm and fuzzy.

He created us, and if he wants he can destroy us. We're his to do with as he pleases. Luckily for us, he is a loving God, but that doesn't mean we should piss him off just to test that.
 
Well ofcourse. Kind of makes you wonder how don't they know that the God they are imagining in modern times is not an imagination ?
 
Even according to the bible god has changed, supposedly we won't get another flood because we're totally evil from birth, and it took god just destroying almost all of mankind to figure it out :)
 
Ech, I prefer Taoism. There is no God but yourself. Well that's probably not a philosophy of Taoism but I choose to believe it is.
 
El_Machinae said:
The 'modern' God, as described by many rigorous theological debates, seems to be more robust a concept. It's more internally consistent, apparently.

This is what I've been told by people who spend a great deal more time thinking about it. To me, it still seems like "the Klingons from Enterprise are more reasonable than the Klingons from Star Trek", maybe so, I guess.

Of course, the god that the theologians describe is certainly not the god that many people try to worship: there's more picking-n-choosing there.
Click to expand...

That would mean it is man-made would it?

Otherwise why would the concepts, dogmas, and texts need to be 'evolved' or 'refined'?
 
I think we could say that the conception is man-made, but that would be true whether or not the item actually exists. We have conceptions of klingons and planets, and both are being refined and evolved over time. The modern 8 year old has a rather different conception of Mars than an 8 year old 100 years ago, but neither are very accurate in describing the actual planet.

I believe that the theological conceptions are evolving because all the "obviously false" conceptions are mostly thrown out, and then the "probably false" conceptions are being tossed out as well.

It's fair to say that the god reflects the society, but also that the society reflects the god.
 
Phlegmak said:
In Ben Stein's unintelligent movie, there was this exchange:

Richard Dawkins: The Old Testament god is a cruel, genocidal, [many more adjectives] being.
Ben Stein: But why not believe in the modern, loving god?

I thought Ben Stein's sentence was really powerful. "The modern loving god". He put into words thoughts that Christians seem to have but have not spoken. Today's modern loving god is a totally new version of the same god. In my opinion, it's a totally new god and a totally new religion from the ancient, violent god(s).
Click to expand...

Which 'modern, loving god'? If he is talking about the christian one, then I doubt it. Sure, the old testament entity recommends genocide and mass rape, conducts wars and natural disasters on a whim and whatnot. But what it makes up in number and mass it lacks in depth. The new testament god is the one that condemns people not just to punishment beyond the grave, but eternal torment. Loving*, with an indispensable asterisk of course.
 
"On the first day we created God!"

But in the end, there is no way to say it, and the modern loving god does seem reasonable, but then you'd need to free yourself to some extent from the ancient scriptures.
 
Phlegmak said:
In Ben Stein's unintelligent movie, there was this exchange:

Richard Dawkins: The Old Testament god is a cruel, genocidal, [many more adjectives] being.
Ben Stein: But why not believe in the modern, loving god?
Click to expand...
Why were you watching Expelled? Doesn't seem like it'd be your kind of movie.

I thought Ben Stein's sentence was really powerful. "The modern loving god". He put into words thoughts that Christians seem to have but have not spoken. Today's modern loving god is a totally new version of the same god. In my opinion, it's a totally new god and a totally new religion from the ancient, violent god(s).

In Skeptic magazine, I read this once. "Farming societies tend to have a polytheistic religion. Shepherd societies tend to have a monotheistic religion." So now I think I can add, "Modern industrialized societies with relatively high standards of living tend to have a monotheistic religion with a loving god." Even Hindus have told me there is only one god.

So, whaddya think? Am I crazy?
Click to expand...
I think you (And Dawkins) focus too much on the nasty stuff - destruction of the Canaanites, plagues, and so on - and don't pay enough attention to the big picture. I mean, people always talk about how Jesus was nice, but the Old Testament God was all mean and stuff - but that same God told His people "Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself." And yes, that's an Old Testament quote. As a matter of fact, that's from the much maligned Leviticus. ;) (Leviticus 19:18, actually. And this is universalized to apply to everyone, not just Jews, in Leviticus 19:33-34) And there are other examples and explanations as well, that's just a quick one.

I don't think you're "crazy." I just think your perception of God is kind of skewed, especially that of the "Old Testament God."
 
nihilistic said:
Which 'modern, loving god'? If he is talking about the christian one, then I doubt it. Sure, the old testament entity recommends genocide and mass rape, conducts wars and natural disasters on a whim and whatnot. But what it makes up in number and mass it lacks in depth. The new testament god is the one that condemns people not just to punishment beyond the grave, but eternal torment. Loving*, with an indispensable asterisk of course.
Click to expand...

Many modern conceptions of God have tuned-down the "Hellfire & Brimstone" and have made Salvation much easier than we'd get from a strict reading of the text. Heck, the Catholic Church now says that you don't need the Church to get to Heaven, Purgatory is gone, and Hell is only for really bad sins. Mormonism is similar. Light 'n Fluffy.
 
Elrohir said:
I think you (And Dawkins) focus too much on the nasty stuff - destruction of the Canaanites, plagues, and so on - and don't pay enough attention to the big picture.
Click to expand...

It's just that all the nasty stuff stands out so much.

It would too, if this was your friend doing these things, and we were trying to figure out his personality type, and if he has changed in the last couple years. You judge people by actions, not by the "big picture". That's why.
 
Old Testament: God pwns joo.
New Testament: Jesus loves you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TheSpaceCowboy
Religion should be reworked in a major expansion
2 3
Replies
59
Views
4K
Lord Yanaek
L
T
Civ 7 Doesn't Work Because The Optimization Paradigm Is For Tiny/Fast, But The Design Paradigm Is For Large/Epic
2
Replies
23
Views
2K
Krikkit1
K
T
review after winning twice on deity marathon
Replies
0
Views
1K
tsuneomai
T
Caesar of Bread
Civilization: The Imperium OffTopicum Edition
8 9 10
Replies
193
Views
25K
Henri Christophe
Henri Christophe
I
Overview of Mechanics
3 4 5
Replies
95
Views
20K
sTAPler27
sTAPler27
Back
Top Bottom