The Problem of a Missing Motive

[TreasureHunter12]

As far as rewards for following a god's requests go...it's not too appealing.

How do know that what you do find appealing isn't a god's request? In other words, don't you think if a god wanted you to do something, he would make it appeal to you? Is there not something (alleviating suffering) that is universally appealing?

 

[quatona]

The idea of God and an afterlife is absurd. As we expand our awareness through "spiritual development", it becomes less absurd.. but still absurd. This isn't by accident.

I believe the answer to your question of why this physical reality exists is for the purpose of transforming from ignorance and limitation to self actualization through exercising faith. I don't think it's important for you or anyone else to agree with me on that, though.

Thanks for your response!
If I agree or not would be the second step. First I need to understand.
Am I correct in assuming from your first paragraph that you don´t adhere to Christian theology, or more precisely: that you don´t believe in a personal creator God?

 

[TreasureHunter12]

Thanks for your response!
If I agree or not would be the second step. First I need to understand.
Am I correct in assuming from your first paragraph that you don´t adhere to Christian theology, or more precisely: that you don´t believe in a personal creator God?

That's right. I wasn't sure if this thread was only meant for Christians or not, but I responded anyway.

 

[quatona]

That's right. I wasn't sure if this thread was only meant for Christians or not, but I responded anyway.

Yes, it was meant to be about possible motives of a personal creator God.

I will happily exchange our ideas of spirituality with you in another thread, though.

 

[Chesterton]

Maybe one is somehow unfit for the spiritual realm until they can "properly" react to the physical realm. Maybe as in training, you demonstrate that you can deal with things even though you will not really be expected to deal with them. I remember the old "King Fu" TV show where the character has to snatch the pebble from his master's hand, and has to pick up a burning hot cauldron with bare wrists. I don't think Bhuddist monks ever do that stuff in the regular course of living, but it demonstrated a certain kind and level of character.

 

[quatona]

Maybe one is somehow unfit for the spiritual realm until they can "properly" react to the physical realm.

Yes, that seems to be the idea. I, however, wasn´t asking for a "but maybe the idea is correct", but for an explanation how it could possibly make sense.

Maybe as in training, you demonstrate that you can deal with things even though you will not really be expected to deal with them.

Like...when you move to a lonely island forever, you should first make sure you can safely drive a formula1 racing car?

 

[Chesterton]

Yes, that seems to be the idea. I, however, wasn´t asking for a "but maybe the idea is correct", but for an explanation how it could possibly make sense.

Makes sense to me, as far as it goes.

Like...when you move to a lonely island forever, you should first make sure you can safely drive a formula1 racing car?

No, that doesn't demonstrate any particular kind of character, just a certain skill.

 

[quatona]

No, that doesn't demonstrate any particular kind of character, just a certain skill.

Yeah, it was but an analogy, you know.
Am I right in concluding that - according to your line of reasoning - life in the spiritual realm doesn´t/can´t show whether you have that "character", and that this "character" isn´t a requirement for living in the spiritual realm?

 

[quatona]

I remember the old "King Fu" TV show where the character has to snatch the pebble from his master's hand, and has to pick up a burning hot cauldron with bare wrists. I don't think Bhuddist monks ever do that stuff in the regular course of living, but it demonstrated a certain kind and level of character.

Well, I can see how this is meant to show that and how your "spiritual" skills/character/whatever can help you deal with worldly problems, once you are living in a physical world.
But, in regards to my question, that would be having it backwards.

 

[Chesterton]

Am I right in concluding that - according to your line of reasoning - life in the spiritual realm doesn´t/can´t show whether you have that "character", and that this "character" isn´t a requirement for living in the spiritual realm?

Maybe there is something like temptation there, so character is required. Or maybe it isn't required but it's desirable to have it anyway. Some people make art objects out of gold, a higher quality substance than is necessary for an object. Or maybe the state of being in Heaven is just the "natural" result of having had a certain character here.

 

[quatona]

Maybe there is something like temptation there, so character is required.

What kind of temptation are you thinking of here?

Or maybe it isn't required but it's desirable to have it anyway.

Can you give an explanatory example?
Desirable from whose perspective, and for which reason?

Some people make art objects out of gold, a higher quality substance than is necessary for an object.

Yeah, I know. A lot of people do a lot of things once they are in the physical realm. There´s no doubt we even create artificial problems just for the sake of it (think: games). The whole learning/improving/growing thing makes a lot of sense - within the physical realm (and we often emulate or even try to be better than immediately necessary, in order to be prepared for even higher challenges within this realm). I do understand that.
My question, however, is a different one: Why create an entire realm with conditions that are totally unlike the conditions in the realm you meant to train for?

Or maybe the state of being in Heaven is just the "natural" result of having had a certain character here.

Could you explain what you mean by "natural", here? Because none of the definitions I am aware of seems to be applicable.
I am also wondering how God got to Heaven, then, and what happens to children who die early and didn´t have this required "natural" training.

 

[Chesterton]

What kind of temptation are you thinking of here?

I don't know but there is the old folklore about how Satan fell from heaven due to the sin of pride.

Can you give an explanatory example?
Desirable from whose perspective, and for which reason?

I meant the gold as an example. Desirable by God, by angels, by everything in heaven because it's of high quality. Maybe it's desirable by us. Maybe we have to first live in material space-time with all it's troubles to appreciate the other type of existence.

Yeah, I know. A lot of people do a lot of things once they are in the physical realm. There´s no doubt we even create artificial problems just for the sake of it (think: games). The whole learning/improving/growing thing makes a lot of sense - within the physical realm (and we often emulate or even try to be better than immediately necessary, in order to be prepared for even higher challenges within this realm). I do understand that.
My question, however, is a different one: Why create an entire realm with conditions that are totally unlike the conditions in the realm you meant to train for?

Maybe the conditions are not totally unlike. But maybe you're mistaking the conditions for training with the expected goal of the training and they're not exactly the same. I can't think of a good example except, when I was kid I was told "reading is good" (and I still hear it today), like just reading is generally good for you. I thought the idea expressed that way seemed a little weird because shouldn't they be saying "reading good books is good" or "reading certain subjects or types of literature is good". But no, the idea was just that reading is good (and I think it is). The general process (or training) is good even where not aimed at a specific goal. Make any sense?

Could you explain what you mean by "natural", here? Because none of the definitions I am aware of seems to be applicable.

Natural meaning the result of a process which God has set up to operate a certain way, as in the way coal naturally becomes diamond under certain conditions.

I am also wondering how God got to Heaven, then, and what happens to children who die early and didn´t have this required "natural" training.

I think heaven is our word for where He's always been. Maybe the children reincarnate, get to try again. That's not Christian teaching, but He's God, he doesn't have to follow our limited understanding of Him. Or He can just accept them, He can make exceptions for the children, He's God.

 

[Ana the Ist]

How do know that what you do find appealing isn't a god's request? In other words, don't you think if a god wanted you to do something, he would make it appeal to you? Is there not something (alleviating suffering) that is universally appealing?

I think perhaps you misread my post.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yes, it was meant to be about possible motives of a personal creator God.

I will happily exchange our ideas of spirituality with you in another thread, though.

Have you ever noticed that whenever you want to discuss a particular idea within christianity that you've noticed many christians adhere to...the first posters to respond are almost always the ones who disagree with the idea up for discussion.

 

[expos4ever]

I believe your question contain a incorrect pre-supposition. And, to be fair to you, Christians themselves are probably responsible for this. As at least one other poster has pointed, the Biblical narrative does not end up in a "non-physical" state. I am convinced that the Scriptures teach that God is going to restore, redeem, and otherwise "perfect" this very physical world.

In this respect, there is a HUGE misunderstanding that trips up many, probably most, Christians - they read "spiritual" as necessarily denoting non-physical. Please read that again because it is very important. Writers like Paul use the term "spiritual" to denote "redeemed" (or some similar concept), not immaterial or non-physical. Hence, in 1 Corinthians 15 Paul uses the adjective "spiritual" to describe a physical object - the human body.

 

[Tree of Life]

The question in short:
Why would a non-material/non-physical (entirely "spiritual") being create a material/physical world when the actual goal (that which it is all about) is again a "spiritual" state of affairs?

According to Christian theology, the end goal of creation is entirely physical. God's people will live in physical bodies in this (renewed) physical world and worship a physical God (Jesus Christ). We will do work, dance, hug, sing, eat, drink, run, etc...

The idea that the Bible presents an "entirely" spiritual picture of the age to come is mistaken.

Or IOW: why create a world exclusively for beings to prove that they are "not of this world"?

The NT expression "not of this world" is used exclusively by John. John's word for "world" is the Greek κόσμος and almost always means "unbelieving society of men". "The world" for John is those who do not believe. The disciples are not "of the world". John never means by this expression that we are destined to live in a non-physical existence.

 

[Tree of Life]

The OP is part of a larger question. Which is why would a transcendent, omniscient, inconceivably superior and perfect entity do anything at all?

To freely express himself.

 

[quatona]

According to Christian theology, the end goal of creation is entirely physical. God's people will live in physical bodies in this (renewed) physical world and worship a physical God (Jesus Christ). We will do work, dance, hug, sing, eat, drink, run, etc...

Ok. Tell me more about it. Will we digest, will we have pain, will we be vulnerable, will we suffer, can we be killed, will we age, will there be gravity and all the natural laws...or what does "physical" mean in this statement?

The NT expression "not of this world" is used exclusively by John. John's word for "world" is the Greek κόσμος and almost always means "unbelieving society of men". "The world" for John is those who do not believe. The disciples are not "of the world". John never means by this expression that we are destined to live in a non-physical existence.

It´s interesting, though, that he uses a word that can also mean "world", for this.

 

[Ana the Ist]

According to Christian theology, the end goal of creation is entirely physical. God's people will live in physical bodies in this (renewed) physical world and worship a physical God (Jesus Christ). We will do work, dance, hug, sing, eat, drink, run, etc...

The idea that the Bible presents an "entirely" spiritual picture of the age to come is mistaken.



The NT expression "not of this world" is used exclusively by John. John's word for "world" is the Greek κόσμος and almost always means "unbelieving society of men". "The world" for John is those who do not believe. The disciples are not "of the world". John never means by this expression that we are destined to live in a non-physical existence.

I can understand why you think the other things will happen...but why would you be working? Is there a need for money? Will someone need to scrub the toilets in paradise?

 

[quatona]

I believe your question contain a incorrect pre-supposition. And, to be fair to you, Christians themselves are probably responsible for this. As at least one other poster has pointed, the Biblical narrative does not end up in a "non-physical" state. I am convinced that the Scriptures teach that God is going to restore, redeem, and otherwise "perfect" this very physical world.

In this respect, there is a HUGE misunderstanding that trips up many, probably most, Christians - they read "spiritual" as necessarily denoting non-physical.

Yes, words like "supernatural", "spiritual" are almost always used as antagonists to "physical, natural, material" - by Christians. Many of their points depend on them being antagonists.
Now, I have to wonder why Christian work from this idea all over CF, yet nobody shows up to correct it until a non-believer refers to it.

Please read that again because it is very important. Writers like Paul use the term "spiritual" to denote "redeemed" (or some similar concept), not immaterial or non-physical. Hence, in 1 Corinthians 15 Paul uses the adjective "spiritual" to describe a physical object - the human body.

Ok. As soon as I find the time, I will create a similar thread for those who believe that the afterlife is physical.