Can God Experience Pleasure?

[sojourner]

I will agree that experience is. However, the sum of the years of temporal existence is not.

@Cacotopia already covered this in post #41.

But the poster asserted “70 years of experience,” not merely “70 years lived.”
It’s the “of experience” that deserves respect.

 

[Windwalker]

I would say that in one case, "In the beginning God created man in his own image" and in others "Man created God in his own image".

The first would would be a correct perspective and in the second in wouldn't.

But you don't think that man creates God in his own image all the time? You don't see people's ideas of God looking a whole lot like an idealized image of themselves? Haven't you ever wondered why so many people have so many different ways of envisioning God?

 

[SalixIncendium]

But the poster asserted “70 years of experience,” not merely “70 years lived.”
It’s the “of experience” that deserves respect.

Actually, she didn't. Please take the time to go back and read the thread.

 

[sojourner]

Actually, she didn't. Please take the time to go back and read the thread.

You’re right. My apologies. However, I believe experience was heavily implied. My point stands (and you agreed).

 

[Windwalker]

The language in sacred scripture that attributes human qualities to God should be seen as Divine assistance to enable humanity to better understand the nature of our relationship with One who is both an intimate friend and an unknowable essence.

Which is an interesting thought that set massive feedback loop inside my head just now. God assisting man by using antrophopmic language for their sakes, is itself an anthropomorphic view of God. It assigns motives and interest, along with teaching techniques, and all, which are of course human qualities projected on to God.

So this is stuck in a feedback loop. The idea of God speaking in human terms for our sakes, is itself an anthropomorphism. You end up with this: The anthropomorphic God, using anthropomorphisms to speak to the human mind to see a God that isn't actually a projection of humans, yet is because it thinks like a human in dumbing things down for the humans. At it all feeds back around, stuck within an anthropomorphic feedback loop, bouncing back and forth like a ping pong ball.

This is the problem one runs into when, though we realize God is bigger than our human projections of God, if we are within a religious system that is based upon the truly anthropomorphic views of God; having a plan, having desires, sending prophets to speak revelations from His mind, keeps naughty and nice lists, for us to be true to these factually would mean God could not be anything other than an anthropomorphic God in our thinking. We would be butting up against the edge of as far as that can go for us when we realize rationally that these are all anthropomorphisms. And so we can easily remain trapped like that ping pong ball in that anthropomorphic feedback loop, until and if we popped the escape hatch and surfaced for some air.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Which is an interesting thought that set massive feedback loop inside my head just now. God assisting man by using antrophopmic language for their sakes, is itself an anthropomorphic view of God. It assigns motives and interest, along with teaching techniques, and all, which are of course human qualities projected on to God.

So this is stuck in a feedback loop. The idea of God speaking in human terms for our sakes, is itself an anthropomorphism. You end up with this: The anthropomorphic God, using anthropomorphisms to speak to the human mind to see a God that isn't actually a projection of humans, yet is because it thinks like a human in dumbing things down for the humans. At it all feeds back around, stuck within an anthropomorphic feedback loop, bouncing back and forth like a ping pong ball.

This is the problem one runs into when, though we realize God is bigger than our human projections of God, if we are within a religious system that is based upon the truly anthropomorphic views of God; having a plan, having desires, sending prophets to speak revelations from His mind, keeps naughty and nice lists, for us to be true to these factually would mean God could not be anything other than an anthropomorphic God in our thinking. We would be butting up against the edge of as far as that can go for us when we realize rationally that these are all anthropomorphisms. And so we can easily remain trapped like that ping pong ball in that anthropomorphic feedback loop, until and if we popped the escape hatch and surfaced for some air.

Lol

Thanks for sharing your response.

It’s a very human quality to see reflections of ourselves in all around us. Our bodies impose limitations. We can not fly yet we are gifted with the capacity for innovation and creativity that we design and build the machines that enable us to soar high above the earth. Where does this capacity of the human mind originate within a seemingly random chaotic universe? How did it come into existence? How does the alignment of atoms or the sequencing of our genes manifest such a wondrous entity?

Likewise, the Word of God! Does it have the power to transform the human spirit and enable us to gain a glimpse into a world beyond? Whether mortal delusion or Divine Providence it inspires a devotion that any worldly king can only long for.

 

[Kenny]

This is patently not part of the Genesis mythic account. The serpent Was. Not. Satan.

Who.Was.He?

Revelation 20:2
And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

 

[Windwalker]

It’s a very human quality to see reflections of ourselves in all around us. Our bodies impose limitations.

To expand that a little further, it's our minds that impose limitations. Because we think in terms of language, we see the world, and God, in dualistic terms. It is an artificial framework of our minds superimposed upon the world or God, which then becomes the reality of it to us.

By dualistic here I am meaning a division between subject and object, a world of separation between the subject that is doing the perceiving, and the object, or that which is perceived. We split this into what is inside, and what is outside us, between a "this" and a "that", because we process and filter everything of experience into our minds through these linguistic structures which alter their reality into a reflection of our own minds.

Though seemingly impossible to us, this can of course be overcome.

We can not fly yet we are gifted with the capacity for innovation and creativity that we design and build the machines that enable us to soar high above the earth. Where does this capacity of the human mind originate within a seemingly random chaotic universe? How did it come into existence? How does the alignment of atoms or the sequencing of our genes manifest such a wondrous entity?

From Nature, which you will take note I capitalized here. I view the whole of creation as an expression of the Divine, and all natural processes as Spirit in motion, or God creating. The key to this is removing our anthropomorphic as well as anthropocentric projections of things like God had intentions that we humans should exists as us, in this time and place, and individually mapped out our lives for us, that humans are the apple of God's eye, that we alone were created in his image, and so on and so forth. To persist in thinking this way, we end up trapped within a feedback loop of contradictions that force us to either ignore them, or come up with loopy rationalizations to excuse them.

That is unnecessary. It's just like those who deny evolution in order to preserve their reading of the book of Genesis. It doesn't seem to occur to them that it's okay to change how they were thinking about it in the first place, rather than fighting against solid evidence which informs us of a different reality than what we were imagining in our minds. Actually though, I think it does occur to them their thinking is wrong, and that is what terrifies them, because it is their thinking alone they are looking to for their "salvation", as it appears to them in their minds.

Likewise, the Word of God! Does it have the power to transform the human spirit and enable us to gain a glimpse into a world beyond? Whether mortal delusion or Divine Providence it inspires a devotion that any worldly king can only long for.

I will say this, that inspiration comes from within us, from that Divine Nature that is the Foundation of all of creation itself. It wells up from the Wellspring of Creation through us in our forms, which includes of course our minds. It comes rolling forth in images projected from our minds, inspired by the soul, onto the night skies above where we see images of this God we ourselves place above us, as something the mind can touch and see, just as it sees and touches the world it perceives as outside itself, such as a friend, or a parent, or tree, or a stream or a mountain or the sky.

But we can see God beyond, and before, all of these projected images, all of these anthropomorphic views of the Divine. You simply see them, recognize them, then see what they were pointing to in our minds and set them aside. Rather, they naturally dissolve when you see the Reality of what they point to. They are no longer necessary. God is seen, within everything you perceive, including yourself. God never was, nor ever can be external or other to us, in the way we see another person as "not us". To continue to see God in those terms, is to remain trapped in a reality of separation from God, others, and our own selves. The term that could be applied to describe that state would be "hell".

What comes to mind is a quote from the Christian mystic Meister Eckhart. "I pray God make me free of God, so that I may know God in his unconditioned being". The anthropomorphic God, is conditional. And a conditional God, is not God.

 

[Katzpur]

God's attributes, like compassion are a given of the nature of God without reason nor cause.

Proceed your know-it-all statement with "I believe..." and I'll be fine with it.

 

[shunyadragon]

Proceed your know-it-all statement with "I believe..." and I'll be fine with it.

Upity sarcasm will only get you a wet cigar. All human beliefs concerning God should be expressed in terms of belief and not "I nor we know." Unfortunately the LDS church and the varied beliefs in the different Christian churches claim to "know." I believe God is "unknowable," which is the difference from the point the churches claim to "know" God including the LDS church.

 

[shunyadragon]

But the poster asserted “70 years of experience,” not merely “70 years lived.”
It’s the “of experience” that deserves respect.

Actually I disagree claims of age nor years of experience has no value concerning ones knowledge and wisdom.

With most people beliefs harden with age, and rare others open their minds to the many possible alternatives and understanding of the many different beliefs. The acknowledgement that one's beliefs are certainty is as rare as jumping out of an airplane without a parachute.

My one most important satori is when I realized tha, "Everything is believe is likely wrong from the fallible human perspective regardless of the path I choose."

 

[sojourner]

Who.Was.He?

Revelation 20:2
And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

The Genesis myth sits right in the middle of examples of ancient, Sumerian myth. The serpent is wisdom, which, in stories of this genre, typically presents as the literary device of the pariah. That’s why the Caduceus is two serpents twined on a pole. It represents wisdom, which fits perfectly with the account of their eyes being opened to good and evil. They became wise.

Regardless of what a much, much later text, in a completely different language and from a completely different culture, says. “Serpent” in Revelation is a different metaphor than “serpent” in Genesis.

 

[sojourner]

Upity sarcasm will only get you a wet cigar. All human beliefs concerning God should be expressed in terms of belief and not "I nor we know." Unfortunately the LDS church and the varied beliefs in the different Christian churches claim to "know." I believe God is "unknowable," which is the difference from the point the churches claim to "know" God including the LDS church.

Have you studied EO theology on any detail?

 

[sojourner]

Actually I disagree claims of age nor years of experience has no value concerning ones knowledge and wisdom.

Ok, but experience does tend to build wisdom. That’s why wisdom + years have histicslly been linked.

 

[shunyadragon]

Ok, but experience does tend to build wisdom. That’s why wisdom + years have histicslly been linked.

Not necessarily, wisdom depends the perspective of one's journey, and not experience.

With most people beliefs harden with age, and rare others open their minds to the many possible alternatives and understanding of the many different beliefs. The acknowledgement that one's beliefs are truly certain is as rare as jumping out of an airplane without a parachute.

My one most important satori is when I realized that, "Everything I believe is likely wrong from the fallible human perspective regardless of the path I choose."

 

[Tumah]

In a recent thread, it was suggested that God can be pleased by one action over another.

Can God experience pleasure? Can God be happy? sad? angry? forgiving?

Is it productive in your faith to attribute human qualities to God? Why?

I would say no, G-d can't experience emotions. That would point to changes in G-d and would contradict G-d's oneness.
It is productive in my faith to project human qualities on G-d so as to have a medium through which we can experience relationship to Him.

 

[shunyadragon]

Ok, but experience does tend to build wisdom. That’s why wisdom + years have histicslly been linked.

I do not believe they are historically linked since over the millennia those who claim to "know" wisdom believe many different things are 'true.'

 

[sojourner]

I do not believe they are historically linked since over the millennia those who claim to "know" wisdom believe many different things are 'true.'

Many different things are true. It depends on perspective. The wise know this.

 

[Katzpur]

Upity sarcasm will only get you a wet cigar.

With you, either sarcasm or courtesy gets me the same results.

All human beliefs concerning God should be expressed in terms of belief and not "I nor we know." Unfortunately the LDS church and the varied beliefs in the different Christian churches claim to "know." I believe God is "unknowable," which is the difference from the point the churches claim to "know" God including the LDS church.

I never, ever, ever post anything about my beliefs that implies I have all the answers or that I know that my religion is any better than anyone else's. You, on the other hand, cannot manage to have a dialogue with me without saying something negative about my religion. Thanks to your attitude towards anyone who disagrees with you, I would by now undoubtedly have started to form some negative prejudices against Baha'is in general; fortunately, I know too many very civil and courteous ones to do so.

 

[Katzpur]

"In the beginning God created man in his own image". "In the beginning man created God in his own image". Which is true? Perhaps both? I'd say both are.

Maybe if you could explain how anything can create its creator, I might be able to see some logic in your post.