The God Story's Logic

[connermt]

Here's the logic as I understand it:
God created everything
He created humans
He placed them in a garden
He placed a tree of knowledge there
He told the humans not to eat of the tree
He allowed the devil/satan to enter the garden
He allowed the humans to be tempted, knowing they would eat of the tree
He (seemingly) acts surprised that they ate of it (didn't see them I guess, but why?) then kicks them out, making their lives difficult and ending in death/hell
Years go by, god asks for sacrifices from people during those years
Eventually, a teenager gets pregnant with his son/self/son/self
He/his son/he/his son grows up
Little to no writings of this age of himself/son/self/son is allowed to be put into the story of himself/his son/himself/his son
Then, all of a sudden, people are writing stories about himself/his son/himself/his son starting around the age of 30
Four stories are accepted as legitimate, yet no one story is exactly the same - some have parts others don't, some can't agree on details
This god obviously can't edit the writing of his own story, much less do it himself - why?
Time passes and his son/self/son/self is sacrificed for the sins of the world
He "dies", then assends (though some reports of him appearing in other parts of the world, but those reports aren't allowed to be published in the official bible)
Over the course of time, people come and go in his name

Here we are today.

Where's the logic in this story? On the superfical level, it makes "sense", but when you dig slightly deeper, you have to start making assumptions and, at times, concessions, for it to make sense.
Why?
If a being can create everything that is, why are the concessions necessary?

There seems to be more logic in many Hollywood scripts.

Are there parts missing of the story?
Has the story been changed over time?
Or, in order to beleive, do you have to do away with logic?

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Myths don't have to be logical.

Here is the Science story:

Science: the belief that there once was absolutely nothing. And nothing happened to nothing until nothing somehow magically exploded for no reason and become everything. Then a bunch of exploded everything magically rearranged itself into self-replicating bits which turned into dinosaurs.

 

[connermt]

Myths don't have to be logical.

Here is the Science story:

Science: the belief that there once was absolutely nothing. And nothing happened to nothing until nothing somehow magically exploded for no reason and become everything. Then a bunch of exploded everything magically rearranged itself into self-replicating bit which turned into dinosaurs.

There's no magic to it really.
Simply because we don't fully know/understand doesn't (shouldn't) allow for the word magic to be inserted.
Specifically into scienctific studies.

But you're right, myths don't have to be logical - just entertaining enough to keep them alive.

 

[sojourner]

Here's the logic as I understand it:
God created everything
He created humans
He placed them in a garden
He placed a tree of knowledge there
He told the humans not to eat of the tree
He allowed the devil/satan to enter the garden
He allowed the humans to be tempted, knowing they would eat of the tree
He (seemingly) acts surprised that they ate of it (didn't see them I guess, but why?) then kicks them out, making their lives difficult and ending in death/hell
Years go by, god asks for sacrifices from people during those years
Eventually, a teenager gets pregnant with his son/self/son/self
He/his son/he/his son grows up
Little to no writings of this age of himself/son/self/son is allowed to be put into the story of himself/his son/himself/his son
Then, all of a sudden, people are writing stories about himself/his son/himself/his son starting around the age of 30
Four stories are accepted as legitimate, yet no one story is exactly the same - some have parts others don't, some can't agree on details
This god obviously can't edit the writing of his own story, much less do it himself - why?
Time passes and his son/self/son/self is sacrificed for the sins of the world
He "dies", then assends (though some reports of him appearing in other parts of the world, but those reports aren't allowed to be published in the official bible)
Over the course of time, people come and go in his name

Here we are today.

Where's the logic in this story? On the superfical level, it makes "sense", but when you dig slightly deeper, you have to start making assumptions and, at times, concessions, for it to make sense.
Why?
If a being can create everything that is, why are the concessions necessary?

There seems to be more logic in many Hollywood scripts.

Are there parts missing of the story?
Has the story been changed over time?
Or, in order to beleive, do you have to do away with logic?

This is a very surface take on very deeply symbolic metaphors and allegories. It's words and syntax without meaning. That's what's missing.

Concessions are necessary because we are finite human beings trying to talk about infinite matters.

 

[connermt]

This is a very surface take on very deeply symbolic metaphors and allegories. It's words and syntax without meaning. That's what's missing.

Concessions are necessary because we are finite human beings trying to talk about infinite matters.

"Meaning" can't be made in text without great expense of explaining. Which I don't see in the bible, even if it's 100% literal. If it's symbolic, that's even worse.

If it's infinite matters made by a deity, where's the logic in said deity making it so finite beings try to understand the infinite?
That's not logical even as a human construct, much less as a deity's construct

 

[sojourner]

Meaning" can't be made in text without great expense of explaining. Which I don't see in the bible, even if it's 100% literal. If it's symbolic, that's even worse.

well, remember that the whole of the Bible comes from very different cultures than yours. Much of the "original meaning" is culturally-imbedded, and needed no further explanation for the intended audience. You and I, on the other hand, have to go through some gymnastics in many cases, in order to recover meaning for us.

If it's infinite matters made by a deity, where's the logic in said deity making it so finite beings try to understand the infinite?

But it's exactly the opposite: Infinite matters voiced by finite human beings.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

It's not logical. And the idea that we simply can't understand it because we're finite and god is infinite, makes it even more illogical, because we're still expected by said god to make sense out of all of it, or just accept it at face value while ignoring the fact that it is illogical.

 

[fallingblood]

The problem is that really isn't even the story. You're kind of taking a very radical approach to this subject, and I can't blame you, because many Christians do as well.

 

[connermt]

well, remember that the whole of the Bible comes from very different cultures than yours. Much of the "original meaning" is culturally-imbedded, and needed no further explanation for the intended audience. You and I, on the other hand, have to go through some gymnastics in many cases, in order to recover meaning for us.

But it's exactly the opposite: Infinite matters voiced by finite human beings.

Why does culture have to play a part in it? Wouldn't a deity have the ability and desire to retain the original culture if that's part of its understanding of said work?

I agree with your last statement as I understand it: it does matter, but in a negative way. Finite beings can't accurately portray infinite concepts.

 

[connermt]

It's not logical. And the idea that we simply can't understand it because we're finite and god is infinite, makes it even more illogical, because we're still expected by said god to make sense out of all of it, or just accept it at face value while ignoring the fact that it is illogical.

I agree 100%
But it's all in what you want to believe based on your personality and experience. Some accept the illogical because they're told to or want to, in order to feed their own desires. The rest of us question it based on logic and common sense.

 

[sojourner]

It's not logical. And the idea that we simply can't understand it because we're finite and god is infinite, makes it even more illogical, because we're still expected by said god to make sense out of all of it, or just accept it at face value while ignoring the fact that it is illogical.

Says who?? I don't think I've ever heard that "God expects us to make sense out of all of it" or "take it at face value." That's just absurd.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Methinks you can not see the forest for the trees.

 

[sojourner]

Why does culture have to play a part in it? Wouldn't a deity have the ability and desire to retain the original culture if that's part of its understanding of said work?

Because religion is a cultural expression. That's reality. As the culture changes, the religion changes with it. It's the way of things. God doesn't have any more desire to "retain the 'original culture'" than God has the desire to "keep maple leaves green in the fall."
With regard to Xy (because that's what I know and can speak authoritatively about), we each have to come up with what has meaning for us, wherever we find ourselves. Xy was not meant to be limited to one culture, because Xy was never meant to be a religion.

I agree with your last statement as I understand it: it does matter, but in a negative way. Finite beings can't accurately portray infinite concepts.

You're right. We can't. And we don't have any business pretending that we can.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Says who?? I don't think I've ever heard that "God expects us to make sense out of all of it" or "take it at face value." That's just absurd.

What is your solution to the conundrum? I spent 30 years trying to make sense of it, and really got nowhere. I believed it because I was expected to, but I never really could accept it. It was just what was expected of me.

 

[sojourner]

What is your solution to the conundrum? I spent 30 years trying to make sense of it, and really got nowhere. I believed it because I was expected to, but I never really could accept it. It was just what was expected of me.

What is "it?" The story?

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

What is "it?" The story?

Yeah.

 

[sojourner]

The "solution" is that the "story" isn't a "story." It's a library of stories, poetry, law, teaching, etc. It'd be like looking at a Chilton's manual for a '73 Pinto and trying to reconcile it with Walt Whitman and Harry Potter. No wonder it never made sense!

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

The "solution" is that the "story" isn't a "story." It's a library of stories, poetry, law, teaching, etc. It'd be like looking at a Chilton's manual for a '73 Pinto and trying to reconcile it with Walt Whitman and Harry Potter. No wonder it never made sense!

So are you saying it's true, but in a metaphorical sense?...if that makes any sense.

 

[Quagmire]

The ignoramus story:

Everyone who believes in any conception of God automatically believes in the Abrahamic God.
Anyone who follows any of the Abrahamic religions (all theists in other words) reads the Bible literally.
Any theist who claims to read the Bible allegorically is lying or cheating.
If I slap the words "Reason" or "Logic" on my argument somewhere, this excuses me from having to be reasonable or logical.

 

[sojourner]

So are you saying it's true, but in a metaphorical sense?...if that makes any sense.

Partly. Anytime we talk about God, we talk in metaphor.