Understanding existentialism

@PhilipOSopher,

PhilipOSopher wrote:

Which is a reason why it might make sense to see existentialism as more of an individualistic set of ideas rather than one applied to humanity for example as collective individuals?

What is more - there is another issue of similar type - if God (if exists) starts communicating with the humans why should He deal with some shepherds and blacksmiths instead of sending a message to the whole humanity. Why should He deal with individual cases that are not even covered by the decimal point?

2 Replies

@Herald,

I'm not religious myself, but maybe the thinking behind it could be that if all humanity could eventually be convinced of God's 'message' without too much intervention from him then they would convince themselves through faith rather than knowing for certain that that message came individually to each of them direct from God. So God keeps an epistemic distance - if God is all-great then convincing humanity of his message with minimal effort on his part is a more fitting deed for such a being than direct intervention to all individuals, I guess. Could this be applied to the problem of evil as well?

0 Replies

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

. . . .if God (if exists) starts communicating with the humans why should He deal with some shepherds and blacksmiths instead of sending a message to the whole humanity. Why should He deal with individual cases that are not even covered by the decimal point?

It has to deal, in part, with prophecy. Genesis 3:15 foretells the coming of a seed, or offspring, that would bruise the head of the one who tempted Eve. Centuries later, God chose Abraham to to be the one through whom the seed would descend. (Genesis 22:18).

Abraham's seed, of course, represents only a small portion of the human race and does not include all of those who are righteously inclined. So, why should God's attention and message be delivered to only a small group? If we examine the function of the Hebrew Law Covenant, we may see the answer. One thing is immediately obvious: The Israelites were pathetically unable to follow the Law through the 1500 +/- years until Jesus' appeared on the scene. The scriptures tell us (whether we believe them or not) that Jesus followed the law to its letter, prompting Paul to proclaim at Galatians 3:24 "Consequently the Law has become our tutor leading to Christ, that we might be declared righteous due to faith. 25 But now that the faith has arrived, we are no longer under a tutor". Jesus, by his death, has provided a remedy for the consequence visited upon Adam and Eve and their offspring.

Jesus commissioned all Christians to proclaim this remedy, the Good News, the Gospel, to the entire world of mankind. (Matthew 28:19). Those who are rightly inclined should be able to reason on the Bible's message and understand that God's purpose expressed in Genesis 1:22, for humans to live indefinitely on earth will soon become reality. Admittedly, you and I may think the time is long overdue. But we are not the timekeepers. Right now, this teaching work is being accomplished in over 550* languages from door to door, as well as on the website referenced in my profile.

*This number grows by the week. In contrast, the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights is available in 431 languages.

2 Replies

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

Centuries later, God chose Abraham to to be the one through whom the seed would descend. (Genesis 22:18).

Yes, included this one. Why should God choose a nation to be superior before all the others? Why should God get down from the level of trans-galactic communication to a local level (which hasn't any meaning)? Its seems much more like a falsification of the original prophecies ... if that prophecies have had alien origin.

1 Reply

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

. . . Why should God choose a nation to be superior before all the others?

The Jews may have considered themselves to be superior; but they were no different in God's view than any other. Which is why Peter was inspired to say at Acts 10:34,35 "Now I truly understand that God is not partial,+ 35 but in every nation the man who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him"

Herald wrote:

Why should God get down from the level of trans-galactic communication to a local level (which hasn't any meaning)? Its seems much more like a falsification of the original prophecies ... if that prophecies have had alien origin.

I am sorry to admit I have no idea what sort of trans cosmic idea you have just presented. I am by nature but a naive realist.

1 Reply

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

I am sorry to admit I have no idea what sort of trans cosmic idea you have just presented. I am by nature but a naive realist.

O.K., if you believe in God perhaps you believe in what the prophets have said (or is claimed to have said), hence you believe that God has sent them some messages (sound) and visions (video) to deliver that further to the population. How do you call the process of sending messages, when the sender is not located on the Earth (obviously) and even on the SS ... unless you prove that the prophets have had oxygen deficiency in the brain by the time of the vision ... and/or problems with the neurotransmitters?

2 Replies

@Herald,

untimely

0 Replies

@neologist,

if herald's response happens in the professional world you may want to defend your self. form a militia...

0 Replies

@Herald,

Are you wondering how God can be a kazillion miles away and have 2 way communication with us ants in real time? The ancient Jews referred to his spirit, or active force.(Genesis 1:2). Now we have theories about space/time, the Higgs Field, etc. that may explain it. I won't speculate. There is ample anecdotal evidence in scripture to substantiate God's power in that respect.

2 Replies

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

Are you wondering how God can be a kazillion miles away

We don't know that He is at such distance, not to say that we even don't know whether He exists or not ... and which religion is the true interpretation of the Word of God.

neologist wrote:

... and have 2 way communication with us ants in real time?

This, when detected, is called nowadays paranoia religiosa. Actually I haven't seen so far a person presenting himself to be a prophet and to talk to God in direct memory access mode.

neologist wrote:

Now we have theories about space/time

Yes, we all know about that theories ... that have been presented by the first TV star in the 1950s for amusement of the ladies of the high life.

neologist wrote:

the Higgs Field, etc. that may explain it.

... and what has the Higgs field and its quantum carrier, the Higgs boson, explained so far about God ... if it is not some secret?

1 Reply

@Herald,

You sought an explanation on how messages could be delivered/received from cosmic distances. I said only that a satisfactory explanation is possible.

1 Reply

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

Are you wondering how God can be a kazillion miles away and have 2 way communication with us ants in real time? The ancient Jews referred to his spirit, or active force.(Genesis 1:2). Now we have theories about space/time, the Higgs Field, etc. that may explain it. I won't speculate. There is ample anecdotal evidence in scripture to substantiate God's power in that respect.

Who said god is kazillion miles away? Not my god. It's right here inside me and in everything that exists in the universe. What kind of a god is it that's somehow distant and possibly busy on another line? Sheesh! Talk about nonsensical questions.

2 Replies

@Lustig Andrei,

Apparently I misunderstood Herald's question

1 Reply

@neologist,

Maybe not. Herald's questions aren't always well thought out.

1 Reply

@Lustig Andrei,

Which makes them easily misunderstood

0 Replies

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

You sought an explanation on how messages could be delivered/received from cosmic distances. I said only that a satisfactory explanation is possible.

How messages could be delivered/received from cosmic distances - in any case scenario it would be one-way communication, for no dialogue can be performed when the reply arrives 1 million years later, for example.
I am also of the opinion that it is possible, but the actual problem is whether this has been the case with the prophets or not. Obviously more information has to be acquired ... and we don't even know whether that information (if exists) hasn't been irretrievably lost ... or has never been available to us.

0 Replies

@Lustig Andrei,

Lustig Andrei wrote:

Not my god ... Talk about nonsensical questions.

First how did you come to know that God 'is yours' (not exactly personal property, but why should He be interested in you ... and me - at all), and second which exactly is the question that is 'nonsensical'?
A question could be either valid (relevant to the theme and to the problem, based on sound assumptions and valid as a semantic construct) or invalid (irrelevant, and/or based on fake assumptions, and/or invalid as a statement in terms of the semantics). Which one of these is the case of 'nonsensical' ... and how did you come to the insight that it is my assumptions that are invalid and yours are absolutely valid ... as truth of the last resort?

1 Reply

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

Lustig Andrei wrote:
Not my god ... Talk about nonsensical questions.
First how did you come to know that God 'is yours' (not exactly personal property, by why should He be interested in you ... and me ... at all), and second which exactly is the question that 'is nonsensical'? A question could be either valid (relevant to the theme and the problem, based on sound assumptions and valid as a semantic construct) or invalid (irrelevant, and/or based on fake assumptions, and/or invalid statement in terms of semantics). Which one of these is the case of 'nonsensical' ... and how did you come to know that it is my assumptions that are invalid ... and yours are valid?

1. Let's understand this right off -- any time I speak of god or a similar phenomenon, I am speaking of my own beliefs only with no reference to what might or might not be valid for you or for anyone else. Ergo, I am speaking only of my god, i.e. of what I alone perceive.

2. Apologies for using so colloquial a word as 'nonsensical' since your entire orientation appears to be semantic rather than ontological. The question is, in fact, not only irrelevant but quite meaningless within the context of the discussion. You make the astonishing assumption that in a putative communication between a believer and that believer's conception of a 'god' there is some physical distance and time involved. I fail to find any post above yours where this has been suggested by any poster. The concept seems absurd to me.

3. My assumptions are quite valid for me and serve to reinforce my personal value system. Whether or not they are valid for you or not is, again, irrelevant and certainly none of my concern. I am not here to proselytize my personal life-view. It may well be valid for me only and for no one else. But, as I am I and not anyone else, this is quite valid and adequate for my needs.

I sincerely hope this answers some of your questions, Herald.

0 Replies

@Arcades,

so what you are saying is that you preform your duty? --or acts of necessity
and you are a person who acts selflessly? --beyound my person.
are you aware of this feature? --

0 Replies

@Herald,

i think you are exagerrating

0 Replies

Understanding existentialism

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know