Originally posted as a comment on the video below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Te862VIUBo
Fry made a good point about the problems in the world and how, if there was an omnipotent God, then this God doesn't seem to care much about our well being.
Clearly, the idea that God is omnipotent is purely a human projection as there is no way we could know this. I mean, humans can create super computers and yet we are not omnipotent, and so enhanced creative ability is no evidence of omnipotence. Obviously, we could say the belief in God is just a human construct as well, and that would be fair, but we can go beyond this to say that the qualities we have projected upon this God are also human constructions.
The idea of omnipotence is one humans invoke to feel secure or to "big-up" their concept of God. In other words, a being may have created this world but that doesn't mean their powers over it are unlimited. People would then argue: then this God did a poor job, considering all the problems that have flowed on from the original creation. However, if we believe that humans have free will then we can admit that most of these problems have been created by our own free will choices, rather than because the universe is flawed in some way. Therefore, the responsibility would lie with us collectively, rather than with the God (or gods) that created us with free will. And although problems exist, in a larger context creation may be best served by having beings with free will that make mistakes and then learn to overcome them, rather than having drone-like beings that operate according to set rules.
As far as Russell Brand’s comments are concerned- yes he is talking about a different concept of God. God as consciousness, or the ground of being, which, although it may be embraced by some in the New Age movement, has its origin in the Vedas of India (and probably before that). If we are God- or the ground of being- existing as a human, then clearly the choices we make, including those that lead to disease and destruction of the environment, are our responsibility and not those of some external agency.
Sharka Todd
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Te862VIUBo
Fry made a good point about the problems in the world and how, if there was an omnipotent God, then this God doesn't seem to care much about our well being.
Clearly, the idea that God is omnipotent is purely a human projection as there is no way we could know this. I mean, humans can create super computers and yet we are not omnipotent, and so enhanced creative ability is no evidence of omnipotence. Obviously, we could say the belief in God is just a human construct as well, and that would be fair, but we can go beyond this to say that the qualities we have projected upon this God are also human constructions.
The idea of omnipotence is one humans invoke to feel secure or to "big-up" their concept of God. In other words, a being may have created this world but that doesn't mean their powers over it are unlimited. People would then argue: then this God did a poor job, considering all the problems that have flowed on from the original creation. However, if we believe that humans have free will then we can admit that most of these problems have been created by our own free will choices, rather than because the universe is flawed in some way. Therefore, the responsibility would lie with us collectively, rather than with the God (or gods) that created us with free will. And although problems exist, in a larger context creation may be best served by having beings with free will that make mistakes and then learn to overcome them, rather than having drone-like beings that operate according to set rules.
As far as Russell Brand’s comments are concerned- yes he is talking about a different concept of God. God as consciousness, or the ground of being, which, although it may be embraced by some in the New Age movement, has its origin in the Vedas of India (and probably before that). If we are God- or the ground of being- existing as a human, then clearly the choices we make, including those that lead to disease and destruction of the environment, are our responsibility and not those of some external agency.
Sharka Todd
No comments:
Post a Comment