toldailytopic: What does God want from me?

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Sealeaf

New member
Such contentious people. You argue over the meaning of the word "want". "Want" =N, a lack of. "Want" = V, to desire. Any active being must "want" (V) to do something. God is active therefore He/She/It must want.

God is larger than our language, our words do not limit God. Just because we don't know how to express something does not mean that God cannot do or be that thing. Our logic is a tool we use to discover God but it does not limit God.
 
Lighthouse

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
God could never get what He wants from me, and He knows that. He is more concerned with what He wants to give me, because of that.
 
WizardofOz

WizardofOz

New member
Traditio said:
"Master, which is the greatest commandment in the law? Jesus said to him: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment. And the second is like to this: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself" (Matthew 22:36-39).
Click to expand...

Exactly :thumb:
 
Traditio

Traditio

BANNED
Banned
Nang said:
Right.

God does not "want."

God wills and commands that His will be done.
Click to expand...

Yeah. To say that God "wants" is to say that God "lacks." But God lacks nothing. Creation is creation precisely from the superabundance of the Divine Goodness.

Wills and commands? Maybe, but no will/command is necessary in this case. God is The Good. Our duties towards God and humanity are made plain from the self-revelation of Reason. God doesn't have to command us to love him and love our neighbors as ourselves. Even if He didn't, we'd still have a moral duty to do so. Need God command Himself to love Himself? Yet, does He cease from His self-love for a lack of a command? :idunno:
 
Last edited:
Traditio

Traditio

BANNED
Banned
John Ladder said:
Look how Traditio would send us to Plotinus instead of Christ.

Clearly, Romanism is a major distraction to fellowship with the Father.

God so loved the world that He sent His Son, that we might believe and obey Him>
Click to expand...

1. Plotinus was a Neoplatonist. He wasn't a Catholic.

2. You (and all protestants) are misologists. :nono:
 
Traditio

Traditio

BANNED
Banned
Lighthouse said:
It is not to say God lacks, but that God desires us to want Him, because we lack. And desire is not born from lack.
Click to expand...

You can't use these words. I'm even uncomfortable using the word "command" for God. God is logically prior to creation. How can God desire/command/etc. (in an act which is prior) an object (which is posterior)? The proper object of God's volition/intellection is Himself (and even that cannot be said of the Father). The Father's eternal act (if so He can be said to have one) is self-will.

Yes, God's act of self-will/self-knowledge embraces the created order (insofar as God conceives the created order in Himself as possibility). But this scarcely can be conceived as a lack or a desire. The act isn't directed to an external object. To use a Parmenidean phrase, God is "self-contained."

Incidentally: See? This is an excellent reason for you to follow my philosophy readings thread. :p
 
Frank Ernest

Frank Ernest

New member
Hall of Fame
yeshuaslavejeff said:
I clicked on you link
and here it is =

Hosea 6:4–6
4 O Ephraim, what shall I do unto thee?
O Judah, what shall I do unto thee?
For your * goodness is as a morning cloud,
And as the early dew it goeth away.
5 Therefore have I hewed them by the prophets;
I have slain them by the words of my mouth:
* And thy judgments are as the light that goeth forth.
6 For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice;
And the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.

and it doesn't say what it looks like you indicated it said.
.
footnote p.s. in v6 "the knowledge of Yhvh" means experiential knowledge as His child, not head nor school learned knowledge.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your comments.
 
T

Todah

New member
Obedience in faith.

For Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.

The beginning of wisdom is to fear the Lord. But ultimately, or the end of wisdom, is to serve the Lord without fear, in perfected love.

We as humans can create and build complex machinery, to perform exactly as we "want" it to perform. That is quite pleasing to ourselves when machines perform as we willed them to do.

How much more complex and how much more fulfilling, it is to create a machine with its own desire switch. And how much more fulfilling to see it perform after it has been tampered with by an enemy who tried to destroy it, but the desire switch, and the Creator, overcame its enemy, as well.

That scenario would makes its Creator well pleased.
 
Lighthouse

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
Traditio said:
You can't use these words. I'm even uncomfortable using the word "command" for God. God is logically prior to creation. How can God desire/command/etc. (in an act which is prior) an object (which is posterior)? The proper object of God's volition/intellection is Himself (and even that cannot be said of the Father). The Father's eternal act (if so He can be said to have one) is self-will.

Yes, God's act of self-will/self-knowledge embraces the created order (insofar as God conceives the created order in Himself as possibility). But this scarcely can be conceived as a lack or a desire. The act isn't directed to an external object. To use a Parmenidean phrase, God is "self-contained."

Incidentally: See? This is an excellent reason for you to follow my philosophy readings thread. :p
Click to expand...
You don't understand God at all. He is not prior, He is [present tense].

God lacks nothing, yet He still wants for us, for we lack everything. And even when we receive on this side of glory we still only receive in part. It is only when we have become present with the Lord that we will no longer be lacking.

Summation: God does not want from us, He wants for us.
 
Nydhogg

Nydhogg

New member
John Ladder said:
Look how Traditio would send us to Plotinus instead of Christ.

Clearly, Romanism is a major distraction to fellowship with the Father.

God so loved the world that He sent His Son, that we might believe and obey Him>
Click to expand...

Anti-intellectualism and the rejection of reason and philosophy are self-defeating, John. Without reason and understanding we're just cavemen.

Perhaps very devout cavemen, but the faith of a caveman cannot raise to more than mere superstition.

Embrace the mind, bro. Glorifying blind obedience and mindlessness can only make you an oaf on the long run.
 
MaryContrary

MaryContrary

New member
Hall of Fame
Nydhogg said:
Anti-intellectualism and the rejection of reason and philosophy are self-defeating, John. Without reason and understanding we're just cavemen.

Perhaps very devout cavemen, but the faith of a caveman cannot raise to more than mere superstition.

Embrace the mind, bro. Glorifying blind obedience and mindlessness can only make you an oaf on the long run.
Click to expand...
All that by what standard?
 
Nydhogg

Nydhogg

New member
Common sense, Mary.

It is generally held as true that knowledge is better than ignorance, and that intelligence is better than idiocy. Thus, glorifying ignorance and idiocy is probably a stupid move.
 
Traditio

Traditio

BANNED
Banned
Lighthouse said:
You don't understand God at all. He is not prior, He is [present tense].
Click to expand...

He's logically prior to us.

God lacks nothing, yet He still wants for us, for we lack everything. And even when we receive on this side of glory we still only receive in part. It is only when we have become present with the Lord that we will no longer be lacking.

Summation: God does not want from us, He wants for us.
Click to expand...

You're playing a word game.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top