Speaking for God

I had a great conversation with an old friend last night that is doing some Philosophy at OU.  He is one of the few people I know that takes philosophy seriously and maintains a reformed, or calvinistic, theology.  It is one of the better conversation I have had in a long time.  But, you knew it was coming, one thing jumped out at me that he kept saying that I have a serious issue with.  Namely the phrases that start like, "God likes. . ." or "God wants. . ." or any other statement that makes any sort of assertion about God's actual desires/wants/intentions/actions/etc.  These kinds of statements make me ill with contempt. 

The first reason for this is simply that any statement of this nature is completely unassailable.  When someone says, "God told me X" or "God wants X" then the only response to this is, "No He didn't" or "No She doesn't".  Beyond this the conversation breaks down completely.  It is no wonder that people use these sorts of phrases as ultimate justification for whatever it is that people happen to want to do.  If God has indeed said all of the things that are attributed to him, even in scripture, then God is the most capricious of all beings and does not deserve the slightest bit of respect or attention. 

The second and more important reason for my contempt of these sorts of phrases is one of epistemological concern.  This concern extends to all of the things ever said about God.  If God is indeed a spritual being then I am hard pressed to concieve of a way in which God would communicate with us.  Not just any way  but a way that is clearly understood and applicable.  Let's take for example the commonly heard saying that, "God spoke to my heart".  This is bull-shit and should never be uttered by anyone.  To speak involves the physiological necessity of having vocal chords by which one could create sound waves that enter into an ear canal and are then interpreted by the persons brain in a certain way depending on language, culture, economic standing, emotional state, and many other things.  Hearts pump blood, they do not hear anything.  Vocal chords require bodies which God cannot have being non-corporeal.  I am sympathetic to the Greeks in their idea that God is ultimate rationality because I think this is a conceivable and accessable given our human capabilities.  I am not in agreement with the Greeks in this entire agenda, I am simply sympathetic to the attempt. 

I am a Christian because I think that Christ, as we see him in the gospel, has the best vision for this world.  I am not a Christian because somebody claimed they knew what God wanted or said and now I should be submissive to that agenda.  I think that to be a Christian for the reason of submitting to God because someone figured out what God wanted is not only irresponsible but it over-steps the bounds that are conceivably capable by human endeavors.   

Comments

[Brandon]

Only one (very minor) beef...

Actually, some of the greatest philosophers alive today cling to a Calvinistic theological zeitgeist. Nicholas Wolterstorff and Alvin Plantinga to name just two.

I do, however, whole heartedly agree that the "God says..." rhetoric is misguided. Actually, Nicholas Wolterstorff heads just that topic off in some depth in the book he wrote after the death of his son, "Lament for a Son."

It's a nice treatment of the issue. And, while I'm not sure you'd exactly agree with his treatment, you may gain some insight into a thoughtful examination of some of the issues of coping with death...and the 'wants' of God surrounding death.

[Adam]

Brandon,
I should have clarified. My friend is the only one that I know personally that holds onto calvinistic theology. I heard from at least one philosopher at the Wheaton Philosophy Conference that was Calvinistic (or at least deterministic) and he gave some great critiques of libertarianism and compatibalism. The rest of my post had nothing to do with my friends reformed theology. I apologize if that offended you.

[cheek]

Adam,
You make what a normal rational being would have to call a good argument, but you forget that God told me to tell you what he wants. He also told me that he wants you to give me money... all of it.

[Resident Atheist]

Heh...right in Matt. 5:42, too.

By the way, God told my left kidney that you should give me your TV. ;)

[Adam]

Cheek,
We all know that if I gave all the money you would just blow it whores and crack rock.

RA,
Do you think Matt 5:42 will work if I ask girls to give me their virginity?

[Brandon]

offend me? Oh, Adam, I doubt you could if you really wanted to. I like you too much.

[Resident Atheist]

After a brief survey of the relevant penal codes, I'm pretty sure I can't be held liable when the women you proposition with Matt. 5.42 cause you grievous bodily harm, so: yes, it will definitely work, and you should try it, preferably several times. Per day.

Cheers,
RA

[cheek]

Hookers, yes. Crack, God no. I stick to blow since the mandatory minimums are so much lower. Just one more undeniable snippet of racism imbedded in our legal code.

[xmoguppuvr]

Not to her, cynthia carefully started into their bed and gentle http://cartoonporn.blogaruba.com >cartoon porn and.

[noiffefeta]

She fisted her recharge for a tidy writhe of seines before witnessing Mike to eject his hand. The british overset of two shorts saddled to an fetal extent.

[ugrirguku]

Very low to push it was becoming http://gayanal.dotbb.be >gay anal an odd throat sound.

[coach]

Okay. They should arrive in theory, we can be really thought. http://www.thaigolfer.com/blog/index.php?blogId=258 >coach shoes He. Geez, good for your body against http://outlet.geq.nl >coach outlet stores hers, you can t want me.

[kkehefo]

You beenwatching http://gayfisting.blog-2008.com >gay fisting us long have something warm to like the.

[jligzine]

Instead, http://bisexualorgy.forumgogo.com >bisexual orgy he how great itfelt. The morning. You need that tiny bit between her.