God's means of communication

[Pygoscelis]

In the holy books, the Bible and Quran, we have claims of all powerful Gods who have a message for us humans and have certain things they want us to and not to do. Yet if this God is all powerful, surely he could have communicated this message better than having to rely on human language (can a divine message even be put into human words?). Surely he didn't need to rely on human messengers or "prophets". An all powerful being could simply make you know what he wants you to know, simple as that. To suggest otherwise is to question is omnipotence.

So given he COULD have avoided using prophets and books, which are subject to misinterpretation, and which have resulted in so much religious tension in the world.. why didn't he? He clearly intended all this tension to exist since he could have avoided it, no?

This is a point on religion that I have rarely seen expressed. So it would be interesting to explore. Maybe God has a good reason for wanting this tension to exist?

If you see no reason to seek out any deities then I can only wonder, how hard have you tried to understand the communication in question before passing it off as poor?

Indeed, and that is what this thread is created for.

Just because I don't believe these stories and beliefs to reflect truth doesn't mean I don't enjoy studying them from an academic standpoint. Mythology is interesting, be it ancient Greek or present day. It reflects the psychology of its believers which may have very real world implications and consequences.

 

[B_M]

Hmmm.

Nature, Earth and the entire universe itself is God's most powerful communication..






For example, a female has a reproductive tract. She also contains eggs. A male has a reproductive organ. He also contains sperm. I believe that's a pretty clear message, lol. I don't think we need a book or prophet for that one, lol.

 

[Pygoscelis]

For example, a female has a reproductive tract. She also contains eggs. A male has a reproductive organ. He also contains sperm. I believe that's a pretty clear message, lol. I don't think we need a book or prophet for that one, lol.

Not a very clear message to me. What do you take from this message? That we should all have sex and reproduce? Doesn't seem to in any way suggest anything further, nor anything regarding a deity or what it may want (beyond us to copulate?)

 

[Zafran]

Not a very clear message to me. What do you take from this message? That we should all have sex and reproduce? Doesn't seem to in any way suggest anything further, nor anything regarding a deity or what it may want (beyond us to copulate?)

The signs are there in the universe if you cant read them then thats your problem.

 

[CosmicPathos]

Not sure why you try to play God to know what God wanted and what He did not. Maybe that is your problem, to know what God wants and thinks and then use that to deny His existence by showing that what He wants is not perfect. So in essence, you try to play God.

Not sure if "God making us believe in Him," which of course He could do, serves any purpose for the existence of this universe ....

 

[S.Belle]

God can make us believe anything that he wanted us to but instead he blessed us with free will and has given certain knowledge to people who then extended that knowledge in search for the truth. The reason for prophets is to remind mankind of the truth, this life is nothing but a test. When people went astray in the past God sent a prophet from among them to rectify their actions and lead them towards the truth it was by the grace of God if they chose to listen bc God leads who he wills to the truth.

 

[Alpha Dude]

Yet if this God is all powerful, surely he could have communicated this message better than having to rely on human language

The existence of Allah and the Prophethood of Muhammad, peace be upon him, is evident and has been made abundantly clear. However, it takes a sound heart and mind to recognise the writing on the wall.

Allah says in the Quraan, chapter 26:

1. These are revelations of the Scripture that maketh plain.
2. It may be that thou tormentest thyself (O Muhammad) because they believe not.
3. If We will, We can send down on them from the sky a portent so that their necks would remain bowed before it.
4. Never cometh there unto them a fresh reminder from the Beneficent One, but they turn away from it.
5. Now they have denied (the Truth); but there will come unto them tidings of that whereat they used to scoff.
6. Have they not seen the earth, how much of every fruitful kind We make to grow therein?
7. Lo! herein is indeed a portent; yet most of them are not believers.
8. And lo! thy Lord! He is indeed the Mighty, the Merciful
​

can a divine message even be put into human words?

It's interesting that you say this. We are told that the Qur'aan is the uncreated, eternal speech of Allah.

The translation of the Quraan cannot be considered a pure revelation. Hence, this is why we Muslims stick to praying solely in Arabic (during the main 5 times prayers - supplication/asking for help can be done in any language).

An all powerful being could simply make you know what he wants you to know, simple as that. To suggest otherwise is to question is omnipotence.

The question of compromised omnipotence does not arise because it is a deliberate choice on the part of Allah that things were revealed in the manner that they were.

why didn't he? He clearly intended all this tension to exist since he could have avoided it, no?

This is a point on religion that I have rarely seen expressed. So it would be interesting to explore. Maybe God has a good reason for wanting this tension to exist?

Yes, there is a reason. Fundamental premise in Islam: This life is a test. It doesn't last forever and does not compare to the vastness of the hereafter.

There will most definitely be trials and tribulations via natural calamities along with shaytan inspiring man into doing evil things. All this is part of the test to see how much a person can avoid doing bad, how much good a person can do, how much patience and trust in Allah he can show during times of distress, how much gratitude he can show during times of blessings/happiness etc.

 

[جوري]

To arrive to God it doesn't take a book.. to understand what God wants from us will take one, as is the case with any discipline.

You know engineering exists you see handiwork all around, but if you want to be an engineer you'll have to do it through formal means (which will include books) that is if you desire to be recognized for your achievements!

 

[IAmZamzam]

In the holy books, the Bible and Quran, we have claims of all powerful Gods who have a message for us humans and have certain things they want us to and not to do. Yet if this God is all powerful, surely he could have communicated this message better than having to rely on human language (can a divine message even be put into human words?). Surely he didn't need to rely on human messengers or "prophets". An all powerful being could simply make you know what he wants you to know, simple as that. To suggest otherwise is to question is omnipotence.

So given he COULD have avoided using prophets and books, which are subject to misinterpretation, and which have resulted in so much religious tension in the world.. why didn't he? He clearly intended all this tension to exist since he could have avoided it, no?

This is a point on religion that I have rarely seen expressed. So it would be interesting to explore. Maybe God has a good reason for wanting this tension to exist?

This is the essence of antitheistic argumentation (or half of it, maybe: there are so many more cliches still), as a paper I'm right in the midst of right now elaborates on in more detail. This rationale is the source of all the snobby remarks about theism or theistic arguments being "dead in the water" or "obsolete" or "primitive"; it really doesn't get any better. This is at least half the scope of atheistic reasoning writ large in one concise capsule: unanswerable and only deceptively relevant questions about motive disguised as argument (we can't even know for sure why people, often including our own selves, do anything they do), appeals to probability (the "if something can happen, therefore it will" fallacy), and claims of no clarity or of "incoherency" where no one else finds anything to be unclear.

If you really must know (and I hate to indulge the discussion because it would be encouraging the above), God has told us in the Koran that even if He did send down angels in their true form with the message, people would still just cry, "Witchcraft!" or, "Magic trick!" or "I must be seeing things." Sure He has the power to remove or override the capacity for this, but when He gave us the ability to make up our minds for ourselves about anything, He wasn't whistling dixie. He was committed. And if miracles were commonplace then they would not seem so much like miracles. Not to mention that as long as people have their inner moral law, recognize it as such, and follow it, then they are still obeying God even if they have never heard of these laws' source. Our conscience is (usually) the only sign or communication that we need. God is not, I think, the type to shout over everyone else, but merely the type to tell you to listen for him so that he doesn't have to raise his voice when he has something to say. (Would you expect such a huge authority figure to be otherwise?) And even if he never did say anything to you, that would only mean that you're not at fault for not heeding it.

I reiterate: the important thing is that asking, "Why would God do this why wouldn't he do that etc." does not help theists understand anything better and it does not help atheists make any good points against theism either, and I really do wish you'd learn not to make appeals to probability. Things don't happen that can happen all the time: it doesn't prove squat. More often than not, it doesn't mean squat.

 

[aadil77]

In the holy books, the Bible and Quran, we have claims of all powerful Gods who have a message for us humans and have certain things they want us to and not to do. Yet if this God is all powerful, surely he could have communicated this message better than having to rely on human language (can a divine message even be put into human words?). Surely he didn't need to rely on human messengers or "prophets". An all powerful being could simply make you know what he wants you to know, simple as that. To suggest otherwise is to question is omnipotence.

So given he COULD have avoided using prophets and books, which are subject to misinterpretation, and which have resulted in so much religious tension in the world.. why didn't he? He clearly intended all this tension to exist since he could have avoided it, no?
.

The whole point is not to make the truth seem so obvious that it requires no faith at all. Otherwise everyone would be true believers.

 

[M.I.A.]

there is a really fundamental question here and one that i could put a theory on... nothing but conjecture though so take it with a pinch of salt.

how about this,

humans act without thinking,
humans think before acting,
humans follow there agendas,
humans follow there wants and needs,
humans follow there religions,
humans do a trillion things and all for a trillion reasons.

as muslims we believe in an all knowing and all powerful god, we are by default believing in things that we dont know about...its a faith thing.

we prostrate before our god, this is not our world.
i guess this world was made for something that did not prostrate... it may be a lesson for something else entirely.

this reasoning is not thought through or explained properly, i guess you can read between the lines and i also know that it goes against the things in islam but it makes sence as to why freedom of choice exists, why we were put here and who tests us and who tries to misguide us.

 

[Pygoscelis]

The signs are there in the universe if you cant read them then thats your problem.

If everything we need to know of God can be found in signs in the universe, then what need have you of the Quran or of Mohammed?

 

[Pygoscelis]

Not sure why you try to play God to know what God wanted and what He did not. Maybe that is your problem, to know what God wants and thinks and then use that to deny His existence by showing that what He wants is not perfect. So in essence, you try to play God.

Not sure if "God making us believe in Him," which of course He could do, serves any purpose for the existence of this universe ....

The point is that by better communicating God could have avoided much of the religious strife and tension in the world. This doesn't in any way disprove God. It only indicates that if he does (and he's all powerful) then he wants such strife and tension to exist, and you have to wonder why. Perhaps it serves some purpose I do not see?

If we all simply knew he existed and they he was as muslims (or whichever religion is right) envision him instead of how pagans or christians (or whoever is wrong) envision him, then the only "test" would be wether or not you choose to follow and obey his commands, instead of wether or not you can figure out the religion puzzle. Making us know what he wishes us to know would not take away free will. People would still be free to reject him and rebel against him (which is what I am often told is what I do anyway - but one can't reject or rebel against something that doesn't exist).

It is a similar question that I have pondered on Christian forums. Are people who don't believe in God capable of blasphemy?

 

[Pygoscelis]

To arrive to God it doesn't take a book.. to understand what God wants from us will take one, as is the case with any discipline.

You know engineering exists you see handiwork all around, but if you want to be an engineer you'll have to do it through formal means (which will include books) that is if you desire to be recognized for your achievements!

This comparison to other subjects, that we learn from human teachers, leaves out the power that God would have to simply make us know what he wants. If God is all powerful, he is not limited in what information or how much information he can instantly put in our heads, and neither are we, his creation limited if he doesn't want us to be.

 

[Pygoscelis]

appeals to probability (the "if something can happen, therefore it will" fallacy)

Look at it again. This is in no way saying "if something can happen, therefore it will".

Not to mention that as long as people have their inner moral law, recognize it as such, and follow it, then they are still obeying God even if they have never heard of these laws' source. Our conscience is (usually) the only sign or communication that we need.

Problem there is that our conscience and "inner moral sense" has nothing to do with following or worshiping any particular God. Even if you could establish that we inherently have a moral rule that we should worship a god, that still leaves out which one, in what manner, etc. It also leaves out a lot of arbitrary (as I would see it) or less obvious (as you would see it) moral rules - the ones that vary from religion to religion.

 

[جوري]

This comparison to other subjects, that we learn from human teachers, leaves out the power that God would have to simply make us know what he wants. If God is all powerful, he is not limited in what information or how much information he can instantly put in our heads, and neither are we, his creation limited if he doesn't want us to be.

The information we have in our head is basic.. basic knowledge is usually what is needed to get you through the door, the rest if acquired as far as you wish to take it..

 

[IAmZamzam]

Pygo, your entire OP was just one long string of appeals to probability. It even started right out with one: “God could have sent his message ‘better’; therefore it throws His omnipotence into doubt if He didn’t.” God could also have made us all polka-dotted. I could have given you an example earlier, yet I trusted you to be able to figure it out for yourself, and if you had tried and been genuinely unable then I wouldn’t have held it against you. “Could” is not a word that proves anything about anything: only “does” does. It’s all about motive to you atheists, isn’t it? Half the time you’re justifying disbelief in God’s existence by presuming motives on His behalf, the other half you’re doing the same thing by demanding to know what His motives are. Motive cannot be definitely established even with humans, even in our own selves. Recognize matters of mere speculation for what they are.

 

[IAmZamzam]

This comparison to other subjects, that we learn from human teachers, leaves out the power that God would have to simply make us know what he wants. If God is all powerful, he is not limited in what information or how much information he can instantly put in our heads, and neither are we, his creation limited if he doesn't want us to be.

Imagine if a character from a story came to life and wondered how there could be an author if he didn't write them into existence with a full initial knowledge of their signficance in the plot, or because they personally don't see any bits of foreshadowing around them!

 

[Pygoscelis]

It even started right out with one: “God could have sent his message ‘better’; therefore it throws His omnipotence into doubt if He didn’t.”

That is not a quote from my OP. Nor is that it otherwise stated or suggested in my OP. You have read that into it yourself and the rest of your post above flows from that error.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Imagine if a character from a story came to life and wondered how there could be an author if he didn't write them into existence with a full initial knowledge of their signficance in the plot, or because they personally don't see any bits of foreshadowing around them!

Not sure what you are trying to do here. An author of a story does not make sentient characters he wishes to communicate with. Nor does my question in the OP have anything to do with a God existing or not.