Assigning the Deity

Do you project your wants and desires into your interpretation of the Deity?

Do you say it's the Will of the Force when you lose something, but claim credit when you win?

Do you think it's ok to say: "Jesus would not approve", when you aren't Jesus?

Do you believe that the world revolves around your tiny, insignificant perspective?

I have found myself guilty of "assigning" the Deity, meaning that I interpret the divine so that it fits my morality, my views. Some will often use God as a scapegoat for a moral argument: "You shouldn't steal because it's against Christianity". Or, some will say that Jesus is Lord... but only for rich white men (and their wives).

This is a problem. If you find yourself doing this, as I often do, think about what you're doing. It's immoral. It's dumb. It's creating your own totalitarian ideology.

Instead, have reverence for the Divine, and don't force your own ideas into your interpretation.

Connor L. wrote: Instead, have reverence for the Divine, and don't force your own ideas into your interpretation.

Indeed! To answer your questions...

Do you project your wants and desires into your interpretation of the Deity?

If I understand this question properly, I no longer think of the Force/God as wanting anything. The Force IS Everything. It cannot lack anything, and so has no desires, no Will. The suchness of things are their own reason.

Do you say it's the Will of the Force when you lose something, but claim credit when you win?

Part of this I answered above. But I find it difficult to take credit for anything. After all, if I am good at something, it isn't as if made this so (or did I? That's a deeper questions). Again, the Force IS Everything. It is us and all our actions, all that we know, all that we create, all that we say. Credit must go to the Force.

Do you think it's ok to say: "Jesus would not approve", when you aren't Jesus?

I think Jesus loves us no matter what we do. "Approval" is a human concept. I don't think God takes that into consideration the way we do.

Do you believe that the world revolves around your tiny, insignificant perspective?

Haha! Oh hell no. But I know many people who do. My "perspective" is... perhaps an illusion. I think the world (physical and spiritual) is far greater than any human has ever imagined, least of all my own imagining.

Connor L. wrote:
Do you believe that the world revolves around your tiny, insignificant perspective?

I believe that MY world does revolve around my "tiny, insignificant perspective".

We can create a rational for every perspective. :whistle:

Connor L. wrote: We can create a rational for every perspective. :whistle:

Is this is a perspective? :woohoo:

In fact, it is! :laugh: There is no escape!

Connor L. wrote: Do you think it's ok to say: "Jesus would not approve", when you aren't Jesus?

Yes. I have this nifty little book of His teachings that tells me what He would and wouldn't approve of. Handy, that.

:dry: Too bad we don't know enough about the Bible to make that call.

Connor L. wrote: :dry: Too bad we don't know enough about the Bible to make that call.

The point is that your deity either exists in a form you can verify, or does not. If your deity does exist in a form you can verify, then you can speak for them rather clearly, as you would be able to learn about their personality. If your deity does not exist in a form you can verify, then you have to take what you can of that deity's personality from the tales woven around them, which will (again) lead you to a pretty thorough understanding of said deity.

The first instance is like ordering for your friend at a coffee or ice cream shop. The second is the same as explaining how a fictional character would act in a situation that isn't directly presented by the writers. Both are done on a daily basis with an alarming degree of accuracy.

I got your point. You're still making assumptions. Which, is assigning the deity.

Connor L. wrote: I got your point. You're still making assumptions. Which, is assigning the deity.

But take a religion such as Islam, Muhammad's decisions are thought of as being directly inspired by God. In these cases interpretations for modern times are also seen as binding. An example might be someone stealing a cart, but nowadays people steal cars etc, the Qur'an and whichever Hadith is prominent is consulted to determine the correct course of action.

The assigning the deity argument really just boils down to the extent to which you can justify your opinion etc...

The assigning the deity argument really just boils down to the extent to which you can justify your opinion etc...

That's exactly right. My assertion is that you can never justify your opinion using religious sources.

Connor L. wrote:

The assigning the deity argument really just boils down to the extent to which you can justify your opinion etc...

That's exactly right. My assertion is that you can never justify your opinion using religious sources.

Indeed, but my point was that in some circles it is perfectly possible to do so and they have no issue against it.

When it really matters is when they try to justify it outside of their group...

I know it happens, and it's perfectly ok to do so. Unfortunately, I think they're wrong. hahaha. :evil:

If I was a Christian, I would never assume anything about Christ. I would indeed look to the source material to find guidelines, but I wouldn't go so far to say: "oh, this thing I'm doing... it's justified by this passage: __". I would think it's healthier to live the life emulating the teachings... but not to morally justify them. That way, if you are less than perfect, you are still beautiful and potent.

Connor L. wrote:

The assigning the deity argument really just boils down to the extent to which you can justify your opinion etc...

That's exactly right. My assertion is that you can never justify your opinion using religious sources.

I disagree rather completely. It's no different than justifying your opinion using other sources you didn't author.

Not really... But, ok.

steamboat28 wrote:

Connor L. wrote:

The assigning the deity argument really just boils down to the extent to which you can justify your opinion etc...

That's exactly right. My assertion is that you can never justify your opinion using religious sources.

I disagree rather completely. It's no different than justifying your opinion using other sources you didn't author.

Appealing to divine authority is a very specific form of the more general 'using other sources you didn't author' so it isn't quite the same. Think of the difference between moral views and scientific views, both use sources other than your own but they are very different.