If one wants to have certainty about God, but doesn't have it yet: 1. If one doesn't yet have certainty about God, but one thinks that what one has done so far to come to certainty about God, should already be enough, then one implicitly believes that God is not just and does not give spiritual insight justly. This way, one sabotages one's own efforts to come to certainty about God, since nobody in their right mind would be interested in an unjust God. 2. If one doesn't yet have certainty about God, but one thinks that what one has done so far to come to certainty about God, might not yet be enough, then one implicitly believes that God is just and does give spiritual insight justly. This way, one empowers one's own efforts to come to certainty about God, since everybody in their right mind would be interested in a just God. Comment.
One could also conclude that God does, perhaps, not exist, or that God is unknowable and certainty is, therefor, not in the cards. Your point 2 looks like the onset of self-delusion.
And on the grounds of what one one conclude that? On the grounds that one has already invested sufficient effort to gain certainty?
On grounds of what am I adding more possible outcomes to your scheme? Uh, on grounds that there are more possible outcomes than you originally described?
There are more possible outcomes than I originally described only if one thinks that what one has done so far to come to certainty about God, should already be enough.
Yea so? I answered "For example". There is a possibility that one could also come to those conclusions through other means. Also, these people do not have to come to the conclusion that God is unjust, they might conclude what I said earlier. Namely that he doesn't exist or is unknowable. Edit: What sort of people are you describing in point 2? People that never ever give up on something no matter what the evidence to the contrary is? Isn't that called blind faith?
Do you really think that one's own ideas about what is enough should be the measurement when it comes to arriving at certainty about God?
Personally, I don't think that any effort would be enough. And even if I did think a particular amount would be enough who's idea's should I go on but my own? Btw. I edited my previous post.
Other means than one's own efforts? Such as? Divine revelation? The point of theological self-sabotage is that by setting oneself up as the judge on how much effort is enough to come to certainty about God implies that God is unjust. Honest people. People who don't make conclusions about God unless they are sure they have done everything humanly possible to come to certainty about God. And people who refrain from making claims about God if they know they haven't done everything humanly possible to come to certainty about God.
For example. Actually, there is someone at SciForums that claims just that. Why does that imply that? One could come to the conclusion that God is unknowable or that he didn't exist. One doesn't have to come to the conclusion that he's unjust. I know I'm repeating myself here, but eh.. How does one establish whether one has done enough? And what if they have done everything possible and still have no certainty?
Self sabotage is an inherent part of monotheism. First like a cult leader, it convinces you that you are flawed, sinful, worthless, one that god could very well choose to wipe out entirely and start over, then it calls god a father, a savior, that it is love and will take care of you. So obviously if you can't justify belief without evidence, it must be your fault. "I am told God lives in me -- and yet the reality of darkness and coldness and emptiness is so great that nothing touches my soul," "Where I try to raise my thoughts to heaven, there is such convicting emptiness that those very thoughts return like sharp knives and hurt my very soul. Love -- the word -- it brings nothing," Mother Teresa
I assume from the thread title and from those words, that this thread concerns a theologian who already believes in God. Presumably this individual wants to put questions or doubts about the divinity's existence, nature or morality to rest. And there's curiosity to factor in. Theologians, by their nature, seek understanding, albeit within the scope and presuppositions of their tradition. I'm not a theist and certainly not a theologian, but I've known and been friends with quite a few theologians in my academic life. What follows is rather speculative, my attempt to put myself in their heads and to answer as they would be likely to. Most of the theologians I know wouldn't feel the way you describe. They would probably assume, first off, that their knowledge and nderstanding of God will always be partial. And they would think that their ability to know God is dependent on God's will somehow. They know what God allows them to know. So your scenario kind of transforms into a particular instance of the familiar theological problem of accepting God's will when that will doesn't correspond to our desires. There's quite a bit about that in the Bible, and some of the theologians would probably seek inspiration there. I suspect that most of the theologians would recognize that a big part of the problem there would lie in their own demands and expectations concerning what they are due and what God owes them. I kind of like that attitude, personally. But it doesn't really seem all that different than the first scenario. In both cases the theologian doesn't have the understanding that he/she seeks. In both cases something more remains to be done, whether by the theologian or by God, before the desired result appears. (Which as in all intellectual pursuits, and in theology particularly, might not happen. Many scholars in all fields spend their entire lives seeking answers that they never attain.) The difference between your scenarios is that in the second situation the theologian accepts the situation and continues on with his/her work, while in the first situation there's what looks like a sense of entitlement and a condemnation of God for failure to honor it. And that seems to be an instance of a broader and more familiar theological problem. Women blame God for not giving them children, kings blame God for not giving them hegemony, merchants blame God for not making them rich...
I certainly don't have any special knowledge of God, above and beyond what the various religious traditions say about their particular monotheistic deity. But I'm not a theist, I don't believe that deities are anything more than characters taken from mythology, so my lack of more direct and revelatory knowledge of them doesn't bother me in the least. I don't believe that there's anything there to know in that way. I certainly don't feel any anger or bitterness at any mythological figure for not revealing itself to me as a reward for my study of religion. I never had any expectation that would happen. But having said that, I do have a pretty strong intuition that there's a LOT more to reality than I know, or possibly can know. Things are happening all around me that are totally beyond my understanding. And significantly, I myself am one of those things... So if I wanted to collapse my intellectualized philosophical sense of the unknown together with the more emotional feelings associated with religion, I'd probably arrive at some kind of non-cognitive conception of deity. The 'Fundamental Mystery' or something like that, maybe. It isn't unlike my interest in philosophy right now. There are endless questions and mysteries surrounding me, everywhere I turn. One of my deepest purposes in life has always been to try to understand these things a little better. (It's the drive that motivates science.) But I have no illusion that I'm finally going to solve all of the philosophical questions that have eluded thinkers much smarter than me for thousands of years.
Why should God being Just or Unjust affect ones investigation of Him? If God exists His standing in this regard is irrelevant. Because God if He does exists has total control over ones eternal destination. If God does exist then one must investigate and find an appropriate response to Him irrespective of how one views Him in regard to His Justice. All Praise The Ancient Of Days
