Is a"personal God" viable?

Dilettante · Post by **Dilettante** » Wed Feb 09, 2005 6:33 pm

I have encountered several people who claim to have a personal relationship with God. The problem is that the very same people also believe that God is an infinite, perfect being, infinitely superior to humans. Still, they say they talk to God as if to a friend. I have often wondered how this is possible. There is an equality between human persons that is clearly lacking in the God-human relationship. Besides, the Christian God (for example) is not just a non-human person, but reportedly three. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that the kind of relationship these people can have with God, if any, is rather like the relationship I have with my dog, or perhaps my goldfish? Isn't God on a totally different level?

Zarathustra · Post by **Zarathustra** » Wed Feb 09, 2005 7:48 pm

God is on a totally different level, which is why they CAN do that. We can't have good relationships with our pets because we can't understand them. If I had a talking dog, I'd probably respect it a bit more. We can talk to God, and with God being infinite, he can listen to ALL of us.

Why is it that I find myself arguing for AND against the Christians? Perhaps the former more than the latter?

Dilettante · Post by **Dilettante** » Wed Feb 09, 2005 8:30 pm

I can see your point. But etologists and veterinarians claim to understand animals. Etologists spend their lives studying them. Perhaps dogs spend their lives studying us too, in their own way. I suspect my dog's got me figured out by now.
If you had a talking dog, would he be more "human"? Or would he be like Locke's parrot? Probably neither your dog nor Locke's parrot would qualify as humans because they lack a human body, but they would certainly be non-human persons.
God is supposed to be a non-human person too (or three, but that is another debate). I can talk to my dog, but he doesn't understand me. If God talked to us, we probably wouldn't understand either, unless he used a lower language. They say God knows even the number of hairs on our heads. I find it hard to believe that a perfect being would give so much attention to us imperfect humans.
Personal relationships occur between similar beings, such as two people. The point is, if God is vastly dissimilar to us, how can we have a personal relationship with him?
Can you have a personal relationship with something much greater than you, such as your country, the scientific community, humanity, or the world?
Conversely, can you have a personal relationship with something vastly different from you, such as your favorite coffee mug or 80's Pop compilation?
Finally, a personal relationship includes two-way communication. Surely an infinite being can listen to us and understand us. But can we understand him?

Zarathustra · Post by **Zarathustra** » Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:19 pm

I'll take your last question first:

Surely an infinite being can listen to us and understand us. But can we understand him?

Many Christians claim they can. Through the reading of the Bible and understanding of His word.

I find it hard to believe that a perfect being would give so much attention to us imperfect humans.

I've never said that God would have to be perfect. You mayve said that, or implied it, but I must've missed it. At one point Nietzsche says that, should he believe in a God, it would be a tormented, imperfect God, trying to look away from Himself and His anguish. And, being imperfect, he was not able to create the perfect world he envisioned to pass His time. He may not be perfect, but, being infinite, he certainly has a lot of attention to give. So the hair scenario wouldn't surprise me (heck, the existence of God would; after that, anything is possible

)

Personal relationships occur between similar beings, such as two people.

You said you have a dog? You should know better...

Dilettante · Post by **Dilettante** » Thu Feb 10, 2005 2:35 am

Zarathustra wrote;

Quote:
Personal relationships occur between similar beings, such as two people.
You said you have a dog? You should know better...

Maybe I forgot to mention that I don't have a "personal relationship" with my dog, but a different kind of relationship (person-animal?).

Zarathustra · Post by **Zarathustra** » Thu Feb 10, 2005 6:27 am

Well, lots of owners have "personal" relationships with their pets. Or, personal to the human, anyway; the animal probably doesn't have the intelligence to put that kind of significance on it. That is probably also like the God-human relationship from a Christian worldview: We obey God, God loves us. To God it's personal as He created each of us, to us it's personal only because we know it's personal to Him.

asajoseph · Post by **asajoseph** » Thu Feb 10, 2005 6:38 am

I think a good place to start would be to define in what sense we think God is 'infinite'.

Because Jesus (fully man, yet fully God) certainly wasn't infinite. So, if we're talking about God the father, what sense are we talking about when we say 'infinite'?

Zarathustra · Post by **Zarathustra** » Thu Feb 10, 2005 2:38 pm

Were I a Christian, I may tell you that the human mind cannot comprehend "infinite". But, I will tell you, when I say "infinite" I mean omniscient, omnipotent, and everything like that.

Dilettante · Post by **Dilettante** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:44 pm

Zarathustra wrote:

Well, lots of owners have "personal" relationships with their pets. Or, personal to the human, anyway; the animal probably doesn't have the intelligence to put that kind of significance on it.

Hmmm...Actually what I believe happens is that lots of owners feelthey have a personal relationship with their pets. But that doesn't mean they actually have it.[/b]

Zarathustra · Post by **Zarathustra** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 10:14 pm

I Wrote:

Or, personal to the human, anyway; the animal probably doesn't have the intelligence to put that kind of significance on it.

I understand that the pet analogy isn't exactly the best one...perhaps I should have chosen something a bit more suitable.