Starts with:
“Not to get into a debate.”Continues with:
" If God is so omnipotent"…🤪
Well, that’s what a rhetorical question is. You’re making a statement, not a query, but the best way to couch your statement happens to be with a question mark at the end of it. I’m not sure this is the best example of one, but at least they made an attempt to label it as such.
If god is Jewish what did he use to circumcise himself?
The main idea is that books like Bible and Quran were sent to humanity so they are made for humans of the time.
The “anger” isn’t supposed to be a literal anger, just how humans identify what happened.
For example most verses about wrath follow with curse or punishment etc, so maybe “wrath” is just what humans call it when God curses or punishes people; and it’s not a literal feeling of anger.
There was a similar debate with how some verses say God heard/saw “humans were doing [insert thing]…” etc in the books.
Less relevant info.
Also in the case of Islam for example, different branches and even sects have different popular interpretations.
I know one Sufi theologist saying “All creatures were made to reflect God’s light” so they might call it “What our own emotions were modeled after, and are distorted versions of?”
Then there is Ahl al-Ra’y (Mainly followers of Maturidism today) who see Hadith as “uncredible” so they usually have slightly different views on most stuff. But I am not religious enough to learn theology that far.
Because we apply human traits to God, and because being emotionless doesn’t necessarily indicate being higher than someone else.
In most traditions, God is incomprehensible to humans. Polytheistic religions break God down into multiple Gods or Goddesses with different characteristics, which is how they explain all of the events assigned to God. Lightning happens because of Zeus, etc.
For religions that don’t break God down into different aspects, it’s one of those things that kinda justifies itself. Bad things are happening so God is mad, if God is mad he has to have a good reason because he’s omnipotent. That’s where the faith part comes in.
Abrahamic religions especially have a father/child or teacher/student dynamic between God and humans. A major negative of the Fall of Man was that we had separated ourselves from God and could no longer could wander the Garden of Eden.
The implication is that God knows more than us, and to have faith that he acts for the good of humanity even if we don’t understand in our limited knowledge.
We like to think God cares about us.
Who can personify the ultimate? Be wary of those who claim the authority to describe it as such…
People who believe in God have failed to adequately reflect on their beliefs. Religion is fairy tales for adults. Sorry, but that’s the truth. Your question is simply a step on the staircase of rationality.
Any omnipotent being must be capable of feeling emotions, otherwise that would be a thing they can’t do, making them not omnipotent.
Who told you God is omnipotent and above humans? Who told you he or she has emotions, or smites or becomes upset or wrathful?
Any God worth naming as such is so beyond such concepts as to be entirely inscrutable. It’s people that ascribe such characteristics, usually to influence other people. In any case, it comes from an inclination to anthropomorphize the unknown, to rationalize non-human phenomena through a familiar human lens. The conflict isn’t in God, it’s in God’s self-appointed biographers.
Genesis 1:27
“So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.“
Which of the 3000 gods are you referring to?
It’s all fictional, it can be whatever you want
Because it’s God’s nature? Sorry, but this seems like a pretty weak gotcha. The “Can God create a stone that he himself cannot lift?” is much better. This one is like asking “Why, if electrons present particle characteristics, do we don’t know (precisely) where an electron is at any given time?”. It’s just their nature, there is no reason behind it.
If a deity like the Judeo Christian god is real, the reason they have emotion is we have emotion so early people would tie their emotions to them and think they have it as well. Something bad happens and it has to be god being angry and punishing them, because that was the only explanation they had.
Humans anthropomorphize pretty much everything around us with varying levels of accuracy. I’m fairly certain that my dog and cat feel anger and love in a very similar way to the way I do. I’m pretty sure plants really don’t, but they might a little bit more than a storm cloud. However you apply that to your spirituality or your perception of that of others is going to be a highly personal experience for you.
Religion does not and never made any logical sense.
(this does not mean it does not have any / also positive use for societies)
Well, the obvious answer is: if God is so much greater than humans, how would we know? If you’re talking about the Hebrew god from the Christian Bible / Jewish Scriptures, you’re seeing the depiction of God as told through the lens of humans, who often try to be telling other humans about god using the limited vocabulary and imagery available.
God is depicted as being powerful enough that a human not being fully aligned with God but being in God’s presence would lead to annihilation, just like a human approaching the sun would be destroyed — not because the sun was angry, just because of its nature compared to ours.
On the flip side of that, for the biblical God, humans are made in God’s image, which means the species as a whole would reflect God’s character (including the bit about wanting to be the ones fully in control).
