Q&A: Questioning the Move to Theism
Questioning the Move to Theism
Question
Hello Michael, in the move from deism to theism you argue that a revelation is expected a priori, because the reason God gave us free choice must be some kind of “religious” purpose.
I don’t understand that claim. While I agree with the general principle that it’s unreasonable that God would create something without a purpose, your conclusion sounds to me like unsupported anthropomorphism:
A- As long as we had no moral sense, it would be impossible to infer that God cares what we choose. It could be that the very existence of a dilemma for human beings—even something like what color shirt to wear, for example—has some kind of “religious” value for which He created us with free choice. Or that for some reason He prefers the world to be non-deterministic, so that it can develop in different directions.
Maybe that sounds a bit strange, but I don’t understand on what basis one can determine that this likely would not have value for Him. And in any case, revelation would not solve the problem, because how can one decide that putting on tefillin can be a religious purpose for God, but this cannot?
B- The fact that we have a moral sense means that it makes sense that He demands that we act that way, but again—not beyond that. It may be that overcoming the inclination and standing up to moral tests has some value for Him, and that is the purpose for which He created us.
If someone wants to argue that the above things cannot matter to Him, or that there was a revelation in which He demanded additional things from us, the burden of proof is on him.
Answer
I did not understand most of your message. I’ll address the point I did understand. Indeed, a priori there could be many purposes for the creation of the world and for God’s expectations of us. I am only arguing that it is not likely to be morality. Indeed, it could be the color of clothes or anything else you want. That is precisely why there is a tradition that explains to us what those expectations are.
Discussion on Answer
Despite the strangeness, that too could be one of the possibilities. Still, it is clear that there has to be something more besides morality. God is supposed to tell us which option is the correct one.
Thanks for the answers, but with your permission I still haven’t understood..
If it is possible that what is demanded of us is moral behavior alone, why is it obvious that there has to be something more besides morality?
For example, if He created us (with free choice) so that we would cope with tests, why aren’t moral tests enough?
I explained it. There has to be something more besides morality, that is, besides moral behavior itself. That something could be many things, for example: the choice to be moral, commandments not connected to morality, standing on one leg every morning, and so on. In order to know which of these is the additional thing desired by the Holy One, blessed be He, revelation is required. Even standing up to tests is something additional besides morality, and therefore that too cannot be known without revelation.
But the above things—that is, the value God has beyond moral behavior itself—can also be achieved through purely moral actions.
For example: a person overcomes his desire to steal, and that overcoming has value for God (apart from the fact that no theft was committed). In order to cause us not to steal, revelation is not needed; the moral inclination embedded in us is enough.
Another question that perhaps I did not explain well in the opening message:
Seemingly, the starting point of the discussion is that even without morality, it is not to be expected that God would demand anything from us (if we assume, for example, that we had no moral inclination or that we would not regard it as having authority), because although He gave us free choice, perhaps the purpose is simply that we deliberate, for example—even with all the strangeness—and He does not care what we choose.
I’ve exhausted the point.
My claim is that it is indeed possible that God’s expectation of us is moral behavior alone, and still that does not mean the purpose of creation is morality, but rather man’s coping with moral tests, for example.
And since we already know that this is what He demands of us (because of the moral sense), it follows that I would not expect a tradition in order to know what we are supposed to do.