Evidence for God from Science

This has been kinda bugging me, and I was hoping for some insight. How does God feel emotions? Wouldn't the emotions have had to exist before Him in order for Him to feel them?

God's emotions are evident through out Scripture. His love for us, His anger for idol worship, how pleased He was with Jesus. So I'm guessing God is fine with emotions. Obviously we should be slow in anger and quick to love.

This is more of a philosophical issue, but I'd suggest that God does not feel emotions in the same way as we do. Our emotions are analogous to His, but certainly not of the same kind. Philosohically, that would require God reacting, which would require God changing, which denies the doctrine of immutability (note, though, that some Christian philosophers have seen it fit to do just that!).

I would rather suggest that the emotions we read about in Scripture are anthropomorphic representations of our moral relationship to God. God is what God is; He does not change. However, we do, and depending on how we are in relation to Him will determine how we perceive Him. Thus, if we are in a proper fellowship with Him, that relationship comes across as love and favor; but if we are not in a proper place, that same God appears to us as wrathful and angry. It is, then, our recognition of the moral nature of God (which is evident in the world as a whole, see Rom 2:14ff) that we interpret as the emotions of God, and those emotions are analogous to our own.

Just a thought from one who holds to a classical view of the doctrine of God . . .

Jac3510 wrote:This is more of a philosophical issue, but I'd suggest that God does not feel emotions in the same way as we do. Our emotions are analogous to His, but certainly not of the same kind. Philosohically, that would require God reacting, which would require God changing, which denies the doctrine of immutability (note, though, that some Christian philosophers have seen it fit to do just that!).

Not that I'm disagreeing with you, but I did want to point out that some may just see God's emotions as part of His nature, therefore His nature wouldn't change. If it's His nature to be angry with idol woship, for instance, He wouldn't be changing to be angry at idol worship. But then, God is not bound to our time, which would really mean that He can feel many different emotions at once, as idol worship and repentence happen at the same time as far as He is concerned. So, then, your idea of emotions being how we perceive the character of God would make more sense that way...God wouldn't feel many things at once.

For_Narniaaa wrote:This has been kinda bugging me, and I was hoping for some insight. How does God feel emotions? Wouldn't the emotions have had to exist before Him in order for Him to feel them?

Absolutely... Some think that any type of emotion is a weakness. But if we search the scripture, we find that Jesus wept at the death of a friend John 11:35. Jesus was also considered a man of sorrows Isaiah 53:3. And then there is jealousy, anger, and love also attributed to God.. While I would think that God has emotions, I wouldn't think that He was ruled by them however..

Jac3510 wrote:I would rather suggest that the emotions we read about in Scripture are anthropomorphic representations of our moral relationship to God. God is what God is; He does not change. However, we do, and depending on how we are in relation to Him will determine how we perceive Him. Thus, if we are in a proper fellowship with Him, that relationship comes across as love and favor; but if we are not in a proper place, that same God appears to us as wrathful and angry. It is, then, our recognition of the moral nature of God (which is evident in the world as a whole, see Rom 2:14ff) that we interpret as the emotions of God, and those emotions are analogous to our own.

Just a thought from one who holds to a classical view of the doctrine of God . . .

Thanks Jac, that's quite beautiful.

I wonder if For Narnia has a good points.

Just because our "reactions" are defining out humanness, doens't necessarily rule out a different wy o reacting on God's...Godness.

Certainly we change from minute to minute but does our *identity* change as humans? Even if God was pleased with His "good an faithful servant" does that mean GOd changed?

I would worry more that it damages God's omniscience...tht if He reacts it means He isn't aware of what was going on.

But I don't htink this has to be true either, because GOd is outside of time.

zoegirl wrote:Certainly we change from minute to minute but does our *identity* change as humans? Even if God was pleased with His "good an faithful servant" does that mean GOd changed? .

Good point.. And we are made in the image of God.

Gman wrote:

For_Narniaaa wrote:This has been kinda bugging me, and I was hoping for some insight. How does God feel emotions? Wouldn't the emotions have had to exist before Him in order for Him to feel them?

Absolutely... Some think that any type of emotion is a weakness. But if we search the scripture, we find that Jesus wept at the death of a friend John 11:35. Jesus was also considered a man of sorrows Isaiah 53:3. And then there is jealousy, anger, and love also attributed to God.. While I would think that God has emotions, I wouldn't think that He was ruled by them however..

Oh, I wasn't saying they control God. I was just curious as to how He feels them at all; the Bible clearly says He does, and IMO you have to be able to "feel" to create and love your creation.

zoegirl wrote:I wonder if For Narnia has a good points.

Just because our "reactions" are defining out humanness, doens't necessarily rule out a different wy o reacting on God's...Godness.

Certainly we change from minute to minute but does our *identity* change as humans? Even if God was pleased with His "good an faithful servant" does that mean GOd changed?

I would worry more that it damages God's omniscience...tht if He reacts it means He isn't aware of what was going on.

But I don't htink this has to be true either, because GOd is outside of time.

Mmmm...I don't think it threatens His omniscience. Just because He knows how He will react doesn't mean He won't. For instance, if He is gladdened by us returning to Him, then surely He feels glad every time it happens, even if He knows itLs coming.

For_Narniaaa wrote:Oh, I wasn't saying they control God. I was just curious as to how He feels them at all; the Bible clearly says He does, and IMO you have to be able to "feel" to create and love your creation.

I would say that God does "feel" or have feelings... No problem here. We aren't robots and God isn't a robot either I would think.

Oh God has emotions allright. No doubt about that. His emotions are clearly seen all through scripture. Some might argue that all of this is to resolve the angelic conflict or some other such position but I've never heard any of them deny God has emotions.

For those of you who hold to the idea that God is outside of time, you cannot philosophically hold to the notion that God has emotions, for emotions, by their nature, are reactive.

I see A and then I feel B as a response.

See the temporal transition there? But if God is outside of time, then He doesn't experience time sequentially, and thus, cannot experience emtions reactively. Further, you have philosophical problems with a reactive God in the first place. For God to react means that He is affected (you can't react to something that doesn't affect you, and that, by definition). But if He is affected, then He is in some sense changed. Thus, you have to redefine the doctrine of immutability.

As I said before, some Christian philosophers have tried to do that. They think of immutability in terms of nature (and, more specifically, in terms of His dispositions). But you have the time problem again, because if God can have intrinsic, non-dispositional changes (i.e., have an emotional response), then God must have existed in one state and then go on to exist in another state. That implies time.

It also implies a further problem. If God can exist in one state and then stop existing in that state, it implies that God's existence is not necessary! A necessary existence is that which must exist--it is not capable of not existing. Now, if that's the case, then it doesn't appear that God must exist in any particular state. But if He must not exist in any particular state, it's hart to see how He must exist (from a philosophical perspective of necessary existence) at all, for the simple reason that to exist is, in fact, to exist in a given state of being. It doesn't make much sense to me to say "Well God is necessary in that He must exist in some state," because I think that's playing a bit fast and loose with the term "neccesary existence." Under that definition, it is not true that God necessarily exists in any given state, and since to exist is to exist in a state, then you can't say that He must necessarily exist!

So, for all these reasons, I don't think it's possible to hold to a dynamic view of God without rejecting the doctrines of immutability and aseity (His necessary existence); you certainly can't hold to a dynamic view of God and at the same time hold to His timelessness, as the two views are mutually exclusive. And if you can't hold to a dynamic view of God, you can't hold to a reactive God. And since emotions require reaction, you can't hold to God having emotions (in the sense we do) without embracing a dynamic, mutible God.

Some more food for thought.

I don't think time has anything to do with it. Even though my father died a few years ago, I'm still sad over it. As for the future, I'm sad for the children of the future and the problems they may face in wars or poverty.. Having emotions doesn't mean that I change who I am. I'm still the same person, but still have my emotions. It's who I am..

Just a thought..

Gman,

Would you agree that your emotional response to your father's passing was by nature a temporal event? At one point, you were not sad, and at the next point, you were sad?

If, then, you were a non-temoral being (you did not experience moment-to-moment time), you would not be able to "at one point" feel this and then "at the next point" feel that. Emotional response--indeed, ANY kind of response--requires temporality. If God is timeless, then He is not temporal. If He is not temporal, then He can have no emotional response, for it makes no sense to talk about God feeling one way and then later feeling another way.