Does God Love Some People More than Others?
An interesting question one could ask when thinking about God, especially from a religious viewpoint, is does God love some people more than others. To me, it seems obvious that he does. Here is my argument in standard form for why I believe this to be true.
1. If some people are more worthy of love then other people, then they ought to be loved more.
2. A purely perfect being will always do what ought to be done.
3. God is a purely perfect being.
4. God will always do what ought to be done. ( 2, 3)
5. Some people are more worthy of love than others.
6. Some people ought to be loved more than others. ( 1, 5)
7. Therefore God loves some people more than others. (4, 6)
Premises 2 and 3 I expect to be uncontroversial. God, by definition, is a purely perfect being, and if something is truly perfect, it will always do what ought to be done. If a purely perfect being does not do what ought to be done, then it is no longer perfect. Premise 4 follows from 2 and 3, entailing its truth as well.
I also expect minimal controversy for premise 1. By definition, if something is worthy of something, it ought to be granted to them. Perhaps there are counter-examples where a person is worthy of something, but they do not receive it. However, this is a result of insufficient resources; they still ought to receive what they are worthy for.
Premise 5 is the only premise that could spark a substantial objection. For this reason, I will attempt to defend it. Assuming moral truths exist, we clearly posit certain things as good, bad, or neutral. Furthermore, we claim that some people are more good than others. Take two people that are identical in every way. Say these two people are walking in separate parks, and in both parks, there is a child drowning. One of the persons, person A, saves the child while the other person, person B, notices the kid but keeps walking. Person A must be considered a better person; They are equal in every way except Person A has done one more good deed than person B. Regarding love, it is better to love something good rather than something bad just in virtue of what goodness is. In addition, if A has more goodness than B, then one ought to love A more than B. This is because more goodness is better than less goodness. As a result, because some people have more goodness than others and more goodness ought to be loved more than less goodness, some people ought to be loved more than others. Therefore premise 5 is true. Premise 6 is entailed by 1 and 5. The conclusion is entailed from 4, and 6. This argument is valid and sound.
1. If some people are more worthy of love then other people, then they ought to be loved more.
2. A purely perfect being will always do what ought to be done.
3. God is a purely perfect being.
4. God will always do what ought to be done. ( 2, 3)
5. Some people are more worthy of love than others.
6. Some people ought to be loved more than others. ( 1, 5)
7. Therefore God loves some people more than others. (4, 6)
Premises 2 and 3 I expect to be uncontroversial. God, by definition, is a purely perfect being, and if something is truly perfect, it will always do what ought to be done. If a purely perfect being does not do what ought to be done, then it is no longer perfect. Premise 4 follows from 2 and 3, entailing its truth as well.
I also expect minimal controversy for premise 1. By definition, if something is worthy of something, it ought to be granted to them. Perhaps there are counter-examples where a person is worthy of something, but they do not receive it. However, this is a result of insufficient resources; they still ought to receive what they are worthy for.
Premise 5 is the only premise that could spark a substantial objection. For this reason, I will attempt to defend it. Assuming moral truths exist, we clearly posit certain things as good, bad, or neutral. Furthermore, we claim that some people are more good than others. Take two people that are identical in every way. Say these two people are walking in separate parks, and in both parks, there is a child drowning. One of the persons, person A, saves the child while the other person, person B, notices the kid but keeps walking. Person A must be considered a better person; They are equal in every way except Person A has done one more good deed than person B. Regarding love, it is better to love something good rather than something bad just in virtue of what goodness is. In addition, if A has more goodness than B, then one ought to love A more than B. This is because more goodness is better than less goodness. As a result, because some people have more goodness than others and more goodness ought to be loved more than less goodness, some people ought to be loved more than others. Therefore premise 5 is true. Premise 6 is entailed by 1 and 5. The conclusion is entailed from 4, and 6. This argument is valid and sound.
Comments (6)
I would replace love with being closer to God entails more positivity. So if you grow closer to God then you get more positive results.
Every religion has different ideas about God, and even inside the same religion there are commonly different and even opposite ideas about God. To what religion are you referring the God you are talking about?
Besides, it seems that you want to imprison the behaviour of God inside strict human logic criterions, while instead God is beyond humans, beyond logic, beyond criterions.
Another problem: what does it mean “God loves some people more than others”: how can you measure God’s love for people? Any criterion would be highly exposed to a lot of criticism.
Another one: it is humanly impossible to get any precise idea about how worthy somebody is to be loved by God: nobody is able to discern the deepest and most complex elements that are behind human behaviours.
You wrote that “God is a purely perfect being”: where does this idea of perfection come from? Does it come from human concepts? If it is a human concept, this mean that the very concept of “perfect” is far from being perfect. So, how do you think to evaluate the “perfection” of God by applying to him such an imperfect concept of perfection?
In general, it seems that you are talking about maths and theoretical logics, rather than God. Is God maths or theoretical logic? Does he need to obey to human criterions of logic?
It's a paradox. They say God loves everyone with the same love but gives some more than others. But to give more has motive in love. So it's unanswerable
:smile: