Don't Get It

Singing along with "Jesus is my boyfriend"? LOL! What kind of church are you attending?!

Hmmm...Is there no one in your life who you love? If there is, maybe pondering the love you have for that person can enlighten you somewhat as to how to love God.

I don't see anywhere in Scripture where we are asked to walk with God "entirely on emotions." We are told, instead,"the just shall live by faith," and "without faith it impossible to please God," and that "he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him." Of course, no one normally puts their faith in someone they don't know. So, behind the biblical injunctions to have faith in God is the idea that we would know God intimately.

For Paul, there was a distinct progression from knowledge of God to fulling committing himself to God: Knowledge>belief>commitment. I don't think you can come to the place where you love God without going through this progression yourself.

How does one come to know God? The Bible tells us that it is in its pages that one finds God's primary revelation of Himself.

Can you have faith in God without loving Him? Possibly. God makes it pretty clear, though, that our relationship with Him is to be motivated by love. He doesn't demand that we love Him in a vacuum, however. God isn't saying, "You gotta' love me!" without reason. Ideally, He intends that we would love Him as a result of coming to know Him and His love for us through study of His Word.

As one studies the Scriptures and reads of God's incredible efforts to reconcile wicked humanity to Himself, as one discovers how far God was willing to go to save us from ourselves, one begins to understand the massive depths of His love for all people. This understanding, in turn, ought to engender in oneself a love for God.

I think, when the full import of God's love strikes a person, tears are often the result. But this doesn't mean that one must go about loving God in some never-ending state of maudlin weepiness. In fact, God tells us that the prime way we show our love for Him isn't in raising our arms skyward, closing our eyes, and swaying back and forth as we sing about how "Jesus is our boyfriend," but in obeying God's commands. Love, in the godly sense of the word is evidenced toward God, first and foremost, in obedient action, not in mushy sentimentalism.

The Bible says that when God's Spirit comes to dwell within a person, that person has an "inner witness" of their new, spiritual birth. That inner witness, that divine connection to God, gives you an awareness of Him that makes prayer vital and real. That you don't have this experience suggests that you have yet to be "born again." Until that happens, God will continue to seem at a distance to you.

God is not "based purely on emotion." Where in the Bible do you read that?

If you have determined that a relationship with God is beyond you, then it is not surprising that this is your experience. A relationship with God is only as impossible as you decide it is.

I should probably just stop right here and admit that I'm faith-challenged, and no matter how hard I try to "get it," it just isn't going to happen. I've been trying for a good 8+ years, and am really no closer now that I was on day 1. Maybe some day something will happen that enlightens me, but I feel like I'm just beating my head against the wall right now. No sense in wasting anybody's time on this forum anymore than I already have, too. I do appreciate your efforts, however.

I guess you could label me as a "seeker" as I've spent the past several years trying to figure out God/religion/faith/Christianity. I've read a lot of apologetics books in my quest to understand all this. Since, by nature, I'm a very analytical person, facts speak to me much more than emotions and feelings, which has made it extremely difficult for me to come to a point where I can truly understand this whole faith thing.

Having said that, I think I've grasped the concept of God as the creator of the universe and life. There are actually many facts in our world that support the concept of God as the creator of life. My analytical nature is, for the most part, satisfied by these facts so I'm not a seeker from that perspective. The Deist sees God as a hands-off creator who, once He created the universe and life, really has nothing more to do with us. That would sum up my understanding of God right now.

However, when it comes to understanding the concept of God as a "personal God," who loves me, cares for me, and desires to have a relationship with me, I just don't get it. It doesn't make sense to me. There seems to be a huge wall that is preventing me from going any further into the "personal" realm -- that is, understanding God as a personal God.

Going to church is downright depressing. Walking into church with 1,000 people who do "get it" makes me feel inferior (I know many in church don't really get it, many are afraid to admit they don't get it), defective, and just plain old dumb. What do they know that I don't? is what I'm thinking. How could so many people be singing along with "Jesus is my boyfriend" as if He was physically present and listening, when I don't experience that. I always leave church more skeptical than I do when I enter.

I guess experiencing the emotional, personal side of God is either something I'm not wired to understand. I'm not much of a touchy-feely person, so when it comes to having to base a relationship with someone I can't see entirely on emotions and love, that just doesn't compute for me. Praying is a good example. I feel pretty strange praying, because to me it just feels like I'm talking to myself, which is really weird (to me) since it's directed toward someone else.

How does one, who might be called emotionally bankrupt, ever connect to a person (God) who is based purely on emotions (e.g., love)? I can convince myself until the cows come home that there is a creator, but trying to have a relationship with an invisible being is just too far out there for me to ever understand.

God has nothing to do with church, and everything to do with all of history and creation.

You know, the kind where they sing the current contemporary christian songs. The kind where the chorus is song over and over and over and over lol.

Yes, indeed. But that person, again, is someone I can touch, see, hear, smell, etc. Apples and oranges.

Exactly. Getting over the hurdle from knowing God exists to knowing him intimately is the problem. I'm not sure I know anyone THAT intimately, not even myself lol. I didn't say we need to walk on emotions. I said that to me, having faith is an emotional pursuit. If it was an entirely cerebrial pursuit, I'd be at the head of the line in having faith. I lack emotion. That's just how I'm wired (by God?).

What's the difference between knowledge and belief? Doesn't it take "faith" to make the leap between knowing and believing? The crux of this whole issue it seems...

So, all I have to do is read the Bible and, poof, I'll have faith? I know that's not what you mean, but I hear that so often: just read the Bible and you'll figure it out. I have read the Bible, and I still haven't figured it out.

Maybe I'm just dense. Maybe I'm just uncapable of "getting it," but when I hear people say things like that I have no reference point to relate it to, so it's just an abstract concept. It doesn't make sense that this invisible person has such a massive amount of love for me and as such, I owe him my unbridled love and faith in return? That's just out there, forgive me for saying so. Way off the common-sense scale. Again, it must be me because I seem to be in a minority.

But I said the sinner's prayer. Once saved, always saved, right? Isn't that what "born again means?"

I haven't read that. But, isn't "love" one of the main points of Christianity? Love God, love your neighbor, love yourself?

Maybe it's my understanding of the word "love," but to me it connotates an emotional response. Looking up love in the dictionary and it's either a noun (the emotion) or a verb (to be in love). Therefore, equating God with love, doesn't it make sense that faith in God is more of an emotional response? Again, I could be wrong, and probably am, but take emotion out of love and it's something entirely different to me.

I'm not trying to pick an argument here, but this is just an issue that constantly escapes the grasp of my comprehension. Yes, I can probably convince myself without too much of a struggle that there is a God, a creator figure. But the limits of my comprehension stop there. To convince myself that this person who has been around longer than the universe wants me to know him personally? How is that possible?

Maybe some day something will happen that enlightens me, but I feel like I'm just beating my head against the wall right now. No sense in wasting anybody's time on this forum anymore than I already have, too. I do appreciate your efforts, however.

I have a story for you trustgod...

During class one afternoon, a professor of philosophy – a non-believer -- begins to explain the core issue science has with the existence of God. To make his point, he asks the students if any of them believe in God. He then points to one of the students who has raised his hand and asks him to stand.

"So," the professor asks, "You believe in God?"

"Absolutely, sir."

"And what scientific rationale is your belief based on?"

The student looked at him and said, "None -- I just believe in God and the Bible based on faith."

"That is the problem that science has with God" the professor continued. "Science uses empirical, testable, and demonstrable protocols to prove or disprove the existence of things. God cannot be proved in this way, so therefore He cannot exist."

The professor turns again to the student and says, "We all have five senses that we use to identify and observe the world around us. "Tell me, son. Have you ever seen God?"

"No."

"Have you ever heard God?"

"No."

"Have you ever felt God? Tasted God? Smelled God? Have you ever had any sensory perception of God for that matter?"

"No sir, I'm afraid I haven't."

"Yet you still believe in God?"

"Yes."

"So, according to empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, we have just proven that God does not exist. What do you say to that, son?"

"Nothing. I have only my faith."

"Exactly. You have only your Faith. Son, that's not science and that is why religion is nothing more than a collection of unproven doctrines."

"Sir, can I pose a question?"

"Certainly"

"Is there such a thing as heat?"

"Yes"

"And is there such a thing as cold?"

"Yes"

"No sir, there isn't. You can have an abundance of heat. Even more heat. Super heat. White heat. A very small amount of heat or no heat. Suppose the temperature plummeted to 458 degrees below zero, which is the equivalent to the absence of heat. If the temperature plummeted even further, would there be any less heat?"

The professor paused. "No, there would not."

Thus, there is no tangible evidence or proof of cold because it cannot be accurately measured. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat."

"So what is your point, young man?"

"My point is this. You correctly state that science is the study of observed phenomena yet based on your definition, science is a premise which is flawed just like religion."

"Flawed?" The professor exclaimed. "How is science flawed?"

"Sir, you are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can successfully measure. Science, however, cannot even explain a thought. It can be tested and studied using particles, algorithms, electricity, magnetism, etc. but a thought has never been seen, much less fully understood. Yet we all know that thoughts are real and that they exist. Thus, the absence of something observable doesn't mean it does not exist."

The student turned to the class.

"Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor's brain? Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor's brain? Felt it, touched or smelled it?"

Laughter erupted in the classroom as the student turned to the professor:

"No one appears to have done so, professor. Therefore, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science concludes that your brain is indeed absent. With all due respect, then, how can we trust your lectures, sir?"

The room became silent as the professor began to stare at the student:

"I guess you'll have to take that on faith, son."

"That, sir, was my point. Faith. Believing in that which you cannot see or hear or feel or touch or smell -- does not make the object of your faith any less real than anything else."