God Doesn't Want Me To Know Him

[ToBeLoved]

Well I don't really. You may be wishing me luck finding A god, not necessarily your personally preferred god.

Someone once encouraged me to "seek god", so I did. When I told her I'd started actively seeking him, she was thrilled. When I later told her I'd almost finished the Koran, and was in sight if embracing Allah, she almost had a stroke. She hadn't specified a god, you see.

So are you now Islaamic? Why or why not?

 

[ToBeLoved]

I don't refuse to recognize that. I simply ask for evidence. I have yet to see any convincing reason to believe that there is life outside of the material universe. I'm not even sure "outside of the material universe" is even a coherent concept, to be honest. But at the end of the day, it comes down to evidence. I see no reason to believe in life outside of the material universe, therefore I do not believe in life outside of the material universe. Why do you believe in life outside of the material universe?

So do you believe that we evolved from fish? What is the basis of your initial belief of where life came from? And creation?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

So do you believe that we evolved from fish? What is the basis of your initial belief of where life came from? And creation?

Evolution doesn't have anything to do with life outside the material universe.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Evolution doesn't have anything to do with life outside the material universe.

You are more than welcome to reply, but please follow the conversation within the reply.

Otherwise don't answer a reply

 

[FireDragon76]

But in this case, if God does reach out to us at first, then... Well, why are there non-believers? Why are there apostates? If God wants to draw us into belief, why the hiddenness?

I'll get to this later. I think you are taking a rationalistic approach to life, and that's why God seems hidden. Life is more than living in your head, you need a heart too or you are missing a universe of possibilities.

*(If not: worth a read; they're reasonably short books and incredibly funny and thought-provoking, and I guarantee you they'll be at the local library, given their status as all-time Sci-Fi classics.)

I've read it. It seemed like black gallows humor to me. Not something I want to feast on.

Yeah... The "dulling of intellect" he talks about in that? I'd consider that a very real consequence of faith, one that people probably shouldn't be so willing to put up with.

So... all religious people are just dumber than atheists? Think of the implications of what you are saying here.

I can agree, if we add two words onto the end: thus far. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic, after all. Go back a hundred years and show people a carefully-staged CGI film of a man turning into a lion,

You're idolizing science and technological supremacy, and ignoring the universe full of other possibilities, possibilities that can give meaning and vision to your life beyond the technological monstrosities of western culture (we are destroying the planet... it's not a scientific problem at this point, it's a moral problem, and much of it is due to not subjecting our technology to any kind of moral vision beyond "the bottom line").

For some people, God is present in the birth of their child, or a beautiful sunrise, or holding a loved-ones hand. The other day I was laying getting some much-needed vitamin D, looking up into the clouds that seemed to have so much depth and clarity to them... and I couldn't believe I haven't appreciated something like that before. Allowing yourself to be swept up into something other than the hard-nosed, left-brained scientific worldview is very important if you want to know God.

This interpretation of the bible certainly makes your religious beliefs a heck of a lot more moral, I'll give you that. As said above, the countless different doctrinal schisms of Christianity makes discussing any "general" doctrine difficult.

Christianity isn't a monolith. That's something I've said a lot before. There really is not one "Christianity". There are some commonalities on the surface but even how we interpret what the doctrines mean in practical terms, can be very different.

I think this reflects fairly poorly on God. If he thinks a 2000-year-old book containing at least one story that is necessarily a legend or fable (Noah's flood simply did not happen as written, I think we can agree on that) and quite a few more which seem incredibly unrealistic, a book written by humans, translated (and horribly mistranslated) by humans countless times, and with hundreds of versions currently flying around is adequate, then he clearly doesn't understand how people think, or how evidence works for us. Dillahunty gave an excellent talk on exactly how bad of an idea this one is.

Mainline Lutherans aren't committed to the concept of Biblical perspicuity or universal applicability. It contains the Word of God, without being identical to it. You'll find that attitude is common in many churches that appreciate textual and historical criticism. The Bible only becomes the Word of God when it's read within the context of a community that confesses the faith, guided by the Holy Spirit. That's why Catholics and mainline Protestants have Synods and Conventions, to listen to God's Word and interpret the Bible collectively, and decide stances on difficult issues.

The entity afishamongmany described is one which created a system wherein we exist primarily to praise it. That sounds incredibly vain to me.

I can't vouch for afishamongnmany's beliefs, I don't know them well enough. Remember what I said about not being a monolith?

What might sound vain to you might not actually be vain, you know? If a parent tells their child to do something, the child might be upset at the perceived infringement on her autonomy, but often times the parent has the child's best interests at heart.

 

[The Cadet]

So do you believe that we evolved from fish?

Irrelevant. If biology, cosmology, geology, and more are all fundamentally wrong, then the answer becomes "I don't know". If you think you have a good answer, then by all means, provide evidence. But no answer gets to "win by default". If we don't know the answer, it doesn't magically justify saying "God did it", we need to actually demonstrate that god did it.

@FireDragon76 I'll get back to your post later today. I'm enjoying the conversation greatly but responses to you take time and thought which I don't have right at the moment.

 

[Locutus]

Have you ever prayed and asked God to show you that He is real?

Quite a few times.

Radio silence.

 

[Locutus]

You are blessed. This is a great attribute. Hang on to it.

I don't think I could lose it if I tried. It's a family thing. Chirpy parents.

 

[Locutus]

you are very intelligent it is a gift.gb

Thanks, but I'm really not. Just done alot. You know ... travel, experiences, people, books, etc.

 

[Locutus]

So are you now Islaamic? Why or why not?

No, I'm an agnostic atheist. But I have read the Koran, and did test drive Islam. Radio silence there, also.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Irrelevant. If biology, cosmology, geology, and more are all fundamentally wrong, then the answer becomes "I don't know". If you think you have a good answer, then by all means, provide evidence. But no answer gets to "win by default". If we don't know the answer, it doesn't magically justify saying "God did it", we need to actually demonstrate that god did it.

Well I believe I posted a verse that all of creation speaks to the glory and power of God. Plants, animals, humans, our ecosystem and the solar system are all to intricate to have been created from nothing.

I know people laugh sometimes in those of us who believe in God and the Bible, but to me the non-believers are putting their faith into something much less likely, random chance. I think they have to be blind.

That's my answer.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Quite a few times.

Radio silence.

Can I ask, if you did hear from God, how would you expect that to happen?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Well I believe I posted a verse that all of creation speaks to the glory and power of God. Plants, animals, humans, our ecosystem and the solar system are all to intricate to have been created from nothing.

I don't know anyone saying that things are created from a literal nothing. There's no indication that a literal nothing is possible.

And the "intricate" part of the argument is really nothing more than an argument from ignorance.

 

[ToBeLoved]

I don't know anyone saying that things are created from a literal nothing. There's no indication that a literal nothing is possible.

And the "intricate" part of the argument is really nothing more than an argument from ignorance.

I'm sorry, I'm not clear what is your position on creation?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

I'm sorry, I'm not clear what is your position on creation?

I didn't mention my position. I'm just saying that your position is flawed because of the things I mentioned in my last post.

 

[ToBeLoved]

I didn't mention my position. I'm just saying that your position is flawed because of the things I mentioned in my last post.

Are you talking about this?

Evolution doesn't have anything to do with life outside the material universe.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Are you talking about this?

Evolution doesn't have anything to do with life outside the material universe.

No. I'm talking about this:

"Plants, animals, humans, our ecosystem and the solar system are all too intricate to have been created from nothing."

 

[ToBeLoved]

No. I'm talking about this:

"Plants, animals, humans, our ecosystem and the solar system are all too intricate to have been created from nothing."

Well I think it's the most logical position. Sorry you disagree.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Well I think it's the most logical position. Sorry you disagree.

So you're saying that you think the position you hold, which is based on logical fallacies, is the most logical position?

 

[ToBeLoved]

So you're saying that you think the position you hold, which is based on logical fallacies, is the most logical position?

Would you be more specific? This is tiring. Otherwise I'm going.