• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

The concept of the Christian God doesn’t make sense to me.

timothyu

Well-Known Member
Dec 31, 2018
24,706
9,276
up there
✟382,895.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
How do you know? What do you base this on?
Does not even the Christ have an opposite?

If all have sinned and fallen short, that would mean 100% of mankind has turned against God at one time or another, 0% allegiance. Why would he want this?
How can you understand the wisdom and virtues of God's will without first experiencing the pitfalls of man's will. After that free will may determine which is preferable and the repentant are looked upon favourably having learned a lesson rather than just accepting it to possibly doubt later.

Proving ground?l If God knows everything, what is there for him to prove?
The proving ground is for us as mentioned above

It goes against my morals to consider dead children as low on concerns and food for something else.

If God is all and we are all part of God, what is lost? On this level we do have a minimal moral code to keep us from self destructing too fast and by nature should find such things abhorrent but at the same time we destroy what suits us to serve ourselves. So perhaps there is a more sane reasoning behind what little we can comprehend. In the meantime loving neighbour as self is a good rule to keep the wheels turning without major conflict.

Again; if God could do anything, he could have changed all of that.
True but where would the overall lesson be learned in the bigger picture. God could have made us 'perfect' from the start, but to make us of any use or individuality we needed a freewill app and sooner or later that free will would seek to rebel. Rebellion is good of course because without it we learn nothing. We instead are just drones. But by learning it separates the grain from the tares. Someone who understands the wisdom of God over the wisdom of man will be a more trustworthy creation in the long run.

Why does there have to be a phase 1 and a phase 2? With unlimited power and ability, why not just do it right the first time? This doesn’t make sense to me.

Again, see above. God didn't need a beta version. We do, in order to be of any practical use to Him down the road. We have to work out our own defects because being mini-gods ourselves we like to tinker and experiment. Until we learn the proper use of the knowledge of good and evil, that it is not for self purpose, we run the risk of being a cancer within creation.

Consider it is not about us at all. God could have remained a sole being untainted but perhaps He got bored and wanted to explore His own natures through us, a manifestation of a particular nature.. That would include, not deleting part of Himself, but having it get itself under control to work in harmony with Himself instead of against Himself. (How else would His knowledge of the Tree be ok for Him but not us)
Mankind is a good example of Him working against Himself. Even though He knows better overall, would He not instead let Himself come to terms with Himself, his natures coming into harmony? He's got it mastered. We don't, and we are but a part within a much greater being. Like a muscle spasm that needs to learn to relax.
So we were removed from the tree of Life until we too figured it out. We will eventually simply because He is in harmony with Himself. We are but a part of His whole, isolated until we learn to play nice with the rest of God.

That's the thing about being the all. Everything imaginable exists within.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,968
10,837
77
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟867,272.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Though unasked for, I can state a few things that puzzle me. God creates us anyway s/he desires and yet we all have the tendency to abuse our free will. And the only way to make that right is for God to become human and die a horrible death for us. It doesn't make much sense to me.
It wasn't the physical death that was significant. Jesus spent three hours on the cross suffering the eternal wrath of God, taking that penalty on Himself for all those who receive Him as Saviour.
 
Upvote 0

timothyu

Well-Known Member
Dec 31, 2018
24,706
9,276
up there
✟382,895.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Jesus spent three hours on the cross suffering the eternal wrath of God, taking that penalty on Himself for all those who receive Him as Saviour.
How was his pain any different than the thousands of others hanging on crosses? Does God suffer differently? Or did He willingly die to show man's will is no match for God's will?
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,968
10,837
77
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟867,272.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
I will list a few of the reasons The Christian religion doesn't make sense to me.

*The story of Adam and Eve
If I were to build a play pen for my 2 children with plenty of toys, then I put a loaded gun in the play pen amongst the toys but told my children not to play with the gun, would you consider me a responsible parent?
Supposed I had an enemy and I see this enemy approach my children with the gun and I do nothing; I then see my enemy cajole my children into playing with the gun, still I do nothing, at first my children refuse via my instructions but eventually this mature adult enemy of mine cajoles my naive children into playing Russian rullet with this gun and I do nothing but watch them die.
For me to take the attitude that they deserved to die because they disobeyed me I believe is atrocious! Yet that is the attitude I am supposed to take when Satan cajoled/tempted Adam and Eve into eating the fruit.
God gave them fair warning. If a father warns his child not to touch a hot stove, otherwise his hand will be burned, and the child touches the stove and burns his hand, does that mean that the father is punishing the child by getting his hand burned, or has the child suffered the consequences of his disobedience? God told Adam and Eve if they ate of the fruit of the tree, they would die. They disobeyed, and eventually, they both died. Did God punish them, or did they suffer the consequences of their disobedience?

*Often God's behavior doesn't seem wise or make sense
The story of Job for example:
Satan approaches God with a challenge claiming he can turn Job against him if given the opportunity. Now Satan knows God knows everything, and he also knows God only tells the truth, so common sense tells you all God has to do is tell Satan that he is unable to turn Job against him even if he were given this opportunity and Satan will know that is the truth and the conversation would be over; right? But instead God accepts this challenge which results in the pain and suffering of an innocent man and the death of Job's children. Now I realize he was able to have more children but the damage was already done! Children are not like cattle, you don't fix it by having more children; I believe this was wrong and unjust.
Read the ending chapters of Job, and see God's answer to your question. Start with God's statement: "Who is he who darkens counsel without knowledge?"

*The slaughter of innocent children
It amazes me how people can protest abortion clinics because it kills unborn children then go home and read in the bible about the slaughter of innocent children with God's blessing and think nothing of it.
If you are referring to Joshua's conquest of Canaan, you need to note that God's instruction was to "subdue the people". There was no direct instruction to slaughter them. That was Joshua's decision.

When Moses went to Egypt to free the "Children of Israel" The first problem I have with this is God chose to "harden Pharaoh's heart" basically taking away his free-will and making him more stubborn than he normally would have been. Now why would he do this? Abraham Lincoln asked
"have I not annihilated my enemies when I've made them my friends?"
Supposed God were to soften Pharaoh's heart and caused him to reject the false God's he worshipped and worship the God of Moses: The entire country of Egypt would have been introduced to this God and everything would have been on the positive tip! But instead, everything stayed on the negative and Moses and Pharaoh were sorta like 2 school kids playing "my daddy is tougher than your daddy" which resulted in the hardship of innocent Egyptians and the death of the Egyptians first born children.
Why would a God that can create the Universe and all that exist in 6 days need to kill innocent children to make a point? He could have put all the Egyptians in a deep sleep and have Moses lead the Children of Israel out into the desert while everyone else slept: Those children did not deserve to die!
Pharaoh was given every opportunity to comply with what Moses instructed him. He had free will like anyone else. It was only when he resolutely set his own will against Moses that his heart became hardened. He suffered the consequences of his own willfulness and disobedience to the command of God through Moses. Pharaoh was clearly told of the consequences at each stage, but it was his own disobedience, pride, and self-will that brought the consequences upon him and his subjects. If he had complied right at the start and let the people of Israel go, none of the consequences would have happened and he would have been blessed by God for his obedience, instead of having his nation and army destroyed, and losing his life into the bargain.

Other examples are of surrendering armies slaughtered during war, (amalekites and midianites) the children and babies killed and virgin women saved for rape; everything I know about right and wrong tells me this is wrong, and as a Christian you are required to believe everything the God of the Old Testament does is good.
You are mistaken in that you are presuming that everything that happened in the Old Testament was instigated by God. Much of the Old Testament history was written for our education. Much of what you are mentioning here are the acts of men and not of God, to show the consequences of acts of evil, and the blessings that come through doing good. God did not create a race of programmable robots. He created men with free will to do what is in their own best interests. You are forgetting that no one will get away with anything, and there will be a day of Judgment where every single human being will be judged on their actions while they were living their lives. The conclusion to all these things is not here yet.

Now I know that was the Old Testament and things are different in the New, (I do believe Jesus was morally superior to the God Christians claim him the Son of) but in order to be Christian, you have to accept the Old Testament God as just and that is something I cannot do.

Ken
Jesus came to show what God is really like, because He is God. The conclusion to all these things depends on our attitude to Christ. This is what will divide those who will be saved, and who will not. The actions of men, whether good or evil, will be displayed as evidence of guilt or acquittal. The main evidence of acquittal will be the receiving of Christ as Saviour. The evidence of guilt will be the actions that show a total rejection of Christ. God will not save a person without appropriate substantive evidence of a true conversion to Christ. And He will not condemn a person without conclusive, substantive evidence of the person's rejection of Christ.

Those in the Old Testament who will be saved are those who were depending on the future promise of the Messiah to come. Their deeds in life will show that dependence, and the evidence of that will come out at the judgment to show that God is a righteous judge. Those who will be lost will show the evidence of their lost condition through their evil deeds. Just like any Court of Law, guilt or innocence is based on the presentation of evidence.
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,968
10,837
77
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟867,272.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
I was surprised to learn - only a few years ago, after being in churches for more than 50 years - that all we really have are theories as to the "why" of Jesus' death on the cross. I really appreciate John Duns Scotus' theory that's explained in this article:


From article:

At-One-Ment, Not Atonement
Sunday, January 21, 2018
Fr. Richard Rohr, OFM

Jesus of Nazareth: Week 2
At-One-Ment, Not Atonement
Sunday, January 21, 2018

The common reading of the Bible is that Jesus “died for our sins”—either to pay a debt to the devil (common in the first millennium) or to pay a debt to God (proposed by Anselm of Canterbury, 1033-1109). Franciscan philosopher and theologian John Duns Scotus (1266-1308) agreed with neither of these understandings.

Duns Scotus was not guided by the Temple language of debt, atonement, or blood sacrifice (understandably used by the Gospel writers and by Paul). He was inspired by the cosmic hymns in the first chapters of Colossians and Ephesians and the Prologue to John’s Gospel (1:1-18) and gave a theological and philosophical base to St. Francis’ deep intuitions of God’s love. While the Church has not rejected the Franciscan position, it has been a minority view.At-One-Ment, Not Atonement — Center for Action and Contemplation
There is a great difference between Paul, who was directly inspired by the Holy Spirit and taught his doctrine by direct revelation from Christ Himself during his three years in seclusion in Arabia - and the natural reasoning of a human philosopher. Paul told the Corinthians that he was not coming to them with the enticing words of man's wisdom, but in the power and demonstration of the Spirit.
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,968
10,837
77
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟867,272.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
The problem becomes why the knowledge is bad or does anything that deserves punishment rather than just being something we have to confront as thinking entities that can make such assessments in the first place? It sounds like making up a disease and then presenting the solution after the fact

~~~~

Eh, not sure scholars are remotely in agreement on Satan as an antithesis to God, when Job and other areas can be interpreted quite consistently with God's sovereignty not being even challenged, Satan merely fitting into a prosecuting attorney metaphor as challenging humans without being a temptation in himself, because I'm pretty sure Judaism wasn't of that opinion until encountering Zoroastrianism, with the dualistic ideas of an evil and good God clashing with each other. If Satan is merely an angel God has tasked with an unpopular job of testing humanity in regards to dealing with unpleasantness and the like rather than an independent agent God has to keep tabs on, it makes God seem far more competent than if it made angels knowing that some would fall (though that also applies in God making humanity knowing they would have to be kicked out of Eden, so..)

~~~~

So literally nothing matters in terms of the temporal world? Any suffering of innocents or God turning a blind eye to slavery are just a bump in the road and will be fixed in the end? That seems morally deficient and bankrupt to a high degree in that you aren't actually concerned with suffering in any meaningful sense

~~~~

God didn't exactly make it that clear about an alternative when God literally used plagues to show its power and turn people to its side, the general Hebrew angle is henotheism, God just the superior god amongst other gods, rather than being a God that is unique, the other "gods" not really gods

~~~~

Not sure it's remotely fair to compare moral corruption with demonstrable scientific aspects where quarantine is beneficial versus culling (humans are not to be treated like animals in the moral sense, because we have agency, animals have far less in being self aware as humans are)

Infinity logically cannot have time, it has no beginning or end, part of temporality itself. And if the flesh is irrelevant, why did God create humans with flesh at all if the lessons could've been learned without that needless extra step?
The important thing to consider is that the Bible is God's personally inspired communication to mankind about who He is and His nature and character. He does not have to explain Himself or justify His actions to anyone. He made this quite clear to Job when He appeared to him in a whirlwind, saying, "Who is he who darkens counsel without knowledge?"

Therefore, in the Bible, God says, "This is the way it is, and I don't have to explain Myself in any way to anyone." This is why there are many things in the Bible which are not clearly explained, because God does not see the need to have to explain them.

But He has set signposts right through the Old Testament directing toward the coming Messiah. Jesus showed the two disciples at Emmaeus where they all were. This shows that the whole point is that everything depends on whether a person embraces either the Messiah to come, or the Messiah who died on the cross for us. This means that those who embrace the Messiah (Jesus Christ) will trust that God is doing everything correctly and righteously, in spite of not having everything explained.

The natural man is unable to discern these things because they are spiritually discerned by those who are converted to Christ - and to be truly converted to Christ, a person must totally trust God that He is righteous in all His ways, even though we don't understand them. Even those who are converted to Christ having only partial knowledge of the ways of God; but there will come the day when all will be revealed and we will know more perfectly and have the appropriate understanding of how and why things happened the way they did.
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,968
10,837
77
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟867,272.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
If I thought you were seeking the truth, I would have attempted to comment. But experience in the other thread convinces me otherwise.
God told Ezekiel that the people would not listen to him when he gave his inspired prophecies to them; but He told Ezekiel to give his prophecy, even though they won't listen to him, because having given them the prophecy, they will have no comeback when they suffer the consequences for their refusal to listen.

If a person will not heed a warning or an instruction, they cannot complain when they suffer the consequences, because the simple and effective answer to them would be, "You were given the instruction and warning quite clearly and you are suffering the consequences because you did not listen to it".

If a person is warned not to get too close to a hornet's nest, and then gets too close and gets badly stung as a result, who is the blame - the person who gave the warning, or the person who did not listen to it?
 
Upvote 0

Ken-1122

Newbie
Jan 30, 2011
13,574
1,792
✟233,210.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Excellent. As you can see in my signature, I treasure doubt and am open to new ideas. How did you turn away from all religions? Or were your parents agnostics? Would you then explain your world view?

My parents were Christian, and I was raised in a Christian household. When I was young I was okay with believing what everybody I loved, and trusted told me, so accepting the God of my parents worked for me, even though I had never experienced God for myself. As I got older, my natural skepticism began to work against what I was taught to believe, so I decided to find God for myself. I did this by praying to God that he would save me, and reading the bible (with the goal of eventually reading it from cover to cover) every night before going to bed. Religious wise, this was the worse thing a skeptic like myself could have possibly done, had I never attempted to get saved, I probably would have been content with empty belief like so many other Christians have.

After about 4 years of this with no communication from God, no signs of being saved, and constantly trying to justify atrocities and wrong doings because they were in the Bible, I was confused, exhausted, and frustrated by my failed attempts; so I gave up. I remember praying my last prayer to God telling him I will not be praying anymore but whenever he is ready for me, here I am. I didn’t stop immediately, I kept going to Church for a while, still professed to be Christian for a while because when you’ve invested your entire life in something, you don’t stop on the dime; especially considering many of my closest friends were Christian, and there were friends of mine that say they got saved because I invited them to my church. I guess I kinda felt like I was betraying them by walking away from what I introduced them to, but eventually I quit going to church as well. Leaving Christianity was the hardest thing I’ve ever done in my life. I’ve never really liked the term “atheist”, initially I considered myself agnostic, but after learning what an agnostic actually was I began to consider myself skeptic even though there is no difference between my skepticism and atheism definition wise. On my signature, I have atheist because skeptic was not an option.

As far as my world view, I don’t know if I have one; I doubt skeptic could be considered a world view. There are so many issues going on today, I have opinions on most of them but my opinions are based on what makes sense to me.


Ken
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,968
10,837
77
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟867,272.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Like you and everybody else here; I’m convinced I already know the truth concerning God (even though I’ve always been open to the possibility I could be wrong; I’ve been wrong countless times in the past and will be wrong countless times in the future). I didn’t really come here looking for guidance or anything, I just came here because Timothyu invited me to express why I believe the way I do.
Jesus Christ is the way, the truth and the life. If you don't know Him, you are nowhere near knowing anything to do with the truth. One day you will be presented with the answers that faithful Christian have given you concerning Christ and the need to have a right attitude to Him, and then you will know that the consquences that will follow for you will because you decided not to listen. The whole of human history is leading to a day of Judgment where everyone will have to give an account of theirs lives to God. The big question for you is: what will you do when you find yourself standing before God and having to give an account of you life to Him?
 
Upvote 0

Andrewn

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
Site Supporter
Jul 4, 2019
5,846
4,331
-
✟747,327.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
God told Ezekiel that the people would not listen to him when he gave his inspired prophecies to them; but He told Ezekiel to give his prophecy, even though they won't listen to him,
God didn't tell me any prophecies to convey but rather to shut up and listen :).
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,968
10,837
77
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟867,272.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
How was his pain any different than the thousands of others hanging on crosses? Does God suffer differently? Or did He willingly die to show man's will is no match for God's will?
It was not the physical death or the pain of it that is the significant factor here. When He struggled with His Father in the Garden of Gethsemone, pleading that if there was any other way to avoid what was going to happen, for His Father to release Him from it, it was not the physical death of the cross, but it was the expectation that for the first time in eternity He would have to suffer the eternal wrath of His Father for the sin of all those who were to receive Him as Saviour, past present and future. Therefore it was not the physical pain that He suffered, but three hours of the eternal wrath of His Father that give Him the most anguish.

Once Jesus knew that He had totally satisfied the wrath of the Father and paid the full penalty, He gave up His life. The cross did not kill Him. He gave it up. That is why the soldiers were surprised that He had died so soon, because crucified people don't die after just three hours. It is significant that He went on the cross at 9am, and He had to die at 3pm because that is when all the Passover lambs were to be killed in preparation for the Passover. This is symbolic because Jesus is the eternal Passover lamb who was to be killed for the sin of mankind.
 
Upvote 0

Ken-1122

Newbie
Jan 30, 2011
13,574
1,792
✟233,210.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Does not even the Christ have an opposite?
On Earth everything is not opposite. Some things are opposite, some things are similar, but most things are somewhere in between.
How can you understand the wisdom and virtues of God's will without first experiencing the pitfalls of man's will. After that free will may determine which is preferable and the repentant are looked upon favourably having learned a lesson rather than just accepting it to possibly doubt later.
But the vast majority prefer the pitfalls of mans will; do you agree?
If God is all and we are all part of God, what is lost?
What do you mean when you say we are a part of God?
On this level we do have a minimal moral code to keep us from self destructing too fast and by nature should find such things abhorrent but at the same time we destroy what suits us to serve ourselves. So perhaps there is a more sane reasoning behind what little we can comprehend. In the meantime loving neighbour as self is a good rule to keep the wheels turning without major conflict.
So how does this justify the dead children?
True but where would the overall lesson be learned in the bigger picture. God could have made us 'perfect' from the start, but to make us of any use or individuality we needed a freewill app and sooner or later that free will would seek to rebel.
If we were morally perfect like God, we would never choose to rebel.
 
Upvote 0

Akita Suggagaki

Well-Known Member
Jul 20, 2018
10,277
7,364
70
Midwest
✟374,560.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
It wasn't the physical death that was significant. Jesus spent three hours on the cross suffering the eternal wrath of God, taking that penalty on Himself for all those who receive Him as Saviour.

That exactly is what I don't understand: God's "eternal wrath". That is a pretty bad wrath that requires such a death.. of himself yet.
 
Upvote 0

Akita Suggagaki

Well-Known Member
Jul 20, 2018
10,277
7,364
70
Midwest
✟374,560.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
at-
I was surprised to learn - only a few years ago, after being in churches for more than 50 years - that all we really have are theories as to the "why" of Jesus' death on the cross. I really appreciate John Duns Scotus' theory that's explained in this article:


From article:

At-One-Ment, Not Atonement
Sunday, January 21, 2018
Fr. Richard Rohr, OFM

Jesus of Nazareth: Week 2
At-One-Ment, Not Atonement
Sunday, January 21, 2018

The common reading of the Bible is that Jesus “died for our sins”—either to pay a debt to the devil (common in the first millennium) or to pay a debt to God (proposed by Anselm of Canterbury, 1033-1109). Franciscan philosopher and theologian John Duns Scotus (1266-1308) agreed with neither of these understandings.

Duns Scotus was not guided by the Temple language of debt, atonement, or blood sacrifice (understandably used by the Gospel writers and by Paul). He was inspired by the cosmic hymns in the first chapters of Colossians and Ephesians and the Prologue to John’s Gospel (1:1-18) and gave a theological and philosophical base to St. Francis’ deep intuitions of God’s love. While the Church has not rejected the Franciscan position, it has been a minority view.At-One-Ment, Not Atonement — Center for Action and Contemplation
At-One-ment begins to make more sense for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mkgal1
Upvote 0

mkgal1

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33
Site Supporter
Jun 22, 2007
27,338
7,348
California
✟573,733.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
At-One-ment begins to make more sense for me.
Father Rohr's article about the scapegoat also makes more sense to me as well:

From that article: As John puts it, “He will show the world how wrong it was about sin, about who was really in the right, and about true judgment” (John 16:8). This is what Jesus exposes and defeats on the cross. He did not come to change God’s mind about us. It did not need changing. Jesus came to change our minds about God—and about ourselves—and about where goodness and evil really lie. ~ The Scapegoat Mechanism — Center for Action and Contemplation
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,968
10,837
77
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟867,272.00
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
My parents were Christian, and I was raised in a Christian household. When I was young I was okay with believing what everybody I loved, and trusted told me, so accepting the God of my parents worked for me, even though I had never experienced God for myself. As I got older, my natural skepticism began to work against what I was taught to believe, so I decided to find God for myself. I did this by praying to God that he would save me, and reading the bible (with the goal of eventually reading it from cover to cover) every night before going to bed. Religious wise, this was the worse thing a skeptic like myself could have possibly done, had I never attempted to get saved, I probably would have been content with empty belief like so many other Christians have.
This shows that God has no grandchildren. So, your parents's faith could not be transferred to you. All they could have done was to teach you the ways of God and how to have a right attitude to Christ. But this would remain intellectual knowledge until the Holy Spirit did the work of conversion in you.

You cannot come to Christ by yourself. This is why all your efforts have been in vain. You were trying to come to God on your own terms and in your own way. What you missed is that the first step in coming to Christ is that you need to know and acknowledge that you are a totally depraved and hopeless sinner, deserving of hell. You do not deserve to have God save you, and there is nothing you can do of yourself to change God's mind about you. All you have gained through your parents' teaching is that you are a hopeless sinner with a Christian education.

After about 4 years of this with no communication from God, no signs of being saved, and constantly trying to justify atrocities and wrong doings because they were in the Bible, I was confused, exhausted, and frustrated by my failed attempts; so I gave up.
No surprises there!

I remember praying my last prayer to God telling him I will not be praying anymore but whenever he is ready for me, here I am. I didn’t stop immediately, I kept going to Church for a while, still professed to be Christian for a while because when you’ve invested your entire life in something, you don’t stop on the dime; especially considering many of my closest friends were Christian, and there were friends of mine that say they got saved because I invited them to my church. I guess I kinda felt like I was betraying them by walking away from what I introduced them to, but eventually I quit going to church as well. Leaving Christianity was the hardest thing I’ve ever done in my life.
You may have left "churchianity" but not Christianity, because you were never truly Christian in the first place. All you had was the Christian religion, giving lip service but knowing that there was nothing more inside of you. I think that you were less of an hypocrite for leaving it than remaining in it playing a role that was not really in your heart of hearts.

I’ve never really liked the term “atheist”, initially I considered myself agnostic, but after learning what an agnostic actually was I began to consider myself skeptic even though there is no difference between my skepticism and atheism definition wise. On my signature, I have atheist because skeptic was not an option.
I don't believe that you are a true atheist, and that you do believe in God, although on an intellectual basis. But true conversion to Christ is much more than this. It is a total transformation involving a new heart and spirit, and it is something that only God Himself, through the agency of the Holy Spirit, can do in you. It is not automatic. It has to be earnestly sought for with all your heart. It is not going to a church, walking the walk and talking the talk and pretending that you are a Christian. It is a total change of heart and spirit. The problem for you is that there is nothing you can do to achieve it. It is by the unmerited grace and mercy of God and His decision alone which will make the difference between whether He decides to transform you or leave you to face the judgment without Christ.

There are people who may tell you that all you have to do is to choose Christ and you will be automatically saved. I am not one of them. You have tried choosing Christ at a certain level, but you have known that something was missing and that just having religion and going to a church did not satisfy that feeling deep down in your heart that you were play acting and were not experiencing the real thing.

I spent two years in a Pentecostal church like that, and I told God that there was something missing. I knew all the religious stuff, but I did not know God on a personal level, and I didn't know how to get there. But I was determined to find out, and when I got to the point of absolute desperation I told God that I had to know Him personally or that I was going to give the whole thing away and live my life without religion at all.

As far as my world view, I don’t know if I have one; I doubt skeptic could be considered a world view. There are so many issues going on today, I have opinions on most of them but my opinions are based on what makes sense to me.
Having a right world view is dependent on knowing God on a personal level. You have to "meet" Him. I can't tell you how to do that because it is something that God has to do.

All I know is that I got out into the middle of a golf course one light, looked up at the stars and told God that I know He is within earshot of my voice wherever He is and I have come out to introduce myself to Him and would not be satisfied until I met Him personally. The next thing I knew was that I was all lit up inside like Times Square, and I just knew beyond doubt that God was real and He was right there with me. I would not have been surprised if Jesus had walked out from behind one of the trees and said, "Hi!" That was 51 years ago, and through all the ups and downs of my life since then, that reality has never left me.

When I got back among my Christian friends, they said that they knew something had changed in me. The Bible became a new book to me, and I started to see things in it that I have never seen before. Also, I started to hear God's voice in my thoughts, and it was a definite, characteristic voice among my own thoughts that I had never heard before. It was not an audible voice or a voice in my head. It was like my own thoughts but different in some way that I was able to recognise. This is in line with the Scripture, "My sheep hear my voice; they know Me and follow Me. They will not recognise the voice of a stranger and will not follow him."

I can't tell you how to meet God personally. You can't walk my journey. You have to seek Him for yourself. The Scripture says, "If you seek for Me with all your heart, you will find Me." God waited until I turned away from trying to seek Him through religion, and went with all my heart to Him directly. He told me that He was waiting all this time for me to do that, and that He responded when He saw that I was coming to Him with all my heart.

I went and read the biographies of all the men and women of God who were successful in their ministries and who won many for Christ. The common thread I saw was that that when they first came to Christ, they got alone with Him and sought him with all their hearts and would not give up until they met Him personally. Read John Bunyan's "Grace Abounding To the Chief of Sinners" to get an appreciation of the long journey he made until he received total assurance of the presence of God with him on a personal basis. One man went into his bedroom and would not come out until He had met God on a personal level. That was the level of his determination, and he was not disappointed. After several hours, he was totally transformed by the Holy Spirit and knew that God was totally real and came and fellowshiped with him on a personal level.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Andrewn
Upvote 0

Andrewn

Well-Known Member
CF Ambassadors
Site Supporter
Jul 4, 2019
5,846
4,331
-
✟747,327.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
My parents were Christian, and I was raised in a Christian household. When I was young I was okay with believing what everybody I loved, and trusted told me, so accepting the God of my parents worked for me, even though I had never experienced God for myself.
Thank you for sharing parts of your story. I, too, was raised in a Christian household. I'm sure each of our stories is precious to God.

As I got older, my natural skepticism began to work against what I was taught to believe, so I decided to find God for myself. I did this by praying to God that he would save me, and reading the bible (with the goal of eventually reading it from cover to cover) every night before going to bed. Religious wise, this was the worse thing a skeptic like myself could have possibly done, had I never attempted to get saved, I probably would have been content with empty belief like so many other Christians have. After about 4 years of this with no communication from God, no signs of being saved, and constantly trying to justify atrocities and wrong doings because they were in the Bible, I was confused, exhausted, and frustrated by my failed attempts; so I gave up.
Christians usually ask skeptics to read the Bible. You say this would be the worst possible advice. Is it bec you were reading OT?

I remember praying my last prayer to God telling him I will not be praying anymore but whenever he is ready for me, here I am. I didn’t stop immediately, I kept going to Church for a while, still professed to be Christian for a while because when you’ve invested your entire life in something, you don’t stop on the dime; especially considering many of my closest friends were Christian, and there were friends of mine that say they got saved because I invited them to my church. I guess I kinda felt like I was betraying them by walking away from what I introduced them to, but eventually I quit going to church as well.
I remember praying a similar prayer, telling God that he either didn't exist or didn't care, and that I wouldn't be praying anymore. Like you, and for similar reasons, I continued going to church. At this period of my life, I was lonely, so I started going to a home Bible study. And this is where God met me and saved me.

Leaving Christianity was the hardest thing I’ve ever done in my life.
This so precious to hear. Usually, one would say the hardest decision is getting married or getting divorced, taking a job or leaving a job, moving to a far place. But your most difficult decision is related to God.

I’ve never really liked the term “atheist”, initially I considered myself agnostic, but after learning what an agnostic actually was I began to consider myself skeptic even though there is no difference between my skepticism and atheism definition wise. On my signature, I have atheist because skeptic was not an option.
I guess it's better either hot or cold. God doesn't like being lukewarm. An agnostic is a person who simply doesn't care whether God exists or not. He wouldn't waste his time thinking.

As far as my world view, I don’t know if I have one; I doubt skeptic could be considered a world view. There are so many issues going on today, I have opinions on most of them but my opinions are based on what makes sense to me.
Would you mind sharing your opinion about the Bible and what you found to be offensive? When you prayed to God to save you, what made you think you weren't already saved? Were you in a very fundamentalist denomination? Why do you think you're not saved now? What is the definition of salvation?

Sorry for all the questions. I'm interested in your opinion and, of course, you don't need to explain anything that you don't want to. If you so choose you can send me a private message or respond in this thread.
 
Upvote 0

Ken-1122

Newbie
Jan 30, 2011
13,574
1,792
✟233,210.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
God gave them fair warning. If a father warns his child not to touch a hot stove, otherwise his hand will be burned, and the child touches the stove and burns his hand, does that mean that the father is punishing the child by getting his hand burned, or has the child suffered the consequences of his disobedience? God told Adam and Eve if they ate of the fruit of the tree, they would die. They disobeyed, and eventually, they both died. Did God punish them, or did they suffer the consequences of their disobedience?

I think there was a little more involve in the Adam and Eve story than your stove analogy. If I recall correctly, there was a serpent involved, and God who knows all and see all was aware what his enemy was doing.
But to answer your question; if I saw my enemy trying to trick my children into touching a hot stove, I would intervene and keep my enemy away from my children. What would you do?

Read the ending chapters of Job, and see God's answer to your question. Start with God's statement: "Who is he who darkens counsel without knowledge?"
How about if you read Job and answer my question.

If you are referring to Joshua's conquest of Canaan, you need to note that God's instruction was to "subdue the people". There was no direct instruction to slaughter them. That was Joshua's decision.
I was referring to Moses and Saul.

Pharaoh was given every opportunity to comply with what Moses instructed him. He had free will like anyone else. It was only when he resolutely set his own will against Moses that his heart became hardened.
So are you saying God did not harden Pharaoh’s heart?

He suffered the consequences of his own willfulness and disobedience to the command of God through Moses. Pharaoh was clearly told of the consequences at each stage, but it was his own disobedience, pride, and self-will that brought the consequences upon him and his subjects. If he had complied right at the start and let the people of Israel go, none of the consequences would have happened and he would have been blessed by God for his obedience, instead of having his nation and army destroyed, and losing his life into the bargain.
My problem is not with Pharaoh, but with the decision to kill innocent children in order to change his mind. Again; those children did not need to die, putting all the Egyptians in a deep sleep would have accomplished everything without death.

You are mistaken in that you are presuming that everything that happened in the Old Testament was instigated by God. Much of the Old Testament history was written for our education. Much of what you are mentioning here are the acts of men and not of God, to show the consequences of acts of evil, and the blessings that come through doing good.
So are you saying what Moses did in the 31 chapter of Numbers was not via instructions from God?

God did not create a race of programmable robots. He created men with free will to do what is in their own best interests. You are forgetting that no one will get away with anything, and there will be a day of Judgment where every single human being will be judged on their actions while they were living their lives. The conclusion to all these things is not here yet.
I would rather be a programmable robot forced to do good for 80 years (or however long I live) with a guarantee ticket to Heaven for eternity, than be given free will for 80 years with a chance of going to Hell because of it.
 
Upvote 0

Ken-1122

Newbie
Jan 30, 2011
13,574
1,792
✟233,210.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Jesus Christ is the way, the truth and the life. If you don't know Him, you are nowhere near knowing anything to do with the truth. One day you will be presented with the answers that faithful Christian have given you concerning Christ and the need to have a right attitude to Him, and then you will know that the consquences that will follow for you will because you decided not to listen. The whole of human history is leading to a day of Judgment where everyone will have to give an account of theirs lives to God. The big question for you is: what will you do when you find yourself standing before God and having to give an account of you life to Him?
I would ask him where was he when I spent all of those years searching for him. For him to remain hidden all of that time then to come out of hiding and present himself in a way that I can recognize only after it is too late, I believe it would be unfair to judge me harshly because of it.
 
Upvote 0