The One True God

[cvanwey]

I can still remember one of my earliest doubts to Christianity, (a few years ago now)... I would wrestle with this general concept, within this newer video...

I would also ponder the following.... Would 'truth' be segregated in such a way?:

Incredibly Detailed Map Of The World’s Religions

I don't really have any specific questions, as the premise in both the video and the given map seem to speak for themselves. Furthermore, 'a picture is worth a thousand words.'

This post is more meant to merely shed light to that of a person in doubt. It is just one, in the many, of other combined 'thought tanks', which seem to place the concept of Christianity into question.

Thank you in advance for reading, watching, responding, and/or other!

 

[Mark Quayle]

I can still remember one of my earliest doubts to Christianity, (a few years ago now)... I would wrestle with this general concept, within this newer video...

I would also ponder the following.... Would 'truth' be segregated in such a way?:

Incredibly Detailed Map Of The World’s Religions

I don't really have any specific questions, as the premise in both the video and the given map seem to speak for themselves. Furthermore, 'a picture is worth a thousand words.'

This post is more meant to merely shed light to that of a person in doubt. It is just one, in the many, of other combined 'thought tanks', which seem to place the concept of Christianity into question.

Thank you in advance for reading, watching, responding, and/or other!

I have noticed that this is one of the favorites of those who wish to disprove the existence of God, as well as those who wish to discredit Christianity in particular.

While the Bible does say that "By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another", the implication that we will all be on board with the same theology as each other is a bit illogical. In the most basic form of the Gospel, yes, we should, but even that is open to some particulars, yet I agree --in fact I insist-- that the virulence with which such things are argued is wrong.

But I myself find some things people claim, who I honestly believe are my brothers in Christ, I have to oppose, because they seem to me to acquire glory to the creature rather than to ascribe it to the Creator. I do bite my tongue, and try to answer in the best way I can, rather than how I in my flesh would rather do.

But there is a time for everything.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

I have no speakers.

 

[Rescued One]

How is that more loving than the kind of love Jesus and His Apostles or someone like Jim Elliot showed? What can an atheist or agnostic offer me?

 

[cvanwey]

I have noticed that this is one of the favorites of those who wish to disprove the existence of God, as well as those who wish to discredit Christianity in particular.

While the Bible does say that "By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another", the implication that we will all be on board with the same theology as each other is a bit illogical. In the most basic form of the Gospel, yes, we should, but even that is open to some particulars

I gather the point is that all should know whom the 'real God' is, without the need for human intervention. Sure, the details may differ from one believer to the next, but we should at least reach consensus on which God is 'the one.' God instead requires fallible humans to spread His message?

yet I agree --in fact I insist-- that the virulence with which such things are argued is wrong.

How so? What needs to change exactly?

 

[cvanwey]

How is that more loving than the kind of love Jesus and His Apostles or someone like Jim Elliot showed?

Can you please elaborate?

What can an atheist or agnostic offer me?

What does an 'atheist' or 'agnostic' need to offer you, and why? I'm more concerned if what I believe is actually true, verses what it may 'offer me'?

 

[Rescued One]

Can you please elaborate?



What does an 'atheist' or 'agnostic' need to offer you, and why? I'm more concerned if what I believe is actually true, verses what it may 'offer me'?

The words are self-explanatory. Without faith it is impossible to please Him.

 

[Chriliman]

I can still remember one of my earliest doubts to Christianity, (a few years ago now)... I would wrestle with this general concept, within this newer video...

I would also ponder the following.... Would 'truth' be segregated in such a way?:

Incredibly Detailed Map Of The World’s Religions

I don't really have any specific questions, as the premise in both the video and the given map seem to speak for themselves. Furthermore, 'a picture is worth a thousand words.'

This post is more meant to merely shed light to that of a person in doubt. It is just one, in the many, of other combined 'thought tanks', which seem to place the concept of Christianity into question.

Thank you in advance for reading, watching, responding, and/or other!

In general I’d agree that the term “Christianity” is just a label that even Jesus wouldn’t recognize when he was alive. What’s more important is living our lives in such a way as be able to put others’ needs before our own, which can yield peace and joy in those around us and ourselves. This “Godly” behavior doesn’t necessarily come naturally and must be taught and practiced.

 

[Greengardener]

I found myself wondering about this, and what came to mind is that it's when we are at our very end, the end of our resources, the end of our lives, the end of life as we know it that we begin to realize our need for the One True God. We can get through our American life, easy as it is, without thinking much about needing help that is beyond ourselves, and we can fool ourselves into believing that somehow all this happened without this One True God. But when we get down to it, I wonder if we really do know our need of Him. And His desire for us is clear in Scriptures. Offered for what it's worth to you.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I gather the point is that all should know whom the 'real God' is, without the need for human intervention. Sure, the details may differ from one believer to the next, but we should at least reach consensus on which God is 'the one.' God instead requires fallible humans to spread His message?



How so? What needs to change exactly?

More often than I want to admit to, for example, I hear the word "Satanic" applied to a theology that one doesn't even understand, because of presumptions not only about what that theology holds to, but even about their own. On my mind particularly heavily tonight is the predestination vs free will debate I have been involved in for more than twenty years. I grow tired of those who think the two do not "work together as God intended". But I need to hold my tongue.

And yes, God sends fallible humans to spread his message. I love the paradoxical fact that we are held to account for our very words, and yet we are none of us capable of sounding the depths of what God has done, nevermind to convey such things to others, yet we are both commanded and in fact DRIVEN to do so. ("The lion has roared --who will not be afraid? The Lord has spoken --who can but prophesy?" Amos 3:8)

 

[cvanwey]

I found myself wondering about this, and what came to mind is that it's when we are at our very end, the end of our resources, the end of our lives, the end of life as we know it that we begin to realize our need for the One True God. We can get through our American life, easy as it is, without thinking much about needing help that is beyond ourselves, and we can fool ourselves into believing that somehow all this happened without this One True God. But when we get down to it, I wonder if we really do know our need of Him. And His desire for us is clear in Scriptures. Offered for what it's worth to you.

I don't see the relevancy in this response, to my OP. However, just so you may be aware, many, on their death beds, might also be praying to their opposing 'one true god', for whom they were indoctrinated; which is often times segregated by a geographical region - (link provided from the OP again below).

Incredibly Detailed Map Of The World’s Religions

 

[cvanwey]

The words are self-explanatory. Without faith it is impossible to please Him.

This lends absolutely nothing to the thread. But thank anyways.

 

[Resha Caner]

As you indicate in your OP, you're not really asking one question but many. That makes it hard to answer. Still, the theme seems to settle around why the "true god" would only be known in the area of the Mediterranean and not elsewhere … and maybe secondarily why God would punish someone for what they can't know and for being sincere about what they know.

First of all, there is a tendency for some to adhere to an instance of a text rather than the message of the text. The KJV-only movement is an example of that (Christianity's sad duplication of the Koran-in-Arabic-only principle) - believing the Gospel can only be conveyed by the KJV.

Second, don't fall into the trap of treating foreign cultures as monolithic. For every Indian Hindu, Chinese Daoist, or Native-American Wakan Tanka, there was also an Indian, Chinese, or Native-American who was disputing those beliefs. One of my favorite examples comes from the Ottoman Empire where a Muslim Ulama suddenly, for reasons unknown, began denying Mohamed and preaching Christ. Of course he didn't last long - beheaded - but it produced enough of a stir, enough historical curiosity, that historians have tried to figure out where the Ulama got his sources from. It remains a mystery.

Third, there also many indications in the sources of foreign cultures of very Christlike religious concepts floating about.

So, it is not the case that to be saved one must recite the "believer's prayer" in the King's English (as many evangelicals seem to indicate). God knows who are his, wherever they may be … the converse of that being we don't know who belongs to God and where they might be.

What, then, is the value of evangelism? Maybe God doesn't need us at all. No doubt 18th-19th century imperialists had the attitude shown in your video, and no doubt the attitude continues. But the purpose of evangelism is not so much to tell savages what they don't know, but to support our brothers and sisters around the world who live in cultures dominated by Hinduism, Daoism, or whatever it may be.

 

[cvanwey]

As you indicate in your OP, you're not really asking one question but many. That makes it hard to answer.

This does seem to be the case

Still, the theme seems to settle around why the "true god" would only be known in the area of the Mediterranean and not elsewhere

Yes. Why would God rely upon fallible humans, and their fallible language to spread 'truth'? Maybe instead convey the message directly to all humans equally. Seems as if that is all we have left behind - (i.e.) 'Books'; aside also from the countless amounts of anecdotal claims of response for all differing god(s), spirits, entities, angels, etc... which seem to further confuse, verses confirm.

If God is truth, why limit this truth to one region alone? And then 'hope' it will get to the others 'just fine.' Only to find that His message will get altered countless amounts of times internally almost immediately, as well as the original transcribes being lost, the surviving copies re-translated and added to, other, other, other... And further, see that differing regions have differing primary beliefs, still in place, as seen from the map link I provided in the OP.

Please see below for a later statement you made, which seems interesting... In red

… and maybe secondarily why God would punish someone for what they can't know and for being sincere about what they know.

Well, the 'debate' continues... Does God 'punish' those, not in the know, or not? Goes right back to what is said above. God allows for humans to deliver the fallible message, rather than doing it Himself. Humans muck it up, repeatedly, as evidence by the practically uncountable denominations within Christianity alone - (you included).

First of all, there is a tendency for some to adhere to an instance of a text rather than the message of the text. The KJV-only movement is an example of that (Christianity's sad duplication of the Koran-in-Arabic-only principle) - believing the Gospel can only be conveyed by the KJV.

This response further demonstrates what I am eluding to above.

One of my favorite examples comes from the Ottoman Empire where a Muslim Ulama suddenly, for reasons unknown, began denying Mohamed and preaching Christ. Of course he didn't last long - beheaded - but it produced enough of a stir, enough historical curiosity, that historians have tried to figure out where the Ulama got his sources from. It remains a mystery.

This was touched upon within the video... The 'savages' already knew...

Can you image if everyone already knows the 'one true God' without first being told of such the 'one true God' ahead of time? You would then have countless 'mysterious stories' and not just one, which possibly may or may not be accounted for....

Third, there also many indications in the sources of foreign cultures of very Christlike religious concepts floating about.

So? And?

So, it is not the case that to be saved one must recite the "believer's prayer" in the King's English (as many evangelicals seem to indicate). God knows who are his, wherever they may be … the converse of that being we don't know who belongs to God and where they might be.

If we 'don't know', then maybe the Evangelicals are correct? Or maybe not? The point being, if God delivered the message, and did not leave the 'truth/messages" up to fallible humans, you would not see such a divided current world map, as demonstrated in the OP.

What, then, is the value of evangelism? Maybe God doesn't need us at all.

If God exists, in the way some of you guys believe He exists, He most certainly does not need you or I He existed before you, and will exist after you are gone. He does not require your presence in His heaven, but maybe He wants it? A suitable question might then be, why does He like to hide while claiming omnipresence - another point mentioned in the video.

No doubt 18th-19th century imperialists had the attitude shown in your video, and no doubt the attitude continues. But the purpose of evangelism is not so much to tell savages what they don't know, but to support our brothers and sisters around the world who live in cultures dominated by Hinduism, Daoism, or whatever it may be.

I'm sure there exists many agendas lurking out there

 

[Resha Caner]

Why would God rely upon fallible humans, and their fallible language to spread 'truth'? Maybe instead convey the message directly to all humans equally. Seems as if that is all we have left behind - (i.e.) 'Books'; aside also from the countless amounts of anecdotal claims of response for all differing god(s), spirits, entities, angels, etc... which seem to further confuse, verses confirm.

If God is truth, why limit this truth to one region alone? And then 'hope' it will get to the others 'just fine.' Only to find that His message will get altered countless amounts of times internally almost immediately, as well as the original transcribes being lost, the surviving copies re-translated and added to, other, other, other.

My point was, I don't think it works this way.​

Well, the 'debate' continues... Does God 'punish' those, not in the know, or not?

The debate continues because no one knows or can find out. But we don't need to know. I believe God is fair, and therefore every person will be judged fairly. If you don't believe that … OK. I think we've touched on the fact that it doesn't matter for you either. The more important issue is finding God.​

So? And?

The idea that someone somewhere else knows about Christ apart from meeting a European missionary is more than a sarcastic video. There are some historical teasers that it may actually happen.​

A suitable question might then be, why does He like to hide ...

I don't think he's hiding.

 

[cvanwey]

My point was, I don't think it works this way.

Great. So apparently, He does directly communicate with individuals, prior to such individuals hearing of the 'One True God.' The reason I can state this, with confidence, is because you mentioned a 'mysterious story' about it. Which means, this is one way God must communicate. See below...

The idea that someone somewhere else knows about Christ apart from meeting a European missionary is more than a sarcastic video. There are some historical teasers that it may actually happen.

'teasers', or 'facts'? Furthermore, did they really know of the 'One True God' without any prior inquiry??? And if so, why not do this to all, as opposed to only a very very small and very very select handful, and furnish them? And with today's technology, and increased level of communications, why is this not already 'common knowledge'?

I don't think he's hiding.

Great, where do I find Him then? I sought after Him for decades, only to come up with the big 'goose egg'.

 

[Resha Caner]

'teasers', or 'facts'? Furthermore, did they really know of the 'One True God' without any prior inquiry??? And if so, why not do this to all, as opposed to only a very very small and very very select handful, and furnish them? And with today's technology, and increased level of communications, why is this not already 'common knowledge'?

I don't know. That's why I left it at "teasers". I didn't want to overstate the case.​

Great, where do I find Him then? I sought after Him for decades, only to come up with the big 'goose egg'.

If this weren't an Internet conversation, I'd invite you to have coffee. Given it is, it's a much trickier conversation. Regardless, it essentially begins with trust.

 

[cvanwey]

I don't know. That's why I left it at "teasers". I didn't want to overstate the case.​

But, you see my friend, you were the one whom brought forth this case, as an example. And now, when I ask you about it, you shy away completely?

One of my main points was to demonstrate that God seems to rely upon fallible humans, and their fallible human writings (i.e.) the Bible, as a way of 'effective' communication. But somehow instead, we have literally many many many denominations, within the 'Christian' population alone. Many of which, disagree with one another irreconcilably. You are part of this fold.

But you then state this is not how Christ communicates. Okay. Let's go with that. Moving forward...

This means, again, according to (you), there exists [a] case, or [some] cases, where God revealed His truth to individuals, >prior< to their awareness of the "one true God". And now, when I ask about you it, here we are

Suspect?​

If this weren't an Internet conversation, I'd invite you to have coffee. Given it is, it's a much trickier conversation. Regardless, it essentially begins with trust.

I would love to have coffee with you, even though I don't really drink coffee. But with all due respect, if you had a sufficient answer to my question, I gather you may have been 'chomping at the bit' to provide it here.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Yes. Why would God rely upon fallible humans, and their fallible language to spread 'truth'? Maybe instead convey the message directly to all humans equally. Seems as if that is all we have left behind - (i.e.) 'Books'; aside also from the countless amounts of anecdotal claims of response for all differing god(s), spirits, entities, angels, etc... which seem to further confuse, verses confirm.

If God is truth, why limit this truth to one region alone? And then 'hope' it will get to the others 'just fine.' Only to find that His message will get altered countless amounts of times internally almost immediately, as well as the original transcribes being lost, the surviving copies re-translated and added to, other, other, other... And further, see that differing regions have differing primary beliefs, still in place, as seen from the map link I provided in the OP.

For what it is worth, specially since "miracle" seems by far to be the exception, God uses means to accomplish his ends. Your question seems much like that of others to assume that God wishes to convince as many people as possible of the truth. But that isn't what the Bible teaches.

 

[Resha Caner]

But, you see my friend, you were the one whom brought forth this case, as an example. And now, when I ask you about it, you shy away completely?

Being honest is shying away? Am I shying away, or is it that you don't trust my answer?

I'm being honest regarding what I, as a historian, think the text of that story can tell us. The Ulama was beheaded, so he didn't live to tell more of his tale. I can only know so much about people I've never met in person … and given my faith and where I live the odds of me meeting someone who has been completely isolated from Western Christianity are pretty small. There are the Biblical stories … but again, you're not going to trust them.

Had he lived, gained safe transport out of Turkey, and written a best-selling book for you to read, would you trust it more? If so, maybe check out something like the documentary The Green Prince. I think there are other stories out there like it.​

I would love to have coffee with you, even though I don't really drink coffee. But with all due respect, if you had a sufficient answer to my question, I gather you may have been 'chomping at the bit' to provide it here.

What you should be suspicious of is someone who implies an Internet post will suddenly reveal God to you. Again, what do you trust? I would venture the answer is not me.