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.
To some extent you are correct in stating what I believe. I do agree that second hand accounts of what God is is useless. What I think when I say this is probably much different from what you think though, such are the wonders of communication. One thing I learned when I came to hear God speak is that hearing the truth about God has <=-1 to do with hearing truth come from God Himself.
I don't believe the Bible is ambiguous evidence of God, rather it is a black and white account of God's involvement with certain people through history, and obviously the book itself isn't proof of God otherwise everyone would believe upon reading it. Rather, it serves the purpose well for those who choose to use it well and there are many people who can explain how the book actually makes God less ambiguous and better defined.
I think you could be getting confused by speaking to Christians since they aren't the one and only Word of God made flesh (John 1:1-14), therefore all our words are imperfect. Look to Jesus' words though and see if they aren't perfect. Look to the Holy Bible and see if the words aren't perfect. This is the problem you have with trying to ascertain truth from your fellow man, we are all just little God-like things running around trying to be God demonstrating our inherent imperfection to each other.
This is why it's a tactic I try to avoid, you can't actually describe God with words. The Bible records God's interaction with people, it doesn't actually describe His nature because an infinite someone cannot be sufficiently described with words.
Even you or I can't be sufficiently described with words. All the religious belief that has attempted to describe God suddenly makes sense when you come to hear God's voice and realize who He is, until that point you are just stuck with your imagination trying to picture this flying spaghetti monster.
No, the Bible teaches us who God is by showing us His nature, His response to certain situations and the types of decisions He makes.
This is one way we can come to be familiar with God's nature that when we become spiritually perceptive we can pick God's voice from among the chorus of lies trying to sway our beliefs away from the truth.
We draw associations to make sense of the world, this is the human plight to understand the world we live in. I think what you're saying about those who make up their own image of God could quite well be indulging in idolatry.
See if they have scripture to back up their claims about God being male/female/non-gendered and white supremest or the provider of riches, and whether the scripture is being twisted out of it's original context. The people whose seed falls amongst thorns really do have a tendency to twist scripture out of context because the way they read the Bible is to find proof of their beliefs. There is no humility there, they are actually telling God what He should be saying and these are also the ones in John 15.
That demonstrates a fear of God exists even in those who don't know the God of Israel. There's plenty of times God has been put up against a false god and He came out on top. Same can't be said for god against god I don't think, their house is a shambles. As for God being in charge of every facet of existence, from rain to drought, I do tend to believe He is. The reason why there is flooding and drought in various parts of the word? No idea. Possibly due to geography especially the destruction of rain forest for pasture I suspect would have an impact on global weather stability. I'm not an expert in weather, I do believe Elijah in 1 Kings 17 had been speaking God's will when God said He would cease the rain.
Don't presume this is so. I don't disbelieve these gods exist, I just don't trust them.
And really, it isn't me who you think is driving this division, it is Jesus the Christ who claims to be the son of God. You either believe He is the Lord, a liar or a lunatic. I don't see any other opinion you could have about Him.
That doesn't answer the question, why is skepticism valuable. Just because everyone has disagreements does not substantiate skepticism. You happen to have disagreements because you are skeptical.
Interesting, does the world revolve around you and only you? Maybe one day you will actually see that it revolves around God, as it ought to. Some people just can't manage to accept this so they deny it. I'm interested to discover the motive behind this, hence why I asked you.
Right there: do you expect that when you believe you will have the same faith as someone else? Why would you think so?
Yes I would. If however I lived after you had existed and people had given their accounts of witnessing your unassisted flight or mind reading, I would believe so unless there was proof that it was a hoax.
I understand such proof doesn't exist in the case of Jesus, do you happen to have some proof against Jesus?
Don't you believe animals can communicate? I talk with dogs and they listen and talk back. Not with words mind you, but you can tell what they think about this and that.
This is good, actually a bone with meat on it. I'm pretty sure even those with faith in their religion, even those of the Islamic religion would have some skepticism when someone says that.
It could very well be to do with the twisting of scripture to support a belief.
What I'm getting at though, which you seem to be evading, is why do you think being skeptical about God is a good thing? Is there some sort of perceived risk if you were to acknowledge God?
Ah, we are getting somewhere. You like to be correct do you? I am thinking that might be what motivates you to deny God until you've had sufficient proof that makes Him undeniable. Is this an accurate assertion?
That would be marvy. But, it hasn't happened.
God is not the type to entertain mockers, perhaps that is why He hasn't spoken to you. Maybe one day if you can manage to stop blaming Him for what others have done, you might be able to give Him the respect He deserves.Again, I will point to the dizzying number of interpretations of the Bible, and suggest that no, the words in the Bible, and the words of Jesus are far from perfect.
Hi JGG, great to hear from you, I see there's not much point going on with a reply like this, so I'll just make a quick comment about one thing that stands out:
God is not the type to entertain mockers, perhaps that is why He hasn't spoken to you. Maybe one day if you can manage to stop blaming Him for what others have done, you might be able to give Him the respect He deserves.
Well you can get furious and feel all those things if you really think it is somehow good to do so. From my perspective you just seem to be unable or unwilling to think about what the Holy Bible says or even what Jesus says, and the only reason you've given me is because other people seem to disagree about the meaning they derive from it. Then you go on to say that God is a vast unimaginable concept and yet you seem to wonder why people don't agree about Him? That's quite a different matter from saying what He has said in the Bible is unreliable.When I was 21, my church declared me a heretic, and my family abandoned me in favour of the church. I moved to a new city, started school, and spent years searching for God. However, without people whispering in my ear, I had to figure things out for myself, and hope that God would give me a sign, or simply give me faith. It just didn't happen. So I started to look for God among other ideas, and my concept of God just got larger, and more expansive, and vague, and ultimately contradictory to the point where the concept was too big to keep hold of, and I admitted to myself that I just didn't know anymore. I also couldn't say that I believed in any of these things, and remain honest. I found a certain joy in finding meaning in the existence I could be confident I had, rather than the existence I wished was there, but could never know. I neither blame God for my idiot siblings, nor do I credit God for the vastness of philosophical thought. There is no need to.
Then my wife died, and not long after that, my mother too, both from cancer.
Now reasonably, this would be the point in someone's life where they look to heaven, and ask of God: "why?" But I didn't, and I don't. It is much simpler to say: Good and bad things happen to everyone, and that's just the way things go. My concept was too big, and too uncertain to say that God had a hand in it. So while some people find comfort in God having control over everything, and doing everything for a reason we couldn't fathom, I found comfort in the idea that "God" wasn't "doing" anything. Nobody was being punished, there was no great significane, or reason behind it. The variables that lead to the deaths of my loved ones were far too numerous to try to cast any sort of blame on anything. Bad things just happen, often for no reason. There's no reason to bring God into the equation. I am still very comfortable with the non-explanatory explanation.
However, the flip side is that all the good things in my life, all of the positive things that have happened, have all happened because of hard work, and good circumstance. There is no reason to inject God into that either. Good things happen to people too. I don't feel the need to thank some God for my son, or my job, or the time I had with my wife. Afterall, I had a pretty big part in all of those things, and typically deserve about half of the credit. Sometimes good things happen because we work for them, sometimes good things just happen because they happen. There's no reason to bring God into the equation.
I don't "reject" God because I blame God for something, or anything. I reject your God concept because I don't see any need for it, and it doesn't make sense to me. I very simply have no reason to accept it. To say that I blame a God I don't believe in, for anything has logical problems right off the bat. I'm not angry with God, afterall at the moment I see it as nothing more than a concept, or an idea. I see no reason to be upset at ideas.
However, I'm basically furious with Christians, and you've just demonstrated why. You don't actually know me. You don't actually know my motivations, or my thinking process. I've tried to explain why I'm skeptical. I've done everything to explain as honestly as I can why I don't believe. I've even demonstrated my train of thought, and to do so without being too offensive. In the end, you've ignored everything I've said, and countered with "you're lying, you reject God because you blame Him for something."
You try to tell me what I think, and what I feel, and when I tell you that you're wrong you claim that I'm dishonest.
Don't get me wrong, I understand why you have to interpret me the way you do. I understand that it would be next to impossible for you to see reality the way I do, or to even begin to understand my position. However, that doesn't mean I'm not perfectly justified in being upset, and offended by your accusations. One should be able to understand why the vast, literally unimaginable concept of God is difficult to accept on just someone's personal testimony (or on the varying, contradicting personal testimonies of billions), and accept this without calling the unbeliever a liar.
Well you can get furious and feel all those things if you really think it is somehow good to do so. From my perspective you just seem to be unable or unwilling to think about what the Holy Bible says or even what Jesus says, and the only reason you've given me is because other people seem to disagree about the meaning they derive from it.
Then you go on to say that God is a vast unimaginable concept and yet you seem to wonder why people don't agree about Him? That's quite a different matter from saying what He has said in the Bible is unreliable.
That's all I meant when I said you are blaming God for what others have done, I don't see any reason to derive the meaning you have from the comment I made except that you're venting here to me a bunch of thoughts that plague your mind.
You know, value is truly subjective. As a child I had no concept of the value of money since I'd never really used it. As a young adult my life was fixed around money, since I didn't have much of it. As an older adult I never worry about money since there's nothing I need so much I can't afford. So money being one tangible asset has a subjective value depending on supply and demand. I think the same could be said about the Bible, if you were wanting to know the truth about God it would be quite valuable, but according to your current attitude toward God, the truth about God has no value to you. That's what I think anyway, perhaps you think you have a different reason for devaluing the Bible.I've been more than willing to think about it, I was a Christian for 21 years. I believed in it at the time. I don't see any value in it now.
Well it's quite clearly the authority on YHWH, Jesus Christ, Israel and Christianity. You want to learn about another god, you need to find the source of information which that god has chosen to convey himself through. Some gods just use the mind for this, there's no written doctrine, it's all taught through spiritual communication.My first problem is that I see no reason to hold the Bible as any sort of authority on anything really. Who is to say that it's not just a book written by a bunch of guys who dreamt up a "God" and wrote about Him, making declarations on His behalf, and condemning their enemies and people they don't like? Seeing other religions pop up in the past few centuries who have done exactly that, I don't see why that would be unimaginable. We still hear from people who claim to speak for God, even some who have claimed to be the second coming. All of these people are dismissed. Why should I assume that the people who wrote the Bible are any different than all of these?
I think you are missing a crucial piece of the puzzle that would put it in perspective, I'm not sure I can just explain it in a brief paragraph, but it all has to do with the existence of godly spirits who have eternal life, who all have an interest in humanity for one reason or another. The Holy Spirit is the one which Jesus received upon His baptism, and is the spirit that all His disciples receive upon their baptism. Other spirits don't require baptism to receive them, most of them just muscle their way in and take possession of the host even without the host realizing, but those who are spiritually aware can see it has happened.It's an alternate problem (I'm allowed to have more than one), but still the same idea. If it was simply people exchanging ideas on what God could be, then this wouldn't be a problem. This problem lies in the fact that every theist, in every theist denomination, of every theist religion assumes that they possess special knowledge of the singular truth to what God actually is, and dismisses all others as false, and a lie. So if their "singular truth" disagrees with the "singular truth" of every other theist organization, why should I believe that any of them are true? It's not just that theists can't agree on the meaning behind the Bible, but that they can't even agree on which holy book is actually meaningful, or what God is, or what God wants.
That's a question I'm not sure how to answer because you've done something that causes an oxymoron - taking a holy book away which is the foundation for Christianity. So if I had not read that book and learned who Jesus is, I'd probably have no way to know what happened during Jesus' lifetime or what I must do, since it is passed as Chinese Whispers through generations of believers at best. That is not what has happened though, the records have been written and preserved as eye-witness accounts from the horses mouth (as far as New testament and some of the Old testament goes).If we take holy books out of the equation (as we would never agree on which one, if any, is true), why should I assume that you have knowledge of God which is superior to every Muslim, every Jew, every Hindu, every Mormon, every Scientologist, or every Christian that disagrees with you? More to the point, why should I assume that you have knowledge of God which is superior to mine?
I have assumed since your commentSo what, precisely, do you assume I "blame" God (which I don't believe in) for?
Matthew 7:21
21 Not everyone who calls out to me, Lord! Lord! will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Only those who actually do the will of my Father in heaven will enter.
I spend a lot of time wondering how and why people's beliefs can be so different and so strange.
Well, here's my problem with that. Different people interpret the Bible differently, and the various visions of God are often drastically different. it is impossible for an outsider to realistically pick and choose which "Christian" is presenting God correctly
Hi BleedingHeart, nice to meet you. It's not so much what an atheist believes that bothers me as a "theist", but that the opinionated ones actively encourage other people to rebel against their maker. Clearly they all have problems with accepting Him for who He is (and strictly speaking, even the majority of "theists" could be described like this), but it's not fair to lead others into the same snare that will ultimately put you at odds with the one who has consistently granted our existence.Personally I'm an atheist but I'm not a very good liar and I cannot manipulate people. The reason many theists condemn us is because we do not believe there are invisible men in the sky. That's how it goes when you boil it down.
I really hate argument with no apparent goal, it's such a waste of time.
Still, your attitude in this post isn't rude at all, though I think it is less of an inquisitive heart you have than is required when you are seeking truth about matters pertaining to God. I think this is what we mean by having your eyes closed.
You know, value is truly subjective. As a child I had no concept of the value of money since I'd never really used it. As a young adult my life was fixed around money, since I didn't have much of it. As an older adult I never worry about money since there's nothing I need so much I can't afford. So money being one tangible asset has a subjective value depending on supply and demand. I think the same could be said about the Bible, if you were wanting to know the truth about God it would be quite valuable, but according to your current attitude toward God, the truth about God has no value to you. That's what I think anyway, perhaps you think you have a different reason for devaluing the Bible.
Well it's quite clearly the authority on YHWH, Jesus Christ, Israel and Christianity.
I think you are missing a crucial piece of the puzzle that would put it in perspective, I'm not sure I can just explain it in a brief paragraph, but it all has to do with the existence of godly spirits who have eternal life, who all have an interest in humanity for one reason or another.
That's a question I'm not sure how to answer because you've done something that causes an oxymoron - taking a holy book away which is the foundation for Christianity. So if I had not read that book and learned who Jesus is, I'd probably have no way to know what happened during Jesus' lifetime or what I must do, since it is passed as Chinese Whispers through generations of believers at best. That is not what has happened though, the records have been written and preserved as eye-witness accounts from the horses mouth (as far as New testament and some of the Old testament goes).
I have assumed since your comment
"Again, I will point to the dizzying number of interpretations of the Bible, and suggest that no, the words in the Bible, and the words of Jesus are far from perfect."
That you think the problem of religious disagreements is due to God having not done well enough in His construction of the Bible. Is this correct?
Anyone holding a sign up to the world which says "God hates f*gs" is not demonstrating an ounce of Christendom, they have take a provocative verse which identifies a plank in someone's eye (a lot of people have this plank in their eye), and they go taking a scripture like this one "“Whom the Lord loves He chastens.” (Heb. 12:6,7)", turning it into their right to condemn people in public! Now, ask yourself even though you don't know the Holy Spirit personally, does this sound like an activity Jesus would tell you to do, or does it seem feasible that this church has a false teacher who has been convinced by a god being an enemy of Jesus to go out and make a mockery of His church? And if you had the spiritual capacity to identify this activity as being of an enemy spirit, what would you, as a Christian, actually do about it? Would you bomb their church as they bomb abortion clinics? I'm not sure what other Christians do about it, if anything, but the Holy Spirit grieves over these slaves to sin and would that any come to repentance. Sadly though, the Holy Spirit is not the most intrusive spirit in the world and He often gets shoved away when He comes to correct a person who has a hard heart. Then a verse like this becomes apparent: "2 He cuts off every branch of mine that doesn’t produce fruit, and he prunes the branches that do bear fruit so they will produce even more." - no wonder these false teachers get more and more contradictory to the common sense application of the Bible - they have been cut off from the Holy Spirit! They aren't now teaching truth by the Holy Spirit whose intent is for everyone to come to the light, they are teaching lies from the enemy whose intent is to turn everyone away from Christianity. This is the parable of the sower, though many will hear the truth, will receive the word into their hearts, their hearts just aren't fertile enough to grow the seed into a productive vine (this is all metaphorical speech for getting the best set of personal values which will turn you into a person fit for God's kingdom). These false teachers are the ones with shallow soil, as soon as they are tempted they fall away.
Being Christian doesn't make you immune to the enemy, it makes you responsible for your decisions. What it does do is give you the confidence to stand before Jesus and say "Lord, save me from the justice I deserve, we both know how my heart has been purely focussed on being as Christian as you expect from me".
I really hope you can give some thought about your attitude toward Jesus Christ, who is the Messiah of the Christian faith, the one who YHWH Himself brought into this world to conquer sin that those who choose to trust Him will be kept safe from the evil vices of the unholy gods. I think at your stage though, you're more inclined to argue against all gods, I'm not sure whether this is due somehow to convenience or pride, it can't be due to the argument they don't exist, there's a good percentage of the world that claims they have had proof to the contrary.
So you make your own decisions, it either brings security or doubt, and since none of us have experienced death yet it could be considered the ultimate riddle.
That really doesn't make sense. If you really think something doesn't exist, you can't seriously blame it for anything (although you can in jest, e.g. 'oops, tripped over the invisible step!'). Generally when atheists 'blame' God, it's lazy rhetorical irony - asking the question of believers, e.g. 'if God is so great, then why does he allow <insert complaint here>'.... for those to whom God isn't real, it's convenient to blame someone who you think doesn't exist.
It seems to me that the whole blame game is childish, debilitating nonsense. Sometimes bad things happen that are outside your control - probability and statistics tells you that this is how the world works; no individual is privileged with regard to chance. Likewise with good fortune. People who focus on the negative things think they're unlucky, people who focus on the positive things think they're lucky.So adopting the belief that God is above us does have consequences, ultimately it shifts the blame off an invisible spaghetti monster and puts it on someone we can identify as being fallible and accountable, someone who is just as 'real' as you and me.
I read an article on how people learn to believe that outcomes to problems or situations are effected by supernatural events (i.e. Gods). I don't want to delve too deeply into whether or not God created man or vice versa, but an interesting experiment was discussed. Everyone has seen or heard that a chicken, mouse, etc. can learn a complex routine in order to get food. Well an experiment was devised where a pigeon would be given a button to poke at that apparently dispensed food. In reality the food was dispensed at random intervals and did not require a poke at the button. The researchers noticed that the pigeons started repeating movements or actions that they had done right before the food was dispensed previously. They would sometimes look over the left shoulder, poke the button 3 times, etc. because the food was dispensed right after they did this on previous attempts. The pigeons 'invented' superstition! The pigeon god was probably not far behind.That really doesn't make sense. If you really think something doesn't exist, you can't seriously blame it for anything (although you can in jest, e.g. 'oops, tripped over the invisible step!'). Generally when atheists 'blame' God, it's lazy rhetorical irony - asking the question of believers, e.g. 'if God is so great, then why does he allow <insert complaint here>'.
It seems to me that the whole blame game is childish, debilitating nonsense. Sometimes bad things happen that are outside your control - probability and statistics tells you that this is how the world works; no individual is privileged with regard to chance. Likewise with good fortune. People who focus on the negative things think they're unlucky, people who focus on the positive things think they're lucky.
My philosophy is that you should take responsibility for your own decisions and actions, and take your decisions and actions with that in mind. It also helps if you take the trouble to learn basic probability and statistics, study human nature, and make sure you understand risk.
That's not to say you shouldn't hold responsible someone who clearly does you wrong, but more often than not such problems occur from one's prior incorrect assessment of risk.
This is exactly the basis behind human superstition and magical thinking - e.g. the footballers who always wear their 'lucky' socks because they once won wearing them, etc. They may explain it as an attempt to influence capricious fortune, but it's a very primitive response. I suppose it could be justified as psychologically beneficial - the feeling of having control....
The researchers noticed that the pigeons started repeating movements or actions that they had done right before the food was dispensed previously. They would sometimes look over the left shoulder, poke the button 3 times, etc. because the food was dispensed right after they did this on previous attempts. The pigeons 'invented' superstition! The pigeon god was probably not far behind.
I think if Christians really understood this kind of thing they may not view us as their enemy.
My reasons for "devaluing" the Bible are very simply that I do not see any reason to actually give it value to begin with.
There would be no Christianity without this book.
Maybe God is something more substancial and complex than a celestial father figure, and fostering belief in itself is not a priority. Maybe there is no god at all. In these cases, blaming God for not appearing and sorting it all out for us is folly.
"Claiming" you have proof is not enough. You have to be able to present it.
That brings to mind this passage in Romans 11 concerning the Jews/circumcision group:Hi! Christian behavior needs to see no human being as an enemy. If you need proof of that from our own teachings I can furnish that, but for now I'll assume you would rather be spared the quotes.
.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?