Why is God so hidden? Why must we seek Him to Find Him?

[juvenissun]

"I just believe because I believe" is one of the worst reasons.

One should realize that there are many things not disclosed by the person who said this.

No one is stupid.

 

[The Cadet]

One should realize that there are many things not disclosed by the person who said this.

No one is stupid.

I beg to differ. There are a lot of really stupid people out there.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to think that everyone necessarily has justification for their beliefs because they believe. This is nonsense. A great many people believe a great many things with poor or invalid justification. Think about it - at least 2/3rds of the world's population is dead wrong when it comes to their religion. They may think they have valid justification, but they logically cannot all have it, because their beliefs contradict each others'.

 

[com7fy8]

So why is it that God hides himself so cleverly? So much so that honestly nobody can really PROVE any doctrine because there is always a verse to debunk the theory.

I think faith is connection with God (1 Corinthians 6:17) so that we discover and believe in Him > He proves Himself to us, including by means of "faith working through love" (in Galatians 5:6) > how His love effects our nature > 1 John 4:17. He does all the good which we have not been able to do with ourselves. He has done better than we tried or even thought of.

Just say it: "i believe it all on faith alone".

"faith working through love" > how God effects me > grace includes how God effects our nature.

How does one "spiritually discern" something?

By means of spiritual connection . . . of "faith working through love" . . . not only believing an idea or "truths".

All you can show me are demands written by men, claiming that they are passing on the words of gods!

I'm experiencing better than what people have said the Bible means. The Bible shows me things people have not told me. And I know people personally, who are examples of this, and don't need to say anything. God gives us deeper connection better than human . . . of "faith working through love".

As was explained to you earlier, more people believe in a god other than yours.

Are all those people "less wiser" (sic) than your lot, or just as deluded perhaps?

Our Apostle Paul shares, how "we all" "were by nature children of wrath, just as the others" > no better than any one else. We all were made "from the same lump" > Romans 9:21

Faith can be established by any reason, simple or complicated.

Well, reason did not bring me to "faith working through love", but now I can see the "theologic" of our Father and Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

 

[com7fy8]

Correct me if I'm wrong,

I don't mean to correct you, because you are right . . . that "things" contradict each other.

B - u - t >

but you seem to think that everyone necessarily has justification for their beliefs because they believe. This is nonsense. A great many people believe a great many things with poor or invalid justification.

I think of the number of people who think they are marrying the one who they belong with, and who think it is a good idea to gamble, smoke, drink and drive . . . and think they are voting for the best candidate.

and Think about it - at least 2/3rds of the world's population is dead wrong when it comes to their religion. They may think they have valid justification, but they logically cannot all have it, because their beliefs contradict each others'.

I think . . . oh-oh, I'm thinking . . . that there is an idea that each group has different parts of the whole. So, not all people understand that "contradictions" mean somebody has to be wrong.

Another thing > pieces of a puzzle can perfectly contradict each other, but certain ones can fit with those they belong with . . . like how certain exact-opposite people make it very well with each other . . . because of how love has things work. But if members of a group have only ideas and not love to make it work, this is a problem.

There are people claiming to be Christian, who do not function in love. So, the Bible contradicts them!!

 

[SteveB28]

I'm experiencing better than what people have said the Bible means. The Bible shows me things people have not told me.

But the Bible was written by people! You only have their claims that it is somehow more than simply their writings.

And I know people personally, who are examples of this, and don't need to say anything.

Personal anecdotes are, as Americans say, "a dime a dozen". They are unsupported claims and cannot be seen as evidence. If a man tells me he 'saw an angel' as a personal experience, how am I to distinguish between a deluded person or a genuine observation. More significantly, how is he to know the difference?

God gives us deeper connection better than human . . . of "faith working through love".

So you claim.

Our Apostle Paul shares, how "we all" "were by nature children of wrath, just as the others" > no better than any one else. We all were made "from the same lump" > Romans 9:21

Well, reason did not bring me to "faith working through love", but now I can see the "theologic" of our Father and Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

Unsupported claims.

Would you care to answer my question? Every other theist has dodged it so far:

Why do theists regard the hiddenness and lack of evidence of 'faith' so highly, when in all other walks of life we dismiss such behaviour as dishonest or disingenuous ?

 

[com7fy8]

Would you care to answer my question? Every other theist has dodged it so far:

I'll try, but satisfaction not guaranteed

Why do theists regard the hiddenness and lack of evidence of 'faith' so highly, when in all other walks of life we dismiss such behaviour as dishonest or disingenuous ?

Hmm . . . I never thought of this, never mind have I ever been asked this or read this, before, Steve.

Why do Christians live by faith, without physical evidence, yet they require evidence for everyday matters like making sure a mechanic did the work on their car right, make sure the child did the dishes right, make sure the food they buy has an in-date label on it, and have medical people test if they are clear of certain problems . . . using practical evidence . . . yet they do not require such clear evidence about God?

Well . . . I would say we do not have practical evidence which can prove what is invisible and not physical; it's kind of like how you can't use dirt to prove there is air or water. God is not physical; so you can't use physical stuff to prove Him. But - - if we can use physical evidence, we do. But God is so more and better than physical things can prove and show; so physical evidence just can't do the job.

"But why don't you use logic?"

God is more and better than the "reach" of human logic. We humans have our own real character with our motives which can effect what we are able to consider to be logical.

"Then how do you know your character is making you reliable for knowing if there is God or not?"

Actually, I can fool my own self and not know it. So, yes this is an issue . . . always But the reason for doubt, then, is not God, but me!!

"So, then, if you know you are so unreliable . . . "

Including in my ability to make the right choice about who I belong with, among other things . . . I simply have experienced that God has done better with me than I or any human has done with me. And all He does with me is a match with how the Bible says God's grace effects us and our relating and our lives . . . always with much more correction needed. He has done so better than I have tried to do, and I experience Him who is so superior to me . . . very sweet and tender way way more than any human I have known.

"But drugs can have you feeling nice and sweet more than you ever have felt."

But God is personal, and caring, with no substance back-up needed. And He does not run out. Drugs don't personally guide me, and ones I have used could shut me down, not make me more and more real in loving any and all people. And His side effects include rest for my soul and gentle and quiet and sweet and pleasant joy not dependent on any substance or thinking or circumstance. "He is good, all by Himself." Yes

It is "like" how you can't prove there are elephants, just by what you can see and feel. You might feel the skin and see the form and actions, but the real elephant is deeper and still beyond comprehension; even with an elephant, your logic can become disproven, when more actual discoveries are made; like this, logic is not enough for dealing with God.

Ones, then, have not truly proven that elephants exist, since they don't even really know what an elephant is.

And God is so more complex and in the spiritual realm much more intricate than physical things are; "and He is personal, not only physical!" < and you "might" have discovered how a number of humans are not to be figured out, because we are beyond just physical predictable principles which might be figured out, and God is so moreso; so we can't use just words and physical observation to "define" Him. We can only say this thing or that, but we are indeed so limited.

He is more real and complicated than things He has created; and humans haven't come close to figuring out the human body, by means of logic and evidence. And God is so more.

But "like" with discovering an elephant . . . you can experience, but your experiencing is indeed limited to who and how you are. Some are more capable of experiencing elephants, than others are. And we need unselfish nature of His love, in order to "get somewhere" with Him.

 

[DivineMarissa]

God seems hidden because we fail to see the Gods within ourselves

 

[juvenissun]

I beg to differ. There are a lot of really stupid people out there.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to think that everyone necessarily has justification for their beliefs because they believe. This is nonsense. A great many people believe a great many things with poor or invalid justification. Think about it - at least 2/3rds of the world's population is dead wrong when it comes to their religion. They may think they have valid justification, but they logically cannot all have it, because their beliefs contradict each others'.

The justification may be poor, but to the person, it is the best he can figure out.
The magic is, a poor justification (logical or not) is all a person needs for a religious faith. It is no worse, or sometimes, even better, than some excellent justifications. That is the nature of religious faith. And it is one of the most precious nature of human being.

 

[Shempster]

Looks like the topic is drifting a bit but along the lines of belief it seems to me that people listen to or read something and decide to believe or not believe it based on whether it "sounds right" to them. Wow. I mean who made US the litmus test of all truth? (Whoops-what am I saying - I do the same thing at times)

 

[The Cadet]

By means of spiritual connection . . . of "faith working through love" . . . not only believing an idea or "truths".

This doesn't actually answer my question at all. Let's say I claim to have "spiritually discerned" that God thinks that homosexuality is perfectly hunky-dory, and you've "spiritually discerned" that God will let homosexuals burn in hell. How do I tell if I'm wrong? How do you tell if I'm right? How does a third-party observer determine whether one of us is right?

that there is an idea that each group has different parts of the whole. So, not all people understand that "contradictions" mean somebody has to be wrong.

I've heard this explanation before, and I'm sorry, but the qualities of the beings in question are massively different, implying different beings. And each being claims to be the only god. It doesn't work. You can't somehow make Islam and Christianity both be right. It just doesn't work, because there are direct contradictions within the religious doctrines.

The justification may be poor, but to the person, it is the best he can figure out.

Right. So, what then? Should we simply accept that they believe things because of bad reasons, and not challenge them on it? In a world so interconnected, and which gives people so much power, this is a terrible idea. If I believe you are wrong about something, particularly something important to your life and how your form beliefs, I think it's important that we talk about it, because if I'm wrong, it's really important that I change my mind, and if you're wrong, the same is true.

To give an example from my own life: my dad is not very educated on medicine. He's a homeopath. If he gets cancer, I'm going to try really, really hard to convince him not to abandon conventional treatment, because it is very literally the life of someone I love on the line. These things matter. These things are really important.

The magic is, a poor justification (logical or not) is all a person needs for a religious faith. It is no worse, or sometimes, even better, than some excellent justifications. That is the nature of religious faith. And it is one of the most precious nature of human being.

No. It really, really is not better or equal. Believing true things is based on solid, valid justifications. Believing false things is based on poor, invalid justifications. And believing false things can be very harmful - to your health if you have faith that prayer can cure disease, to your finances if you have faith in the prosperity gospel, and to your surroundings if you believe that homosexuality is immoral and wrong.

 

[SteveB28]

I'll try, but satisfaction not guaranteed

Hmm . . . I never thought of this, never mind have I ever been asked this or read this, before, Steve.

Why do Christians live by faith, without physical evidence, yet they require evidence for everyday matters like making sure a mechanic did the work on their car right, make sure the child did the dishes right, make sure the food they buy has an in-date label on it, and have medical people test if they are clear of certain problems . . . using practical evidence . . . yet they do not require such clear evidence about God?

Well . . . I would say we do not have practical evidence which can prove what is invisible and not physical; it's kind of like how you can't use dirt to prove there is air or water. God is not physical; so you can't use physical stuff to prove Him. But - - if we can use physical evidence, we do. But God is so more and better than physical things can prove and show; so physical evidence just can't do the job.

"But why don't you use logic?"

God is more and better than the "reach" of human logic. We humans have our own real character with our motives which can effect what we are able to consider to be logical.

"Then how do you know your character is making you reliable for knowing if there is God or not?"

Actually, I can fool my own self and not know it. So, yes this is an issue . . . always But the reason for doubt, then, is not God, but me!!

"So, then, if you know you are so unreliable . . . "

Including in my ability to make the right choice about who I belong with, among other things . . . I simply have experienced that God has done better with me than I or any human has done with me. And all He does with me is a match with how the Bible says God's grace effects us and our relating and our lives . . . always with much more correction needed. He has done so better than I have tried to do, and I experience Him who is so superior to me . . . very sweet and tender way way more than any human I have known.

"But drugs can have you feeling nice and sweet more than you ever have felt."

But God is personal, and caring, with no substance back-up needed. And He does not run out. Drugs don't personally guide me, and ones I have used could shut me down, not make me more and more real in loving any and all people. And His side effects include rest for my soul and gentle and quiet and sweet and pleasant joy not dependent on any substance or thinking or circumstance. "He is good, all by Himself." Yes

It is "like" how you can't prove there are elephants, just by what you can see and feel. You might feel the skin and see the form and actions, but the real elephant is deeper and still beyond comprehension; even with an elephant, your logic can become disproven, when more actual discoveries are made; like this, logic is not enough for dealing with God.

Ones, then, have not truly proven that elephants exist, since they don't even really know what an elephant is.

And God is so more complex and in the spiritual realm much more intricate than physical things are; "and He is personal, not only physical!" < and you "might" have discovered how a number of humans are not to be figured out, because we are beyond just physical predictable principles which might be figured out, and God is so moreso; so we can't use just words and physical observation to "define" Him. We can only say this thing or that, but we are indeed so limited.

He is more real and complicated than things He has created; and humans haven't come close to figuring out the human body, by means of logic and evidence. And God is so more.

But "like" with discovering an elephant . . . you can experience, but your experiencing is indeed limited to who and how you are. Some are more capable of experiencing elephants, than others are. And we need unselfish nature of His love, in order to "get somewhere" with Him.

Thank you for your thoughtful response.

Unfortunately, what you have largely provided here is a "what", rather than a "why", which is what my question sought.

If we utilised this spiritual, invisible, 'other world', personal approach to determining the guilt or innocence of the accused, to assess the capability of the student to enter university, to gauge appropriateness of surgery for the patient, to search for the perpetrator of the crime - we would not only be reviled and ridiculed, we might even find ourselves charged with a crime.

And yet, here are people like you, telling us that this approach is the appropriate one for managing our lives.

It isn't honest.

 

[The Cadet]

Thank you for your thoughtful response.

Unfortunately, what you have largely provided here is a "what", rather than a "why", which is what my question sought.

If we utilised this spiritual, invisible, 'other world', personal approach to determining the guilt or innocence of the accused, to assess the capability of the student to enter university, to gauge appropriateness of surgery for the patient, to search for the perpetrator of the crime - we would not only be reviled and ridiculed, we might even find ourselves charged with a crime.

And yet, here are people like you, telling us that this approach is the appropriate one for managing our lives.

It isn't honest.

This is a really important point, IMO. In every other aspect of our lives, we use logic and evidence to determine the correct way forward. Doctors who go on faith aren't revolutionaries or visionaries, they're terrible doctors.

So when it comes to what may be the single most important part of our life, we're supposed to abandon these methods that are established to work incredibly well entirely, in favor of another method that you people can't even demonstrate is valid?

 

[juvenissun]

Right. So, what then? Should we simply accept that they believe things because of bad reasons, and not challenge them on it? In a world so interconnected, and which gives people so much power, this is a terrible idea. If I believe you are wrong about something, particularly something important to your life and how your form beliefs, I think it's important that we talk about it, because if I'm wrong, it's really important that I change my mind, and if you're wrong, the same is true.

To give an example from my own life: my dad is not very educated on medicine. He's a homeopath. If he gets cancer, I'm going to try really, really hard to convince him not to abandon conventional treatment, because it is very literally the life of someone I love on the line. These things matter. These things are really important.

No. It really, really is not better or equal. Believing true things is based on solid, valid justifications. Believing false things is based on poor, invalid justifications. And believing false things can be very harmful - to your health if you have faith that prayer can cure disease, to your finances if you have faith in the prosperity gospel, and to your surroundings if you believe that homosexuality is immoral and wrong.

Your argument is based on scientific knowledge/learning. It is something logic can be applied in 100%. However, in religion, any religion, it would be a case of different nature. A farmer who is faithful to God. Then there is NO logic/scientific reasoning which can convince him that he is wrong. Because reasoning is a wrong way to use in this case.

On a case at the other end, I believe in God. Then you can reason with all your capability with me in trying to talk me out of it. Because I can talk back with reasons.

With that much of difference, yet my faith and the farmer's faith are, in fact, the same in quality. It is possible that my faith is even weaker than a farmer's faith.

 

[The Cadet]

Your argument is based on scientific knowledge/learning. It is something logic can be applied in 100%. However, in religion, any religion, it would be a case of different nature. A farmer who is faithful to God. Then there is NO logic/scientific reasoning which can convince him that he is wrong. Because reasoning is a wrong way to use in this case.

Wat

Hang on, just to clarify, are you saying that it's wrong to apply reasoning here? Or that it's just not going to help very much? Either way, I don't quite get the point.

On a case at the other end, I believe in God. Then you can reason with all your capability with me in trying to talk me out of it. Because I can talk back with reasons.

With that much of difference, yet my faith and the farmer's faith are, in fact, the same in quality. It is possible that my faith is even weaker than a farmer's faith.

Then the problem is faith. See, here's the thing. You have reasons. Why, then, do you need faith? What role does faith play in this equation?

 

[juvenissun]

Wat

Hang on, just to clarify, are you saying that it's wrong to apply reasoning here? Or that it's just not going to help very much? Either way, I don't quite get the point.

It may not be wrong. But it is certainly ineffective and is not appropriate. A farmer's faith to God is likely to be established on a few very simple reasons. If the faith is strong, then complicate higher level reasoning is not useful to weaken the faith. If you tried, the most likely consequence is that you would feel the faith is not reasonable (to you).

 

[juvenissun]

Then the problem is faith. See, here's the thing. You have reasons. Why, then, do you need faith? What role does faith play in this equation?

In my case, it is easier to understand. My (or yours) reasoning is not enough for me to discard my faith. AND, the reasoning, in fact, is able to strengthen my faith. I did not NEED faith at the beginning. My faith is gradually built up by reasoning. I still do not NEED faith. My faith is emplaced there automatically through reasoning. The more reasoning I do, the stronger the faith. So, in the equation, faith is the final solution.

One of my wish in being this CF forum is to seek challenge which is able to shake my faith. So far, it has not happened yet.

 

[com7fy8]

it seems to me that people listen to or read something and decide to believe or not believe it based on whether it "sounds right" to them.

I believe that there are people who do have personal communication with God, and so they get reliable input about things. God knows more than we do, plus He has control so He can personally guide us according to all the good He is bringing about. An example of this is how things went for Joseph > Genesis 37-50.

But if one is depending on one's own intuition ability, this is a problem . . . doing what is right in our own eyes.

So, we need to seek and trust God to personally correct us so we can get things right with Him and find out how to love. His love has His creativity

But we humans can get in trouble if we only go with an intellectual approach and what we are capable of seeing and appreciating. And so, "of course", people with different personalities and character can be effected by their personal preferences and ways they want to see things.

there is an idea that each group has different parts of the whole. So, not all people understand that "contradictions" mean somebody has to be wrong.

I've heard this explanation before, and I'm sorry, but the qualities of the beings in question are massively different, implying different beings. And each being claims to be the only god. It doesn't work. You can't somehow make Islam and Christianity both be right. It just doesn't work, because there are direct contradictions within the religious doctrines.

I did not mean that that idea is correct, but that there are people who claim to see things that way.

Let's say I claim to have "spiritually discerned" that God thinks that homosexuality is perfectly hunky-dory, and you've "spiritually discerned" that God will let homosexuals burn in hell. How do I tell if I'm wrong? How do you tell if I'm right? How does a third-party observer determine whether one of us is right?

I pray for God to guide me, and I do not expect anyone to accept that I do this right. Also, I know I'm still not perfect at making sure with God; so I pray for His correction > Hebrews 5:13-14, Hebrews 12:4-11. And even if I were to give "evidence" which were proof, in the Bible we see how people could have proof right in their faces but still they did not want Jesus. We see this, now . . . how ones do present evidence of things . . . physical and statistical evidence, but others still refuse it. So, I can't expect others to accept if I have communication with God and am doing His will. But I pray for however God will do good with each of us.

If we utilised this spiritual, invisible, 'other world', personal approach to determining the guilt or innocence of the accused, to assess the capability of the student to enter university, to gauge appropriateness of surgery for the patient, to search for the perpetrator of the crime - we would not only be reviled and ridiculed, we might even find ourselves charged with a crime.

And yet, here are people like you, telling us that this approach is the appropriate one for managing our lives.

It isn't honest.

If I suppose I am in touch with God and I am not, this is dishonest. But if God does personally help me, it is stupid to depend on less.

Evidence can be rigged. But God knows. So, it is wise, not only honest, to make sure with God. Joshua chapter nine has an interesting report about how the Jewish leaders fooled themselves into going by the "evidence" which was presented to them.

So @Shempster . . . going by and depending only on my personal effort to study and meditate and figure things out is not enough. We need how our Father personally shares with each of us His children. He is personal with His own children. And so, "of course", there are counterfeits of this, including to give this a bad name. But you are not only a statistic. What has become of others does not decide what becomes of you

 

[The Cadet]

I pray for God to guide me, and I do not expect anyone to accept that I do this right.

Okay, so how do you tell that you are right? How do you know it's actually god guiding you, and not just self-delusion? To name a prescient example, when Matt Dillahunty was a Christian, he was sure that God wanted him to join the ministry. He was convinced that he had received spiritual revelation from God. Then, as a result of learning more about the bible and its history, he lost his faith and became one of the major figureheads of the modern atheist movement. Clearly, he was wrong - it couldn't really have been god that inspired him to join the ministry. So when God gives you such a revelation, how do you determine that it actually is god speaking, and not just your own subconscious, or your conscience, or simply self-delusion?

in the Bible we see how people could have proof right in their faces but still they did not want Jesus

I'm reminded of the exodus story. You remember, after God rained supernatural plagues down on the egyptians, parted the red seas, and fed them manna from heaven on their trek through the desert... And then their leader goes missing for a few days, and they're like, "Screw that, let's build a new god!" Does that sound even remotely realistic? Like, at all?

 

[com7fy8]

Okay, so how do you tell that you are right? How do you know it's actually god guiding you, and not just self-delusion?

There are things in the Bible which I go by, for testing myself. Basically, I trust God to be the Judge and do what He sees fit with me. And it's not like I figure out how to be right, but I do what He has me do . . . if and when I do . . . then discover how it is right, and how the Bible matches with what God has me doing. So, yes it is a sort of an intellectual suicide thing, but knowing that any other humans could be fooling themselves, too. So, my only hope is God.

when Matt Dillahunty was a Christian, he was sure that God wanted him to join the ministry. He was convinced that he had received spiritual revelation from God. Then, as a result of learning more about the bible and its history, he lost his faith and became one of the major figureheads of the modern atheist movement.

I don't know Matt personally, nor do I know how he really was while he thought he was a Christian. But I am satisfied the Bible says that we do not just at times get some revelation of what God wants. We are constantly seeking Him for His grace and correction and guiding "continually" (Isaiah 58:11), and how He personally rules each of us in His very own peace in our "hearts" > (Romans 5:5, Colossians 3:15).

But there are people whose "ministry" can be or seem to be constantly preaching and teaching at others and pointing at anyone but their own selves, and being some image. I don't know what Matt did for "ministry", but I know ones can have a do-it-yourself thing and they get wasted and burnt out and hurt and broken and frustrated, because they are not resting in Jesus and submitting to how He takes us along >

"'Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.'" (Matthew 11:29)

So I find that God is personal with me; so I don't "need" to get some one big isolated message revealing to me what to do . . . and then I am kind of on my own. But each moment I can be encouraged and guided and enjoy and rest.

So when God gives you such a revelation, how do you determine that it actually is god speaking, and not just your own subconscious, or your conscience, or simply self-delusion?

Like I say, I don't only get revelations at times. I go by what God actually does with me, at each moment > I test by seeing what He does. I compare things in the Bible with how I am, what I am doing, how I am relating with people, and see if He is matching what He does in me, with what His word says. And He does better than what I would have thought His word means.

And I am quite acquainted with how I can be while I am not in gentle and humble peace and caring about people. So, if and when I start to get that way, I know I am away from how grace can have me be and love. Like . . . one helper scripture for this is >

"Do all things without complaining and disputing, that you may become blameless and harmless, children of God without fault in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world, holding fast the word of life, so that I may rejoice in the day of Christ that I have not run in vain or labored in vain." (Philippians 2:14-16)

Instead of intellectually analyzing the different scripture issues people have, I am busy with how to love, by not giving in to arguing and complaining and unforgiveness and paranoia. And I keep finding how God has me grow and get better with how the Bible means to love. I might consider for moments other things people bring up about the Bible, but I'm specializing in discovering the love meaning. People including myself can look at things according to how we are and how we might want to see things. There are motives, and the Bible is designed to expose people's motives.

I'm reminded of the exodus story. You remember, after God rained supernatural plagues down on the egyptians, parted the red seas, and fed them manna from heaven on their trek through the desert... And then their leader goes missing for a few days, and they're like, "Screw that, let's build a new god!" Does that sound even remotely realistic? Like, at all?

I have indeed been seeing how unrealistic people can be . . . smoking, killing their own unborn with whom they could learn real love, doing the Charlie Brown and Lucy football thing of supposing at each next election that they can control politicians, going through changes in moments . . . like maybe the Jews did when they did not see where Moses was. People can be fickle.

But I have been with Satan, and how I continually could be changing around to worry and religion and trying to get something going with a woman and studying until I was drunk from lack of sleep. But with God I am becoming more and more stable and sober in love which is gentle and pleasant and creative with people and problems. Because God is stable and not fickle.

But people can go this way and that; and so God might use different things and ways to deal with us. But this is not because He is unstable, but He is using various measures to resist us from going into as much disaster and tragedy as we could. Then people blame God, which humans can have a tendency of doing.

So, that's another thing I do . . . just don't waste my time blaming, but trust God to have me doing better. So, I can see how I and others are doing things wrong, and see how the Bible's way is better. Compared to me and how I have been, it's not hard to see how God through Jesus and His word is superior

 

[The Cadet]

My apologies for the short answer, but it has been a long and very aggravating day and I'm just very tired.

And it's not like I figure out how to be right

Well, there's the answer. I'm just going to cut through everything else and point this out. You don't know that there's any merit to this methodology. That's really all I need to know, and it should be all you need to know. For some reason it isn't.