|
I don't have a touching personal story that the two posters before me shared. I'm a very rational and logical person, I work in research engineering, and to me God just makes sense. There have been several times in my life (not necessarily bad times) where I could just tell that God was walking with me, steering me on a safe course through life. When you read some of the psalms where the author will speak of God "putting a hedge around me" (a metaphor for protection) or leading him as a shepherd leads a sheep, it resonates with what I've experienced. The best way I can describe it rationally is to compare it to the Frobenius method - you assume a form of the solution, substitute it into the problem, and it all comes together. In the same way, God is the solution that I substitute into the question of life, and as I go through it, everything seems to come together. If you are honestly looking for God, you will find Him; at least, that's been my experience. Those who look cynically for what they consider proof, often don't, since they weren't really looking for God to begin with. Jesus once compares being touched by the spirit to being touched by the wind - you can feel it, but you can't tell where it came from or where it is going.
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 10:26 |
|
|
Who What Now posted:Please don't feel obligated to answer if you don't wish to, but do you believe that there are people who have honestly looked for God who didn't find him? How does one look for God? I do not believe that God hides himself from anyone who honestly looks for Him. Does everyone who searches honestly look for him? I doubt it. All too often we put our own preconceptions to what God should be in front of our search, rather than trying to find Him as He is. Often times I see this as people trying to fit God to their own worldview and walk away. "What do you mean God doesn't like homosexuality, isn't he supposed to be all about love?" That is one that I hear a lot. People don't always like the idea that there is right and wrong, and today's culture is very much one of moral relativism. I don't say this to preach at anyone, but when you get down to it, God isn't morally relativistic - He has his laws as to what is right and wrong. He offers forgiveness for our failures, but that still requires us to admit our errors when we sin, and that sometimes isn't something we want to face. Thus, we claim that God "isn't meeting us" because we refuse to let go of the things that are between us and Him. Another thing that can make it hard to truly seek God is pain. Sometimes when we are hurting the most, or are in the darkest place, that's when God can be the most visible, as that is when He reaches out the most (again, that has been my experience, others may have different stories). However, just like how if we find ourselves in pain and lash out at those closest to us, we can sometimes lash out at God and close ourselves off from Him. "Why God did you let this happen to me?" is the essence of the argument, and sometimes that can be an enlightening and spiritually strengthening process if we are honest with ourselves and don't let pain or bitterness rule us (this is essentially the book of Job and is well worth reading). However, it can also break down into "Well, if God really existed, my friend wouldn't have been hit by that drunk driver and died." Such events are tragic indeed, but that is an example of letting our pain cloud our ability to accurately view the issue. Not to get into a tangent of free will vs omnipotence, but if God directly controlled everything we did, it kind of defeats the purpose of creating us in the first place. We are still responsible for our actions, and the consequences therein (or of other people's mistakes). What God does though, is work in us and through us to redeem tragedies or circumstances that we do not understand, and bring about good despite them. This isn't an easy thing to get, especially when we're in the midst of pain, so often times people turn away from God. To answer your question of how to look for God, I'm not the best person to ask, as an introverted thinker, much of my methodology in life doesn't work for other people. For me, though, I found God through reading the Bible, His word to all, and constant prayer. The Bible is an account of what God has done in the past for others, and a promise to us today what He will do for us, should we seek Him. No, God didn't come down in a chariot of fire, give me a fist bump, and say "we're cool bro." Whereas most Christians can give an account of some moment in their life where it became real for them, for me it was a slow gradual process. I would go through life with an intellectual understanding that God loved me and would help me, but never really getting it on an emotional level. However, day by day I would lean on him a little more, tell him my troubles and how I wanted to be better, and then I before I realize it I have this feeling that someone is walking beside me. A lot of it is the understanding that our walk with God will transform us (theologians call it the process of sanctification), so we need to be willing to offer up who we are now to Him so that he can make us into something better. Much like in rock climbing when you reach the top, it can be hard to let go and trust the other person to catch you if you've not done it before. It's easy to pray "God, help me with this problem," but it is a lot harder to pray "God, in this time of trouble, help me to learn what it is I can from this to be a the man you want me to be." Does this answer your question? I admit I'm more of a thinker than a speaker, so I'm probably terrible at explaining myself. Let me know if you have any other questions.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
Stinky_Pete posted:I'm sorry if this sounds condescending, and I don't mean to interfere with the spirit of this thread, but I notice posters so far referring to God as a "he." Well, I refer to God in the male form as that is how He chose to refer to himself. His representation to those who saw a glimpse was that of a man, and when he came down to Earth in the flesh He chose to be born male. It's possible that gender is simply a construct of creation, that He created us such that we were inherently drawn to our complement so that together we are greater than the sum of our parts (insert long tangent into the theology of marriage). Could God have chosen to depict himself as a woman? Sure, I don't see why he couldn't have, he just chose not to. SedanChair posted:Were you raised in a Christian tradition? I think it would be hard to go looking for God without preconceptions if you grew up in the west. Yes, I was born and raised in a Christian family and grew up in a non-denominational church. That certainly made it easier for me, as I had the answer right in front of me. In terms of actually finding God and asking Him to be central to my life, I had to figure that out and choose to do it myself. It is certainly harder to find God without that kind of supportive environment, beyond even the question of religion and spirituality. If you're raised to think that anything is permissible, the core premise of God as holy and just who wishes us to turn away from sin will be difficult to grasp. This was actually a problem in many of the early churches in Greece in the first century AD. I believe it is in 1 Corinthians that Paul writes about how people would brag that anything is permissible to them, but that goes against God's way where there is an intended order (i.e. don't sleep with your mother-in-law). However, people who have never heard the Gospel before can be searching for God and find him. A coworker of mine shared his mother's story of when she was growing up in India and was encouraged by a local pastor over the years in her education. Eventually she came to know God through the support of the pastor and a couple who were sponsoring her schooling here in the US. One of God's favorite tools to reach people who are searching for him is everyday people; it isn't through posters that say "God hates fags," but rather through humbly living out the example he set for us. I really like a quote attributed to St. Francis of Assisi, "At all times preach the Gospel, and if necessary use words." Confounding Factor posted:What would it mean to believe in a transcendent? What do you mean by "believe" for the sake of the discussion? Because belief has changed its meaning over the centuries. Now it means something like a mental acceptance of some propositional statement. That is why I do not like the use of "belief" when discussing religion or God, because it goes beyond a matter of knowledge. Faith is a much better word, though people have misused it greatly over the years, assuming that it means believing in something you cannot prove. Rather, use it like you would with another person - having faith in someone means you trust them, that you take them at their word, that you are comfortable leaning on the strength of your relationship to them. It is more than either reason or emotion, faith is where the mind and heart unite to create trust. I place my faith in God and what He has said He would do. He has been true to me thus far and I believe Him when He says He will complete a good work in me. God, to me, is not something that I just mentally accept, He is not a proposition, He is not just a thing that is or is not transcendent. He is my creator who decided that I was worth loving and worth continually working on and with me, a continual creation that is still ongoing. He said that He will be with me, wherever I go - and I believe Him.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 04:54
|
|
|
bitterandtwisted posted:Have you not done the same - fitted God into your own worldview? Is God's morality any different from your moral beliefs? I have not done the same. I do not fit God into my worldview, but instead change my worldview to reflect God. To use an analogy, if you belonged to a certain house or clan, would you wear some other clan's colors, or would you wear your clan's colors? Obviously you would dress yourself to match that which you claim allegiance to. In the same way, if I claim to be one of God's followers, I would shape my life so that it better reflects His values. How can I claim to love God if I do not follow His commandments? This isn't always easy, I'd much rather hold a grudge than forgive, but that is what God calls for me to do. Am I perfect at it? No, that is why God still has to work on me, but I fully cooperate with Him in this process, even if it isn't always easy or clear. How do I know God hates homosexuality? It is written clearly in His word, the Bible. It's actually one of the more explicitly stated issue, both in the Old and New Testaments, so I find it baffling that some Christians have trouble with this. This is an example of us putting our own moral worldview over God's. We think that if there isn't someone being "harmed" by an action, it can't be immoral. However, that is a limited lens to view morality, because it doesn't take into account the intents of the Creator. Sexual relationships were meant to be within the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman. There is something fundamentally complementary about the setup that makes one without the other feel lacking. We can try to distort that intention and fit it to our paradigm, but it is still distorting the original intention. There are much better people to explain the theology of this than I, so if you are interested I recommend reading the thoughts of those smarter than I. I think Pope John Paul II had some good thoughts on this, I really liked "The Gospel of Life." Do I believe being gay is a wicked choice? Yes, though I do not consider the person "degenerate." I view homosexuality to be the same as adultery or fornication - a misuse of sexuality for our own selfish needs. I do not think that homosexuals are somehow worse than any other kind of sinner, the difference is that our society is trying to argue that in this case homosexuality isn't a sin (again, using the argument that no one is getting hurt). You can say that someone who gets blackout drunk every night at home and simply passes out isn't hurting anyone or doing anything wrong. However, that person is harming themselves. In the same manner, sexual sin damages us in ways that can be hard to observe at the time. However, this is true with every sin, be it lying, stealing, pride, greed, sloth, etc. Some of these we as society hold to be bad (lying, stealing, murder, etc) but others we hold up almost as virtues (greed, pride, vanity, etc). Sometimes these sins can be tied up in our identity that it becomes hard to separate ourselves from it. Do I think that being homosexual is a cruel test from God? No. As Paul writes, we all have our thorns in the flesh that we have to deal with, because we live in a fallen world. There will be things that lure us away; if the only possible choice was God, what significance is there to our choosing Him? Instead, I make the conscious choice to turn aside from what tempts me and instead claim God as my greatest priority, the central pillar of my life. Would it be easier if I didn't have these inner demons that I have to fight? Sure, but then I would be able to claim that I did all these things by the power of my own hand. Instead, I am forced to confront my own weakness and lean on God's grace. In this He demonstrates to me that He is powerful enough to save me from the worst of myself, and merciful to love me still after failing so many times. In this he makes the words I read in the Bible true, "The Lord is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and rich in love" (Ps 145:8). This is no longer some stale passage written by some dead guy, but the resonating chord that so many have sung before me that I now join in. The Kingfish posted:The Christian conception of God really should be 'they' for a number of reasons. Well, once you start getting into the concept of the Trinity, you are getting into the deep end of the theological pool. Yes, there is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but they are also in one being. It's kind of like how light has both wave and particle natures; in the same way God is three in one. There is God the Father; then there is Jesus, Emmanuel, God with us; then there is the Holy Spirit, God within us. All three are God, and whenever one acts, all are there. I really like how Catholics refer to God as the Divine Mystery, because God is so much bigger than we are, no matter how much you learn about Him, there is always something more to be found as He reveals Himself to you.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 13:56
|
|
|
bitterandtwisted posted:Are any of those values not your values? All of His values are my values. Can you honestly look at yourself in the mirror and say that there has not been a single time in your life that you let yourself down, did something that you knew you should not have done, or failed to do something that you knew you should have done? Failing your ideals is not the same as not having them. bitterandtwisted posted:Where in the Bible specifically? That one verse in Leviticus in between condemning shrimp and cotton-poly blended shirts? What did Jesus say about homosexuality? "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination." Leviticus 18:22. This is the same chapter that says you should sleep with you mother-in-law, or your daughter-in-law, or your aunt, or your uncle, etc. Seriously, there is a whole chapter on who you shouldn't sleep with. Normally I would think this is unnecessary, but the existence of the Jerry Springer show I guess disproves the notion that we inherently know better. "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet" Romans 1:26-27 "Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God" 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. Note that Paul lumps sexual immorality with other sins; one is not greater or lesser than the other, they are all sin before God. I'm not bashing on homosexuality any more than other sins, this is just today's hot-button issue that society wants to believe is a good thing and act amazed that some Christians don't agree with them. You ask what Jesus said of it, and I love it when people say that, as if the fact that Jesus doesn't say anything about it means that it isn't wrong. No, Jesus does not talk about homosexuality, because the Jews didn't have a problem with homosexuality, they didn't think it was right and need to be corrected. He spoke to what was in need of fixing. It is not enough to not murder each other, you must also not hate each other. It is not enough to posture that you love God, but you must also be humble in heart and serve Him. You know what he also didn't talk about? He never said rape was wrong, but that was because for everyone he talked to, that was already painfully obvious. Therefore you cannot claim that since Jesus didn't address it specifically it cannot be a sin, as Jesus said that he came to fulfill the Law, and not one mark of it will be removed. Thus the condemnation of homosexuality in the New Testament is generally to Greek and Roman converts, to whom the Jewish religious/cultural norms against homosexuality were not present (i.e. people who hadn't heard it before). As to your comment that it feels like "because I say so," if there is a sufficiently complex system designed to operate a certain way, unless you understand fully the reasoning behind it and the underlying fundamentals and all the interweaving interactions, any explanation of it will seem equally arbitrary. I've tried explaining numerous complex systems that I understand to people and they sometimes will respond with "that's not right, that doesn't make any sense." OK, great, I can sympathize that you don't understand it, but just because you can't follow it doesn't mean the logic isn't there. In the same way, I acknowledge that I don't fully understand how and why the pairing of a man and a woman in marriage makes something more than just two people having sex and living with each other; so yes, it can seem arbitrary from where you or I stand. That doesn't mean God doesn't have a very logical and well reasoned plan and design for it. If I trust God with my life and my soul, it seems a small leap of faith to trust my relationships with Him too, and have faith that I will understand His reasoning in time. bitterandtwisted posted:I didn't ask "is having sex a choice". Is being gay a choice? Do you consider "being gay" a condition of the body or a conscious choice of who you sleep with? If it is the latter, than my previous post stands. If it is the former, how can you tell me it is not an illness or condition that needs to be corrected? Biologically speaking, it does sorta kill off passing on your genes, which is the definition of an evolutionary negative trait. So either it is a choice that we have to accept responsibility for, or it is something that afflicts us and should be treated. Do we tell people with diabetes that they should accept their conditions and live with the consequences, or do we try to ameliorate the effects and help them live a normal life. Granted this isn't to say you should persecute homosexuals, but likewise you shouldn't embrace the practice. I consider homosexuality to be a negative urge that some people have or are vulnerable to, much like others have vulnerabilities to addiction, or the need to be the center of attention, or the urge to pathologically lie, or anxiety issues, etc. We all have our demons, and they differ from person to person. I do not consider mine to be any less or greater than another's, simply that if we want God in our lives, we need to turn away from these temptations and turn to Him instead. The great part is we don't have to do it alone, as He's already waiting for us and has reached out to us. [edit] Reveilled posted:Do you believe the followers of other faiths also do the latter? For example, an extremely devout hindu, or sikh, or muslim, are any of them changing their worldview to reflect something (whether god or something else), or are they all just trying to fit God into their worldview? Honestly? I don't know. I think that the urge to fit the world or God, or whatever, into our own views and preconceptions is a universally human thing, so I would imagine some do, and some don't. I don't think someone's specific religion will decide whether they will try to cherry pick what parts of their religion they follow. If they're a cherry-picker, they'd be one if they were Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Jain, or Zoroastrian. Griffen fucked around with this message at 16:14 on Jun 10, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Are we talking about evolutionary fitness or the will of God? Even if you believe in evolution (which it is certainly possible for Christians to do), it's not like it should matter. If the end of days is near, evolutionary time scales are irrelevant. Correct, it doesn't matter to me the evolutionary fitness of one trait or another, I was simply trying to use other arguments, since the poster clearly saw little relevance to what I was saying thus far. Who What Now posted:Actually, no, this is 100% false. It's a very common misconception that evolution is concerned with individuals passing on their genetic lines, when actually evolution is concerned with population groups propagating a new generation. Homosexuality does have several evolutionary benefits to a societal species like us, as it allows for either the homosexuals to focus on non-caregiving tasks while the breeding members focus on child-rearing or for the homosexual members to adopt infants that are abandoned or orphaned, which in both cases increases the rates of infant survival. You know, I typed up a response to this, but really, this is a tangent that goes against what the OP laid out: GAINING WEIGHT... posted:This thread's title is not a challenge, but an invitation: rather than debate if God exists, or look at the reasons to think he does not, I want to start a discussion about why believers think he does. This is not a debate - this thread will solidly fall on the "discussion" side of the subforum's title, although if fellow believers think they can examine the nuances of others' reason to make them more robust, that is by all means permissible. I don't want to hear arguments against people's reasons based on the belief that God does not exist; let's just assume for the purpose of this thread that he does. What compels you personally to believe in God? I have no illusions that you are here to honestly debate the nature of whether homosexuality is a sin or not. If you want to debate that with Christians, go make a thread and do it there. This thread is for discussing why some of us believe God exists.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 17:06
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Many Christians (some fairly prominent and with seminary backgrounds) disagree, so I'm not sure you can just deliver a ruling on it like this. The problem is that for those people with seminary backgrounds, they have to rely on indirect arguments, such as condemning homosexuality harms homosexuals and is therefore wrong (if that is the case, condemning alcoholics is wrong, or condemning sloth is wrong). There is no Biblical basis to argue that homosexuality is not a sin. There aren't many cases in the Bible where something is so clear-cut, but this is one of them. The Belgian posted:How do you feel about clothes with multiple fabrics or eating rare steak? I was wondering when someone would bring up the cleanliness laws. Some of the tenets of the Old Testament involved how to become ceremonially clean, which was important for times of offering sacrifices, seeking God's guidance, and for conducting priestly duties. This was a means to impress upon the people the nature of their sins and their contrast to God's holiness. The sacrifices were done to show the cost of our sin and to make us right with God. Even some legitimately acceptable things had to be abstained from in order to be ceremonially clean for certain actions. There are accounts in the Old Testament where people are told to abstain from sexual relations with their spouses right before an important event. This was not because sex is wrong, but to impress upon the people that going before God is a big deal because of the gulf between us caused by sin. That is why only the high priest could go into the Holy of Holies only once a year on behalf of all the people, because of that separation. The good news of Christianity is that Christ bridged that gulf for us and gave us the opportunity to reach God; that is one of the themes in the book of Hebrews, that Jesus is our eternal high priest who intercedes on our behalf. In the same way, his sacrifice is the eternal sacrifice that wipes our sin away if we accept him. Thus, there is no more clean or unclean. As is recorded in Peter's vision in Acts, God tells Peter "do not call anything impure that God has made clean" (Acts 10:15). Therefore the cleanliness laws are no longer required, as the core meaning of them has been fulfilled in Christ. In the same way, Christians don't have to be circumcised, because the mark of the covenant is no longer a physical mark on our bodies, but the indelible mark of God on our souls by the Holy Spirit. Now, if you want to relate kosher laws with laws on sexual immorality, I don't know what to tell you. To me, that is text book cherry picking of wanting to equate things without understanding what they are or their context. If you concede that we are discussing the nature of God and His relation to Man, surely you have to admit that pithy one-liners are going to fall rather short in terms of having a functional dialogue. Who What Now posted:I don't think you're wrong when you say that the bible lays out the homosexuality is a sin. In fact I agree with you when you admit to be surprised that other Christians don't. I was just correcting a faulty argument that you made in the hopes that you would stick with theological reasons against homosexuality. Very true, and I apologize if my arguments were unsatisfactory to you. I'm not used to people wanting to stay in the realm of theology with me.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Blaspheming, cursing ones parents, witchcraft, and a number of other sons are just as clearly established in Leviticus as well. So the questions becomes what should be done to/for the sinners? Should sins be criminalized? If so, what should the punishments be? If not, isn't there an onus for Christians to save people actively as well as passively? Well, if you want to talk about criminalizing sins, you're entering theocracy territory. The Bible teaches us in Romans chapter 13 that we are to respect the governing authorities, as God can use even them to His ends. In our case, that means Christians are to live in a secular society and respect the notion of separation of church and state (at least here in the US and Europe). Can Christians try to provide a positive influence on other people? Sure, but there isn't a right or onus on us to persecute or punish non-Christians. 1 Corinthians states "What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside" 1 Cor 5:12. Sin is sin, and we are all called to turn away from it, but that is for each of us a personal decision. In the end, it comes down to a choice each of us make: do we choose God, or do we reject God? That is between you and God. However, Christians are called to encourage and instruct fellow Christians to ensure that no one is led astray. Thus I really don't like those guys with the "God hate fags" signs, as it is counter to the Bible to just condemn people who are not Christians with blanket hate and no purpose. We are to gently call them to God's way and be an example for them. If they choose not to, that is for God to deal with, and we can just hope they change their minds. The Belgian posted:You're the one cherry-picking. The laws I mentioned are only a few lines above the one possibly on homosexuality in Leviticus. If Acts 10;15 applies to those, then you should also remember Acts 10:28 Yes, Acts 10:28 is Peter acknowledging that while Jewish cleanliness laws forbid any Jew (like Peter) to enter a gentile's home (Cornelius), Peter's vision of God's command is a formal revocation of the barrier between Jew and gentile, of clean and unclean. That is the entire point of that event, that we are no longer required to hold to the cleanliness laws as we are made clean by Christ's sacrifice. That is what led Paul to publicly correct Peter when Peter began to backslide to agree with the Judiazers, who held that gentile converts needed to hold to Jewish custom. You are literally picking a passage that proves my point, which suggests to me you don't understand the context or meaning of them. Are you here to actually have a dialogue on your belief in God, or are you just trying to troll a Christian?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2016 06:40
|
|
|
Slightly Toasted posted:This was a neat post to read and helped me frame the issue more rationally for when I encounter people who think things based on religion that I don't about gays in the future. I've enjoyed reading your posts in this thread, thank you. I'm glad that you found the post helpful in some way, you're welcome. Let me know if you have any other questions or thoughts you'd like to explore Rakosi posted:To the people who answered about why they believe in a specific God; why do you not believe in any of the many other Gods? Honestly, I do not really think about whether they exist or not. God, as He has made himself known to us through the prophets and His son Christ Jesus, is all sufficient for me, and I need no other. If I had to answer the question, shooting from the hip so to speak, I'd guess they don't exist as products of man, or are man's attempt to identify God and yet have chosen not to use the revelations He has provided (either through choice or simply never having heard the gospel). Even if there were other gods that existed, God has made Himself known to me in my life and I will have no other god before Him in my life. Therefore their existence or non-existence are irrelevant to me. Subyng posted:God believers: do you recognize that a belief in any one particular God (most notably God of the Abrahamic religions) is irrational and illogical? Your entire post is predicated on this statement, and yet you offer no reason or proof for this statement. Why do you believe that faith in God must be illogical simply because you yourself have not seen Him? Subyng posted:Likewise, do you recognize that your belief is most likely the result of the circumstance of your upbringing, rooted in a part of your brain that has nothing to do with rational thought and logic, and that it doesn't really make sense, but you believe it anyway "just because"? Or do you honestly believe that God is a truth of the universe in the same way that 1+1=2 is a truth of the universe? My belief in God has been built over the years by His continual presence in my life and what He has done for me. Despite being brought up in a church, my theology has been developed solely from my own study of His word and my experiences, not from what someone else has told me. I do not believe anything "just because" but have faith in my Creator because even today does He still reach out to help in my my times of need and to make manifest in my life the love He has for me. God is a fundamental truth in the universe and in my life because He has said "test me in this; ask and you shall receive, seek, and you shall find, knock and the door shall be opened," and He has never failed me yet. If someone tells me something, I might question it; if I see it for myself, I might consider it; if I experience it for myself, I know it to be true.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
Prism Mirror Lens posted:Can you go into any more detail about what God has done for you and how he is a presence? I know you started off posting about feeling as if he's guiding you or walking beside you, can you describe that more? I don't think I've ever had that feeling. I don't really get it. I can't comprehend simply 'feeling' something so strongly that I become convinced it's the truth. Sure, I'll give it a try. A more personal example is that mental or emotional issues can run in my family, which means I have some inner demons that I have to fight with a lot. There have been many times that when I struggle with these issues that God is there to help me with them. Having Him literally calm the storms in my soul over and over again is just one of the ways He lets me know He is here. It's hard to describe it in a way that will really be meaningful for other people, much like trying to explain how your significant other makes everything better. For me, it is how He brings order to chaos in my life, peace into turbulence. Prism Mirror Lens posted:Also, what happens to that feeling when your life gets poo poo, how can you feel like God is beside you and loves you and helps you when terrible things are happening? I know you said God redeems tragedies, but I felt like either you were implying that people brought the tragedies on themselves, or that, well, God just has a form of love that we can't understand. (Or are people who have unhappy lives just not faithful enough?) It has been true in my life that God shines the brightest when life is the darkest. It is all too easy during times of ease and happiness to think that it came about through my own efforts and forget about God. When I am in distress is when I turn the most to Him, selfish as it is, and yet He is there to meet me. There has been a time where the only thing that would get me out of bed is to repeat the first stanza of the poem Invictus; granted, I interpreted it slightly differently than the author, since "whatever gods may be" wasn't applicable to me, but the thought that God granted me an unconquerable soul gave me strength. As for redeeming tragedies, I do not mean that people brought them on themselves, but rather, much like the case in Orlando yesterday, people can make terrible choices and hurt others. God gave us free will to make our own decisions, even bad ones that hurt other people, but God is willing and able to meet us in the tragedy, help us through it, and bring about good despite people making evil actions. Thus I won't say that tragedies are God's plan, but rather that tragedies cannot stop God from loving us and meeting us where we need Him. Prism Mirror Lens posted:e: Also, directed to everyone: what do you think about this quote? A lot of people think that the idea of God is comforting and that atheism would be scary; this expresses the opposite. Is the idea of God existing scary or disturbing to you in any way despite your belief? Is anyone a RELUCTANT believer? I'm honestly confused. It is a great comfort to me to know that the God of the universe considers me and you worth loving, worth saving. Consider the Norse concept of Ragnarok (as explained to me, so apologies for errors) where the Norse gods must struggle mightily against looming destruction, knowing that they cannot succeed no matter what they do. That to me is the essence of despair; replace demons, or whatever is in Norse mythology, with entropy and now you have an atheist's Ragnarok. Instead, I know that victory is assured, "For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord." Romans 8:38-39. If you consider a God that loves us that much, why would His existence be something to fear? I welcome it! The only thing I can think of is the fear of condemnation, if someone is living a life they know they should not be. You don't have to be afraid of God because of that, because He is ready to forgive us should we turn to Him, so we need not fear judgement, or oblivion, or whatever. Instead we can embrace life, knowing that "for me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain." Philippians 1:21. Prism Mirror Lens posted:I'm leaving it fairly context-less because people have different ideas of what God is. But fear of God isn't an uncommon motivator to believe. Atheism can give you the reassurance that there are no universal moral laws handed down by an omnipotent authority, there is no injunction but to enjoy yourself, nobody will judge you at the end of your life, you'll just cease to exist and all your problems and failures will be forgotten in time. The idea of a Judeo-Christian God rigidly forbidding us to do certain things we don't personally find morally objectionable (homosexuality), creating (at least the conditions for) clearly morally objectionable diseases and parasites, and threatening to eternally condemn us is obviously completely terrifying. Even the idea of just 'some sort of higher power' is worrying - what properties/values does it have, what does it want from us? I think this answers the above of why people fear existence of God, because it inherently means they have to change their ways. People today don't like the idea of being responsible for their actions, instead seeking to buy now pay later, or as you say "cease to exist and all your problems and failures will be forgotten in time." As for "rigidly forbidding us to do certain things we don't personally find morally objectionable" that speaks to moral relativism, which is really just a way to defend actions we take from others judging us. Many people have done evil things because they thought they were moral. You might find the notion of Divine Morality to be an odd bronze-age abstraction, but I find moral relativism even more baffling, a case of "if you stand for nothing you will fall for anything." At least I can see the logic within the framework God sets out in his Word. As for "the idea of just 'some sort of higher power' is worrying - what properties/values does it have, what does it want from us," that is easy: God is a God of justice who has designed a wonderful creation in you and wants you to fulfill all that He has planned for you. To do that, you must turn to His way, and He is there to meet you and carry you through, to give you mercy and forgiveness when you fail. God loves you, and gave us all the grace of bridging that gap between God and Man by Himself to show it. Think about it: God Himself came down to meet us face to face and give us the chance to choose Him. Man rejected and tried to kill Him, but He turned that rejection into the sacrifice that takes our sin from us as an affirmation of His love for us. He rose from the dead to show that he breaks the chains of death and sin and promises us to be with us wherever we go, should we let Him into our lives. God wants us to love Him like He loves us. What have we to fear from that? Prism Mirror Lens posted:To me, if God is a guiding force, it seems to be a fairly inept or uncaring one. And that's scarier than the idea that NOBODY is at the helm. If I was somehow convinced via supernatural event or whatever that God exists, no matter how loving it purported to be, I'd be bricking it tbh Again, God is omnipotent, but we are not puppets. He gives us the freedom to choose our lives, and sometimes that means people choose terrible things. God doesn't want us to choose to do evil on each other, but He gave us the ability to make that choice; instead He calls us to another path and gives us the help we need to make it happen. What we choose then is on us. As for bickering with God, that actually happens several times in the Bible; each time is rather heart warming to be honest, because it shows just how much patience and understanding God has to meet us at our level. There is much that can be gained from the book of Job on this subject, because ultimately it is about "why do bad things happen to good people." The honest answer is that life is more complex and complicated than we can understand. If we concede the existence of God, one who can make the universe and all within it, would that not by definition imply that He is going to be beyond our comprehension, much like trying to imagine a 4-dimensional object? Just because we cannot understand a complex system does not mean that it is not ordered. Much like a parent to a child, God is asking us to trust Him. Yes, there is an element of the unknown in trusting, as we have to let go of the illusion of control, but He hasn't failed me yet.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2016 17:47
|
|
|
GAINING WEIGHT... posted:Purely to provoke more discussion, let me ask: what of those who say God revealed himself through the Quran and the prophet Mohammed? Your position seems to be that those who disbelieve Christianity do so by deliberately rejecting God and the legitimate methods of revelation he's utilized, but I'm certain members of other faiths are under the impression that they are being perfectly obedient to God - just the wrong one, in your view. You say it's choice, but I feel it's more of an honest mistake; what do you make of someone sincerely attempting to know God but just by accident of birth landing on the wrong one? Assume the same answer for all your other parameters: that they also feel God has made himself known to them, that they have also experienced God, etc. Honestly? This is outside my area of experience, so I don't really know. The Catholic Church holds the position that God can reach out through any structure to reach us, so maybe other religions are Man's attempt to reach God while waiting for the message to be brought to them. If someone has never heard the gospel, I doubt God would condemn them for that, but instead judge them by whether they reached out to Him as best they could. So yes, I would think they can still achieve a religious experience without being Christian. I heard of an Indian man who was a indentured slave in a brick factory speak of his conversion moment, when he prayed to God not out of any personal knowledge, but simply to the god his mother followed, and God answered him, which led to his learning more and later conversion. Those that do hear the gospel are judged by whether they respond to it, because they have been given the truth and they either choose it, or reject it. I've heard some converts from other religions speak, and their experiences vary. One muslim woman I heard spoke about how she felt liberated upon reading the Bible. I don't want to say too much about how other people experience it, since it feels like putting words in their mouth to me, and I know little of their lives. As for the last question, "how do you differentiate legitimate religious experience from illegitimate," I personally cannot aways distinguish it. I am a mortal man, I cannot look at someone or something and say "yep, God did that," or "nope, God didn't do that" in their lives with perfect accuracy. I can see something that might bear His fingerprints, so to speak, or I can see something that He would never do, but I can be wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
GAINING WEIGHT... posted:Well, I suppose I'm not really asking about those who have never heard the Gospel at all, more of those who were raised, say, in a Muslim society, and who are aware that Christians and/or the Bible exists, but for whom that scripture and that testimony do nothing. People that give the Bible that cursory glance and dismiss it with as much alacrity as you might dismiss the Quran. The core essence of Christianity is that God came down to Earth in the form of Man (as Jesus), faced all our troubles, and died for us so that he as a sinless man could take the punishment for our sins in our place. If we wish to receive that forgiveness and grace, we must turn aside from a sinful life and follow Him, and He will accompany us along the way. Those who hear this message and reject it, reject Jesus, and thus reject God. As Jesus himself said, "no one comes to the Father except through me," John 14:6. GAINING WEIGHT... posted:Right, but the point is you seem to be claiming that ability nonetheless; you've cited your experiences of God as a reason to believe, so how do you know they are indeed experiences of God? Let's make it much simpler: if a Christian and a Muslim both felt some powerful feeling of love while praying, and both were moved to cite that as evidence of their respective Gods, how do you know that the Christian was experiencing the real God, and the Muslim was mistaken? Why is it not the other way around? Let me correct my previous post: I cannot tell for other people. I can see where God has moved in my life, but I can't always see that in other people's lives. Sometimes God is as obvious as the rolling thunder, and sometimes he comes as a still small whisper when you are alone in your darkest times.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
aaaaaand this is why I gave up on the thread. It started out as a nice idea where people could share personal stories about why they believe. Then it steadily decayed into a giant argument about why someone else should or shouldn't believe. It is one thing to answer honest questions for information or to share personal stories, but when was the last time an atheists or theists changed their opinion based on arguments on SA?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
OK, at least there is a theological discussion I can join in on that doesn't have theist/atheist dichotomy.Captain_Maclaine posted:As far as I can tell? If you're not satisfied with various forms of special pleading, you're not going to get a good answer. The most honest attempts I've heard and read all seem to boil down to something roughly analogous to "the problem of evil is a significant challenge to the core thesis of who and what God is, and for that not to fail there must be an answer, so therefore there is an answer, but we just don't know what it is yet and must maintain faith that we'll find out eventually." The primary fallacy with the Problem of Evil is that it ignores that, to God, human agency is a desired goal. Let's take the first formulation of the logical Problem of Evil as listed in Wikipedia, just as a place to start: "If an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent god exists, then evil does not. There is evil in the world. Therefore, an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent God does not exist." The problem with this statement is that is assumes that if God omnibenevolent and omnipotent He must intervene any time an evil action occurs. I suppose the argument is that if God is good and hates evil, He would therefore try to stop evil at any point, otherwise he violates his value of good > evil. Thus if evil exists, it is solely because he chooses not to stop it. However, it doesn't take into consideration that that much of the evil in the world is due to Man's actions. For God to stop every evil action of Man, God essentially has to remove the concept of free will entirely. Since God created us with free will ("let us make Man in our own image") it therefore stands to reason that He values that ability to choose; therefore the presence of evil in this world is simply a reflection that God still gives us free will and that we have the power to choose our actions, and the consequences they bring. Now why is this important theologically? It is because God doesn't want puppets to worship Him, but rather He desires our love to be given to Him freely, just as He freely loves us. If God wanted worship without a choice, He would have never made creation, as the heavenly host already has that part covered. If God wanted to enjoy an evil-less creation, He would have never have created Man and simply enjoyed a universe without sapience (no ability to choose evil). Instead, He chose to create us capable of choosing Him, or not choosing Him. It is worth noting that the definition of sin is to be "off the mark" or not aligned with God's way. For God to create us such that we can choose to follow Him, He inherently gave us the ability to not choose him, which leads to evil. He has given us an example of how to live without choosing to do evil, both in his spoken Word (the Bible) and by living a righteous life Himself (as Jesus). Whether we choose to follow His example or not is up to us alone. Essentially, the Problem of Evil is only a logical problem for those who are unwilling to accept that we humans are the true source of evil. We don't have to do bad things, we choose to do them.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:Well that remains a pretty drat big problem since humans aren't the true source of all evil. That humans can and do create evil does not mean that all evil is created by humans (unless you're going the Victor route here and presuming that human sin literally causes parasites to attack the eyeballs of third world children, which don't think you are). Suffering and wrong exist in the world independent of human action as well as that which we inflict upon ourselves. If a standard omni-* God wanted us to have free will, he could still let us wreck the hell out of ourselves all we wanted without, you know, also deciding Tay-Sachs needed to be a thing. Now you're moving goal posts - is the question about the existence of evil, or why do bad things happen, aka why does suffering exist? These are two fundamentally different things. Disease it not good or evil, it just is; we may view it as evil because it causes us pain or takes someone we love away from us, but there is no moral element to a hurricane. IS capturing Yazidi women and forcing them to become sex slaves? That's evil, and that is on mankind. What you're now talking about goes into more of the book of Job, in which the answer is due to the complexity of creation beyond our comprehension, there is no answer you will like or understand ("you" referring to Man, not you specifically). Why are there earthquakes? Why do bodies age? Why is there disease? I honestly don't know; some theologians talk about how we live in a fallen world, and it is the presence of sin which has caused creation to turn from the original intent. I instead look at it more like we don't fully understand all the complexity. In the book of Job, after Job demands God to explain why his misfortune has befallen him, God responds to Job in two speeches, both of which are essentially the same idea. They both list off questions on the nature of the universe, an example being (Job 38:4-5): ""Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation? Tell me, if you understand. Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it?" The core premise of Job is that Job wanted God to explain why misfortune befell him even though he did everything right. God's point is that creation isn't so simple that it can be boiled down to "do good, and nothing bad will happen to you." Man is inherently arrogant in the sense that we always believe that we can understand everything. I think we can understand many things, but there are some things that will be beyond us. Heck, there are many things beyond most of us. There are countless mysteries in the universe that we don't know; some we've figured out, and some we will figure out, but only human arrogance says that we will figure out everything. I think this is one of those things that we can't figure out for ourselves, because the nature of life in this world is so vast and complex (and by this I mean in terms of what builds and shapes who we are). What would we be like if there was no calamity to work together against? What would it be like if we didn't have things which scared us, to humble us and make us realize that we are not the masters of the universe we believe ourselves to be? I don't know. But let's look at your last sentence again: "If a standard omni-* God wanted us to have free will, he could still let us wreck the hell out of ourselves all we wanted without, you know, also deciding Tay-Sachs needed to be a thing." What you are essentially asking for here in this sentence (assuming I understand what you mean by "wreck the hell out of ourselves") is that Man be capable of choosing a course of action but then be free from the consequences of said actions. How is that free will at all? If there is a law against speeding, and I choose to go 100 mph above the limit and never have to face a police patrol, does the speed limit have a meaning anymore? A choice without consequences is not a choice at all, merely the illusion of one. Instead, we are free to make whatever decisions we want, but there will be consequences to those choices. If you choose to steal, you have deprived someone of what was their's; if you choose to verbally abuse someone, you have inflicted emotional pain on them; if you choose to murder someone, they are dead. That is how evil is manifest. If you were free to shoot anyone like in GTA or something, and all that happens after getting 50 rounds to the chest is that they come to in the hospital 50 bucks poorer, is there any meaning anymore to the choice of whether to shoot someone or not? The actions we take have consequences, and to lay the results of our choices at the feet of God and say "it's all your fault!" is to do no less than to forfeit our own agency and humanity.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 10:26 |
|
|
Who What Now posted:There's also a moral element to prevent harm when one is able to. If a person has the ability and the awareness to prevent, say, a boulder from crushing a person by pressing a button, it would be immoral for them not to do so, even if they did not set said boulder into motion. Likewise a God who is aware of all suffering and capable of preventing it is in some way morally culpable for that suffering's existence. So what you're saying is that you want God to baby-proof creation for you, so that you have no chance to hurt yourself. However, if that was the case, we would perpetually be infantile creations, never able to advance beyond that simplified construct. Perhaps the reason for difficulties in the world is to give us opportunity to grow and become more than just a cat trying to sun itself before we feed it? According to your argument, letting a friend work out is immoral, because you're not preventing him from suffering (working out hurts). In the same way, what if suffering is an avenue for us to grow through the overcoming of said adversity? I would wager you (and most goons) would look down on someone who grew up with a silver spoon in hand that never faced a difficult day in their life, yet here you demand God do that for us. God set creation up in this way, and I believe it is for our benefit, even if it can be hard to see at times. edit: What might possibly help explain this further is the understanding that this world is not all there is, there is a life beyond this. Therefore, an early death due to adversity that builds us up is not necessarily a bad thing in of itself in relation to the life to come with God. If all you see is life on Earth, then yes, life sucks and then you die and there is nothing else. However, if this world is how God shapes us for the life to come, then whatever we face here cannot stop us, no matter how dire. Griffen fucked around with this message at 23:48 on Jun 28, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2016 23:45
|
|