God is this and that

[jayleew]

Is anyone else tired of hearing about this god notion? I'm tired of hearing declarative statements about god. Everyone who believes in god has a personal notion of what defines god. It is baffling that each interpretation even in one belief is so different. And all believers follow their belief, changing degrees of belief along the way as "the truth" is revealed to them. How vain it is for all the pretenders who don't see they are pretending. This makes it really hard to see the truth with all the BS people have made up to fill holes in the logic of their belief. How can seekers of truth like me hope to find it amongst all of it?

One belief is "God is good." I'm confused. I don't see how this can be measured because evil exists. It is only in faith that this belief is valid on a personal basis, and it is faith in words written or heard that god is good.

What I mean is a good follower can make bad mistakes and commit all sorts of sins. And god's strength cannot be measured by the success of a person because all people are fallible and there are plenty of "blessed" evil people. Maybe I'm one of them because I feel blessed, but I don't believe so I am called evil by some. I'm just sick of people measuring the power of god like this.

"God is good because I got better." "God is good because I got a new job." Who on earth praises God when they are hurting? Nope, that's when believers pray as if God is a personal slave to human will. They believe prayer helps, but prayer has a 50/50 shot at curing cancer.

Then on the opposite side of the belief spectrum you have people declaring they know exactly what god is and everyone who does not heed the person's warning shall suffer the wrath of god.

Believing in god definitely does not make a person good or the devil is good, so I am confused by religions that say I am condemned for not believing. So what is it that makes a person good? Is it that they believe and because they are good? Good is good and evil is evil.

To all those who believe that the unbeliever is evil and we will suffer the wrath of god: Seriously, the wrath of god is exactly what we need! That would put all doubts aside and maybe we can move on. If god exists then my death would at least help someone else believe. If that is even a requirement. Religion and belief is a cause for war and it is killing us. When two beliefs clash, there are always people willing to kill for their belief, right or wrong. Thankfully it isn't the majority.

Belief in the wrong hands is deadly.

What religion is is a club and a coping mechanism. The thing I did like about being a part of church and the thing I miss were that people did seem to make an effort to be good to one another for the most part and I always felt accepted. And people did help one another as the world should. Everyone was united under a single banner of love. Is that proof of god? I believe in altruism and it cannot be evil by definition.

 

[lightgigantic]

Is anyone else tired of hearing about this god notion? I'm tired of hearing declarative statements about god. Everyone who believes in god has a personal notion of what defines god.

You can't be too sick of it if you just declared something about god ....
:shrug:

 

[wynn]

Is anyone else tired of hearing about this god notion? I'm tired of hearing declarative statements about god.

That just goes to show that your own definition of God is not superior to all those others that you're tired of.

 

[Balerion]

That just goes to show that your own definition of God is not superior to all those others that you're tired of.

How so?

 

[Aqueous Id]

Is anyone else tired of hearing about this god notion? I'm tired of hearing declarative statements about god. ...

I think it needs to be talked out in the way therapy helps people recover from an illness. It's not going away anytime soon, so maybe during our lifetimes the conversation can be directed toward protecting the young and impressionable minds of later generations from the harmful effects of indoctrination.

The thing I did like about being a part of church and the thing I miss were that people did seem to make an effort to be good to one another for the most part and I always felt accepted. And people did help one another as the world should. Everyone was united under a single banner of love.

It's never too late to find a organization or movement that hangs together like a congregation. Maybe someday you'll join up with some Unitarians, or a volunteer group of some kind, or even a club, and regain that sense of community. Altruism is a universal that fits well in almost any organization regardless of whether religious belief is involved.

 

[wynn]

How so?

If he had a superior philosophy, he'd be at peace (and not frustrated or tired and such), as the superior philosophy is able to contextualize everything, and still forecast a happy ending for all.

A philosophy according to which not everyone is eventually happy (such as, for example, mainstream Christianity according to which the majority of people will burn in hell for all eternity with no hope for redemption), is not one that could consistently put one's mind at ease (unless, of course, one already subscribes to that fire-and-brimstone philosophy, but which the OP seems not to).

 

[seagypsy]

You can't be too sick of it if you just declared something about god ....
:shrug:

That just goes to show that your own definition of God is not superior to all those others that you're tired of.

The OP neither defined God nor made any declarations about God.

 

[Balerion]

If he had a superior philosophy, he'd be at peace (and not frustrated or tired and such), as the superior philosophy is able to contextualize everything, and still forecast a happy ending for all

That's nonsense. Humanism is a superior philosophy to Christianity, and yet it doesn't necessarily provide peace or "forecast a happy ending for all" (What does that even mean, anyway?) It's superior because it works better, and has a better impact upon society.

A philosophy according to which not everyone is eventually happy (such as, for example, mainstream Christianity according to which the majority of people will burn in hell for all eternity with no hope for redemption), is not one that could consistently put one's mind at ease (unless, of course, one already subscribes to that fire-and-brimstone philosophy, but which the OP seems not to).

Philosophy is not intended to put one's mind at ease. There is no such thing as universal happiness, and no one worldview is going to be all things to all people. I think you're thinking of Buddhism, or something. Not that it makes a difference, because there are plenty of maligned and angry Buddhist out there, as well, but at least they make claims of total peace and other such nonsense.

 

[jayleew]

That just goes to show that your own definition of God is not superior to all those others that you're tired of.

You missed the point. The point is I'm tired of hearing all sorts or monotheistic views. Why can't there be a definitive answer between theists on what god is and how it should be worshipped if there is one god? Perhaps there are many gods? In any single religion, for every controversial subject and about what god thinks about it, there seems to be as many different views as there are people. And they all say they are right. If they are all right and there is only one god, then it is unjust for condemning confused people. If they are all wrong but one, and there is only one god, then god is still unjust for condemning confused people.

 

[jayleew]

If he had a superior philosophy, he'd be at peace (and not frustrated or tired and such), as the superior philosophy is able to contextualize everything, and still forecast a happy ending for all.

The best way to learn something is to be a child.

 

[Jan Ardena]

jayleew,

Is anyone else tired of hearing about this god notion?

Where do you get to hear it?

I'm tired of hearing declarative statements about god.

Why does it make you tired?

Everyone who believes in god has a personal notion of what defines god.

We even have personal notions as to what defines our biological fathers. So what's your problem? I would most certainly be an atheist if there was a uniformed notion of what defines God. Which is why I'm not a fan of current institutes.

It is baffling that each interpretation even in one belief is so different.

I beg to differ, it's what makes it realistic.

And all believers follow their belief, changing degrees of belief along the way as "the truth" is revealed to them.

Do you really understand what ''belief in God'' is, or what it actually means?

How vain it is for all the pretenders who don't see they are pretending. This makes it really hard to see the truth with all the BS people have made up to fill holes in the logic of their belief. How can seekers of truth like me hope to find it amongst all of it?

Are you really seeking truth though?
Or are you seeking to justify your prefered position?
A serious question.

One belief is "God is good." I'm confused. I don't see how this can be measured because evil exists.

How would we know ''God is good'' if we don't know what good is?
How can we know something without experience of it?

There are three states of being, one is spiritual, the other material, and the other marginal, meaning we are spiritual beings, but we express ourselves through material nature. This is the basic premise from all the great teachers.
From there you should have no problem understanding this so called dilema, especially if you are a genuine seeker.

It is only in faith that this belief is valid on a personal basis, and it is faith in words written or heard that god is good.

No. It is a logical conclusion. The origin of everything IS the standard, everything else falls below, in varying degrees.

What I mean is a good follower can make bad mistakes and commit all sorts of sins.

Goodness, is not the end result. It is merely the begining. Everything that falls below that, is gross materialism of some sort or another. The root cause of sin is ignorance of ones actual position. From there all acts are done in such ignorance.

And god's strength cannot be measured by the success of a person because all people are fallible and there are plenty of "blessed" evil people.

''Evil'' is a different kettle of fish. It is an intended act which harms other living beings for selfish purposes. Evil people aren't blessed, because they don't want blessings. They abhor God, or anything to do with God, and seek to destroy God, and all lnotions of God.

Maybe I'm one of them because I feel blessed, but I don't believe so I am called evil by some.

Learning about God, questioning religious institutions or theists, and being an atheist, are not evil acts. Evil is determined by YOUR intention towards others.

"God is good because I got better." "God is good because I got a new job." Who on earth praises God when they are hurting? Nope, that's when believers pray as if God is a personal slave to human will. They believe prayer helps, but prayer has a 50/50 shot at curing cancer.

That's not the extent of theism.
You really should open your mind a bit more.

Then on the opposite side of the belief spectrum you have people declaring they know exactly what god is and everyone who does not heed the person's warning shall suffer the wrath of god.

As you said earlier, it is a personal thing, and you should not judge something purely by finite parts.

Believing in god definitely does not make a person good or the devil is good, so I am confused by religions that say I am condemned for not believing.

Don't you think it is time to leave those simplistic institutional concepts behind, as you have been at this for quite a while now. There are different types of belief, and acts of belief out there. Why stick to tv ones.

So what is it that makes a person good? Is it that they believe and because they are good? Good is good and evil is evil.

There's alot more to it than that.
A good person doesn't decide to be good, anymore than an actual theist decides to believe in God. It is a part of their make-up.

To all those who believe that the unbeliever is evil and we will suffer the wrath of god:

Do you need people to believe this?
Does it make you a stronger atheist?

Belief in the wrong hands is deadly.

What is wrong with you atheists?
You can't just believe something because you want to. You have to arrive at certain conclusion through real experience, the level of experience determines ones level of belief.

What religion is is a club and a coping mechanism.

I wouldn't know about that because there are lots of religions, and they all have different notions of their particular place in this world. That is not necessarily God consciousness.

The sad thing is, you have taken one, mabye two current institutions, and tarred the whole notion of God consciousness with them. Strangely enough this seems to be the tactic of modern atheism, pretending nothing exists apart from these institutions, thereby deeming it unecessary to look into the real scriptoral meaning, and looking for the oneness. Which would be a more scientific approach.

Is that proof of god?

What do you think?

jan.

 

[wynn]

You missed the point. The point is I'm tired of hearing all sorts or monotheistic views. Why can't there be a definitive answer between theists on what god is and how it should be worshipped if there is one god? Perhaps there are many gods? In any single religion, for every controversial subject and about what god thinks about it, there seems to be as many different views as there are people. And they all say they are right. If they are all right and there is only one god, then it is unjust for condemning confused people. If they are all wrong but one, and there is only one god, then god is still unjust for condemning confused people.

The theists don't seem to be interested in such unification. They also don't seem to see theistic diversity as much of a problem, and they don't seem to see it as their problem to solve.

Theistic diversity seems to first and foremost be the problem of seekers.
And the problem is for the one to solve who has it. In this case, the seekers. In this case, you, me, some others.

The best way to learn something is to be a child.

If you behave like a child when you're already an adult - beware, for you'll get owned, and badly.

The OP neither defined God nor made any declarations about God.

The OP clearly stated to be tired about the diversity on the topic of God.
That suggests that currently, he does not have an understanding of the topic "God" that could meaningfully contextualize theistic diversity.

 

[wynn]

Philosophy is not intended to put one's mind at ease.

Of course it is. The intended result of love of wisdom can't possibly be agitation and restlessness.

"I love wisdom, and therefore, I am a pissy, old, bitter bastard."
Only in a Frankensteinian universe does that check out.

 

[wynn]

Learning about God, questioning religious institutions or theists, and being an atheist, are not evil acts.

You're kidding, right?

What is wrong with you atheists?
You can't just believe something because you want to. You have to arrive at certain conclusion through real experience, the level of experience determines ones level of belief.

Then why do theists preach?

The whole idea of theists preaching to non-theists is to make it clear to them, ie. to the non-theists, that there is something inherently wrong with them.

Add to this the constraints in terms of time and experience that some theists place on non-theists: "By now, you should have understood this. By now you should have decided about this."
Theists imposing such constraints on non-theists is a clear sign that theists believe that things can and should be believed at will, and that they are the ones to decide whether the non-theist has had sufficient experience to consider something real or not.

You yourself place such constraints on people. You place them on me, and you are doing it to the OP, such as when telling him "Don't you think it is time to leave those simplistic institutional concepts behind, as you have been at this for quite a while now."

Gee, so you think he already has the experience to leave "those simplistic institutional concepts behind," but is persisting with them out of some stubbornness and atheistic idiocity?

The sad thing is, you have taken one, mabye two current institutions, and tarred the whole notion of God consciousness with them. Strangely enough this seems to be the tactic of modern atheism, pretending nothing exists apart from these institutions, thereby deeming it unecessary to look into the real scriptoral meaning, and looking for the oneness. Which would be a more scientific approach.

Looking for oneness at the expense of all the differences?

 

[Jan Ardena]

wynn,

Then why do theists preach?

The majority of theists don't preach.
And please don't waste time with such assumptions.


jan.

 

[Jan Ardena]

wynn,

Gee, so you think he already has the experience to leave "those simplistic institutional concepts behind," but is persisting with them out of some stubbornness and atheistic idiocity?

I think he is sub-consciously justifying his position. I don't think he, and some others feel comfortable in their position because they are simply explaining things away.

As for you, you seem to have a problem with something, but you're not actually saying what it is, and you feel pressured when asked to disclose any information which may reveal that problem. How long have we been conversing the same old thing because you don't want to move on. What do you want to gain from these discussions? Or is that a pressure question also.

for oneness at the expense of all the differences?

If you're honestly looking for answers, then the obvious way to go is to look for similarities within things. Wouldn't you agree?

jan.

 

[wynn]

As for you, you seem to have a problem with something, but you're not actually saying what it is, and you feel pressured when asked to disclose any information which may reveal that problem. How long have we been conversing the same old thing because you don't want to move on. What do you want to gain from these discussions? Or is that a pressure question also.

I have been trying to conceptualize the problem in such a manner that would render it solvable. Not to enough success so far, but I still have hope.

It's not that I am "evasive"; it's that to me, there simply seem to be many ways to state the problem, each way having some advantages and some disadvantages.

"In its proper application, the analytical mind exhausts itself" is my guideline.

I take it on faith that it is possible to conceptualize the problem surrounding theism in such a way as to render it solvable, without resorting to leaps of faith or cynicism.

If you're honestly looking for answers, then the obvious way to go is to look for similarities within things. Wouldn't you agree?

Not at all.
Both bottles and giraffes have long necks. And how exactly does that help us? It doesn't.

 

[jayleew]

jayleew,
Where do you get to hear it?
Why does it make you tired?

I hear it everywhere I go from everyone I see down the grocery isle, facebook, or at work. I am tired of people's outlook that absolutely everything good is from god. In their minds, people cannot be good without god. It simply is not true. There are plenty of good people in the world who do not believe in god. The theists argue, "Even a white lie is evil." That isn't true either. All of them are hypocrites sometimes same as me. It cannot be avoided unless they are prefect.

We even have personal notions as to what defines our biological fathers. So what's your problem? I would most certainly be an atheist if there was a uniformed notion of what defines God. Which is why I'm not a fan of current institutes.

It's not the same thing. I'm talking about their views on what their god believes about controversial subjects, not their relationships.

Do you really understand what ''belief in God'' is, or what it actually means?

The fact that you are asking insinuates that you do. That is what i'm tired of. Most of the theists claim to understand god better than the other in one way or another. Even when the understanding conflicts. This happens within a single religion or across religions.

Are you really seeking truth though?
Or are you seeking to justify your prefered position?
A serious question.

They are one and the same, it's just a matter of perspective. I don't believe I have arrived is all, so I am reevaluating my beliefs and others'.

The root cause of sin is ignorance of ones actual position. From there all acts are done in such ignorance.

Exactly. By this definition all theists are sinners because they ignore the parts in their scripture that they don't understand or are mysterious and chalk it up to a popular interpretation or make up their own. I'm tired of this.

''Evil'' is a different kettle of fish. It is an intended act which harms other living beings for selfish purposes. Evil people aren't blessed, because they don't want blessings. They abhor God, or anything to do with God, and seek to destroy God, and all lnotions of God.

I know I am "blessed" and am not evil, but theists and scriptures call me evil for the simple fact of unbelief in their god. I'm tired of this nonsense. I've put up with it before to humor them. I don't seek to destroy them or god, but my voice may do that in people's minds. I try to be careful in what I say to people so as not to destroy people's beliefs in god. I don't abhor god because I don't understand if it exists. I abhor theists who don't give credit to any power other than god's. It makes me sick because when something good happens and you see why it happened plain as day, god gets the credit. But, when something bad happens its never god's fault.

It is illogical to believe god can only do "good" because god kills and some people call that "evil".

Learning about God, questioning religious institutions or theists, and being an atheist, are not evil acts. Evil is determined by YOUR intention towards others.

Hmmm...this is a refreshing view. Unfortunately, it is not mainstream theism.

That's not the extent of theism.
You really should open your mind a bit more.

My mind is wide open. I would even go to Sunday school (not any worship service) if everyone did not assume that I believed and go on and on about "god is good" and "people are evil".

Don't you think it is time to leave those simplistic institutional concepts behind, as you have been at this for quite a while now. There are different types of belief, and acts of belief out there. Why stick to tv ones.

I'm ready to move on, but mainstream institutions are stuck in their rigid beliefs of what is "good" and what is "evil." Their books condemn people who do not believe.

The sad thing is, you have taken one, mabye two current institutions, and tarred the whole notion of God consciousness with them. Strangely enough this seems to be the tactic of modern atheism, pretending nothing exists apart from these institutions, thereby deeming it unecessary to look into the real scriptoral meaning, and looking for the oneness. Which would be a more scientific approach.

Look, i'm just saying I'm sick of hearing the current institutions dogma, just as you have previously stated you are too. It's sort of refreshing to hear this coming from what appears to be a theist defense. I have no sanctuary from the mainstream views. They are everywhere I go. I'm sick of the ignorance mainstream thesists show towards one another, but in the same breath claim to be right and condemn unbelievers.

Your theistic view is refreshing. I still don't believe, but that is another topic of discussion.

 

[jayleew]

wynn,
The majority of theists don't preach.
And please don't waste time with such assumptions.
jan.

They may not mostly preach, but they profess tiresome nonsense.

The straw that broke my camel's back was when at work someone was canned. One of our leaders spoke and just started going on a tangent about how the person was going to be fine because the person who was fired was a theist and a good man and god is good. He professed to the group here that because of this, the man would be fine and actually end up in a better place because that's what happened when he himself believes and is on the receiving end of the shit.

I thought to myself..."Really? This is hardly appropriate for me to have to sit here and be subjugated."

The man is going to be fine because he is a good man and a smart man with a lot of experience.

Our leader went on and on to comfort the believers here about how the church the man was a member of was behind him. Another irritation was that the reason he had spoken was to comfort everyone about the situation because there are mostly theists employed here. Some devout, others just go because their spouse goes.

What a sad state of affairs. I let him have his moment because I felt it the right thing to do to let everyone feel good that the man was going to be okay.

He didn't have to make it a church service, but he did. And it's been like this for awhile, I can't get away from being in church. I go to the grocery store and I'm in church hearing about how good god is because so and so got a job or so and so got married and so and so is better now. Where was the beauty of the sweat of the brow, or love, or doctors?

And to this i've heard, "Well, where do you think doctors get their medicine."

I'm sick of this brainwashing....seriously! Credit is never given to man for success. I guess every rich person is good then because they are successful. Is that it? Of course they'd say, "no." It's a mind-numbing circle of fallacy upon fallacy. All of which comes from ignorance of the holes of the belief in their god. It is the reason faith is necessary.

Is there a point when faith become ignorance of what is good and evil?

 

[arfa brane]

What if instead of someone telling you what or who God is (in their opinion), they said they can't tell you, but it doesn't matter, you already know.

On the one hand it's a big deal, as attested by all the opinions. On the other hand, it's no big deal.
Subtle are the ways of the Lord.