kx000
Valued Senior Member
How about I prove I exist. Even face to face you can't be sure.
I Believe in God.
- Thread starter NMSquirrel
- Start date
How about I prove I exist. Even face to face you can't be sure.
Prove it.
At least in studying the Abrahamic faiths, I came to the conclusion that "God" as described in the texts, had symptoms of many psychological disorders, such as narcissism, suicidal tendencies, pedophilia, and more recently existing in a catatonic state. But that's just my perspective.
How do you align this with the idea that the Bible was written from the specific perspective of a people, whom God Himself is said to have considered "stiff-necked"?
What people say about another person first and foremost says something about themselves, not about that other person.
Projection.
Hey, that's almost straight from some of my past posts. I can see you and I think alike.
Most of the bases have been covered here, I would add that it has regional meaning (tagging JDawg's post near the top):
So if I'm at the Piggly-Wiggly is Tuscaloosa or Murfreesboro or Dimebox it almost invariably conveys a similar local view. For example, if I were to say "I heard they stawted teechin' evvalooshun in theeze heah potz" it would not be unusual to get the response "I believe in God".
However, if I stopped for red beans and rice at Preservation Hall, and the conversation concerned the possibility that someone saw the Virgin Mary in paint chips on the wall, the response could just as likely be "I believe in God."
yes..but it is not assumption...it is what i have noticed here on sci forums..not so much with the users who have posted in this thread as i haven't seen much from them (with the exception of Wynn (who came closest to expressing his assumptions) and Knowledge)
I will admit that i failed horribly with my original intent..(to catch ppl in their assumptions)
i guess you guys are just smarter than that.
yes..but it is not assumption...it is what i have noticed here on sci forums..not so much with the users who have posted in this thread as i haven't seen much from them (with the exception of Wynn (who came closest to expressing his assumptions) and Knowledge)
I will admit that i failed horribly with my original intent..(to catch ppl in their assumptions)
i guess you guys are just smarter than that.
heh heh...
NOW I will finally post on topic.
Most people will assume things. If, upon meeting someone, they make that statement, they do so with intent.
Similar to feeling out a persons interests or hobbies, you want to see if you're on the same page.
I make assumptions whenever I hear it. You know this about me... we've discussed it already.
But it is not a negative thing to make these assumptions- The definition of "God" is only as broad as it is because he can be whatever the believer wants him to be.
My own image of God, when I was a believer, was a very parental and benevolent critter. He was subtle, kind, authoritative - all forgiving. Nothing, really, as he's described in the bible! Closer to what the Modern Church tries to portray him as, with a great deal of propaganda.
I could tell you many stories about the times in my life God got me through those hard times. I didn't grow up an atheist. I grew up a believer. Was never a bible-thumper but I was devout. Was even in the ministry.
And when I concluded there is no God- it was painful. It was like a sad divorce. I hurt over it.
I make assumptions that people believe such as a comfort. They believe such, not because there really is evidence- but because they want to believe and any evidence will do, really.
There is a lot of comfort in believing a divine being is watching over you.
I assume that is a person that will justify or rationalize. That will blame a deity or beg said deity for help. It's a person that won't examine events as they happened, but events as defined by a divine source.
I assume that they have the potential to try to fill my ears with woo.
That this is a person who won't be accepting of ideas that are not Godly in nature.
I assume that they are the sort who will reject hearing what they do not wish to hear.
I could go on but you get the idea-- I have given you what I think you wanted, now.
I do not think the assumptions are a negative thing- they are a cautious one.
If I meet someone and he says, "I believe in Marx." I will be just as cautious- I know his political agenda is profoundly different than my own.
Yazata
Valued Senior Member
Short answer: If somebody makes that statement, ask them to expand on what they mean by it. The answers to that you get will probably vary quite a bit, depending on the individual and on the circumstances.
Longer answer: Questions can probably be asked about every word in the sentence : "I believe in God".
Who and what is "I"? It's a real philosophical question, but we can probably ignore it in this instance.
"in' seems to be a grammatical function, and we can ignore it too.
But what is "God" supposed to mean? What does that very impressive but rather odd word refer to, if anything?
And what kind of work is "believe" doing here? What is somebody saying when they say that they believe in something? What differences are there between everyday common-sensical instances of 'believe' and specifically religious cases where somebody 'believes' in a deity.
Is this just a cognitive state in which somebody affirms the extra-subjective reality of something? Or is there a specifically religious performative aspect to it too? I mean, mythology's Satan character must presumably be said to 'believe' in mythology's God character, in the sense of acknowledging God existence.
So are religious 'believers' really affirming that they stand in some kind of additional relationship to God, that goes beyond that? Are they saying that they have assumed some kind of internal psychological attitude towards God, that they are trying to orient their lives towards their deity, that they are recognizing this God as their "Lord" or something?
Last edited:
Although, I am not aware of any place in the bible where god calls the people stiff-necked, I will, for argument sake, assume you are not making it up, for now. People will often attempt to validate their claims by displaying false humility when in reality they subconsciously or even consciously exclude themselves from the group they are criticizing.
(example: a parent claims that parents today just don't care about their children. In order for this claim to be valid, the one who made it must also not care about their children. But it is probable that the one speaking excluded his or herself from the group, implying "all parents but me". Creating the false qualifier that since they are the exception to the rule, they are qualified to make such a claim. )
IMO, the individuals who wrote the bible must have believed that they were better than the people who they expected to read and follow the bible. Because they already knew everything, they didn't need a book to tell them right from wrong, it is everyone else who is unable to figure that out for themselves. So they appointed themselves the emissaries of good and claimed it was god that appointed them, otherwise the masses may have rejected their presumed qualifications.
Considering the time period it was written in, the definition of "stiff-necked" would undoubtedly vary from what the majority of people today consider "stiff-necked".
Not necessarily. If I say "my daughter is black". All it says about me is that I am aware of my child's ethnicity. And all it says about my daughter is that she is perceived to be black by at least one person.
I don't disagree that the way someone expresses their opinions about someone or the validations one gives to justify their opinions does tell you more about them as a whole.
Reading into things and making assumptions about people, gives you false insight into things. So believing you can discern a lot about someone thing from a statement of observation made by an individual leaves you in a state of judging a book by its cover, or title.
yes..but it is not assumption...it is what i have noticed here on sci forums..not so much with the users who have posted in this thread as i haven't seen much from them (with the exception of Wynn (who came closest to expressing his assumptions) and Knowledge)
I will admit that i failed horribly with my original intent..(to catch ppl in their assumptions)
i guess you guys are just smarter than that.
Oh well why didn't you say so? If you want my knee jerk reaction to someone telling me they believe in God, I guess it would depend on the setting. If it was someone I know, I would take the statement into account with all that I already know about the person.
If I am in public minding my own business and a stranger walks up to me and says this. I would probably back away slowly then turn and run. It is unusual for someone to violate unwritten social constructs and walk up to strangers and say something like that without provocation unless they are mentally unstable.
If I am on Sciforums, I assume they are trying to start a debate between atheists and theists which if not careful will undoubtedly turn into a finger pointing joust of 'I know you are but what am I?'
And you say you were once religious??
Read your Bible - http://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=stiff-necked&qs_version=NIV
Be that as it may: The Jews had it in them to write down "stiff-necked" and this in reference to themselves.
And same goes for God, as far as religious scriptures are concerned.
I never said I memorized word for word any religious text. The only faith I am aware of that does at the very least "reward" such an act is Islam.
Also with so many versions of the Bible available, semantics gets lost. But none of this detracts from your point. But I do appreciate your willingness to back up a claim. It certainly does help me to understand your viewpoint better, rather than just taking your word for it.
You said:
God of the bible is often declaring people to be greedy, arrogant, lustful, jealous, and foul in all possible ways, quite often because of the acts of a few. Check his opinions of the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah. His opinions of Cananites or all of preflood civilization. If humanity has a history of being vile disgusting sinners, yet we were created in his image, what does that say?
Does the rule of what we say about others apply only to people or does it also apply to God?
Now to clarify what I see as a difference in the two situations. Most individuals do not have huge books, and schools set up to teach others what they want people to know about them. If God did indeed reveal himself as the bible claims. and if you want to use the bible as the authority on the matter that it claims to be. then God has gone to great lengths to make us understand him by revealing his strongest desires and methods of reasoning to us. It is by a huge book of explanation, supposedly presented by God himself, that I feel I can make such judgements. If this were a courtroom of life and God presented the Bible as his witness statement to his own character, I would have declared him by his own confession to be nuts.
My 'Into the Lands Of the Gods' illustrated book pages:
http://www.toequest.com/forum/anecdotal-stories/6091-into-the-lands-the-gods.html
For the Super Heavy Weight Championship
Of the Universe: God vs. Science:
http://www.toequest.com/forum/anecdotal-stories/6092-the-super-heavy-weight-championship-the-universe-god-vs-science.html
http://www.toequest.com/forum/anecdotal-stories/6091-into-the-lands-the-gods.html
For the Super Heavy Weight Championship
Of the Universe: God vs. Science:
http://www.toequest.com/forum/anecdotal-stories/6092-the-super-heavy-weight-championship-the-universe-god-vs-science.html
At least in some traditions, they focus on issues of humility and pride, hence the stiff-neckedness reference.
??
I thought we agreed that the Bible is written from the perspective of a particular people?
We did and I still agree with you on that.
But my comment was referring to god as if he existed and from the ideas expressed in the bible, not from my analysis of whether or not I agreed with the actual authors of it.