If you want to honestly and seriously believe in God ...

[greenberg]

If you are someone who is so far unsure about God, but you want to honestly and seriously believe in God ... then you're in big trouble, to say the least.

Theists all around you tell you theirs is the only true faith. They claim they know God. Their claims are often mutually exclusive.
Since you have no first-hand knowledge of God, you can't know who's right and who isn't.
Since you have no first-hand knowledge of God, you can't know who is telling the truth about God and who isn't.
It appears that anyone could be right - or wrong.

You could follow your fancy or your feelings. But if there truly is only one right God, then following your fancy or your feelings doesn't seem like the best route to take. There should be a more reliable and more respectable way to arrive at belief in God.

And since you have no first-hand knowledge of God and all you have ever heard in relation to God was by people, you have to rely on them or the texts they refer to. Which brings you back to the beginning.

If you are someone who is so far unsure about God, but you want to honestly and seriously believe in God, then you're in big trouble, to say the least.

Your options are either

1. to blindly follow some theists or their texts,
2. to give in to your personal fancies or feelings,
3. to remain unsure - and thus is perpetual trouble,
4. to give up your desire for believing in God.

Either way, you're going to be in trouble:

1. If you blindly follow some theists or their texts, your faith won't be worth much and you won't be able to rely on it, because it's blind faith.

2. If you give in to your personal fancies or feelings, who knows where you end up in.

3. If you remain unsure, you'll be in perpetual agony.

4. If you give up your desire for believing in God, you could be buying yourself a ticket to hell.

 

[Sciencelovah]

If you are someone who is so far unsure about God, but you want to honestly and seriously believe in God, then you're in big trouble, to say the least.

Your options are either

1. to blindly follow some theists or their texts,
2. to give in to your personal fancies or feelings,
3. to remain unsure - and thus is perpetual trouble,
4. to give up your desire for believing in God.

Not really, there are always other options.

As for me, I like to follow what I believe is true, at the time
I see the truth in it, until I find its not true and see another
truth.

For example, if my current knowledge leads me to the level to be
theist of a certain religion, then be it. If my future knowledge
leads me to the level to be atheist/agnostic/etc, then be it.

The process of searching and learning may take whole life time,
but I believe it is worth doing.

 

[lightgigantic]

If you are someone who is so far unsure about God, but you want to honestly and seriously believe in God ... then you're in big trouble, to say the least.

Theists all around you tell you theirs is the only true faith. They claim they know God. Their claims are often mutually exclusive.
Since you have no first-hand knowledge of God, you can't know who's right and who isn't.
Since you have no first-hand knowledge of God, you can't know who is telling the truth about God and who isn't.
It appears that anyone could be right - or wrong.

You could follow your fancy or your feelings. But if there truly is only one right God, then following your fancy or your feelings doesn't seem like the best route to take. There should be a more reliable and more respectable way to arrive at belief in God.

And since you have no first-hand knowledge of God and all you have ever heard in relation to God was by people, you have to rely on them or the texts they refer to. Which brings you back to the beginning.

If you are someone who is so far unsure about God, but you want to honestly and seriously believe in God, then you're in big trouble, to say the least.

Your options are either

1. to blindly follow some theists or their texts,
2. to give in to your personal fancies or feelings,
3. to remain unsure - and thus is perpetual trouble,
4. to give up your desire for believing in God.

Either way, you're going to be in trouble:

1. If you blindly follow some theists or their texts, your faith won't be worth much and you won't be able to rely on it, because it's blind faith.

2. If you give in to your personal fancies or feelings, who knows where you end up in.

3. If you remain unsure, you'll be in perpetual agony.

4. If you give up your desire for believing in God, you could be buying yourself a ticket to hell.

sorry I couldn't resist
(oh those feelings)

 

[Jan Ardena]

greenberg,

If you are someone who is so far unsure about God, but you want to honestly and seriously believe in God ... then you're in big trouble, to say the least.

Can you really be "unsure" about God?
Or do you mean not sure whether to believe in God or not?

Theists all around you tell you theirs is the only true faith. They claim they know God. Their claims are often mutually exclusive.

This is an exageration.

Since you have no first-hand knowledge of God, you can't know who's right and who isn't.

What do you mean by "first-hand knowledge of God"?

Since you have no first-hand knowledge of God, you can't know who is telling the truth about God and who isn't.

Then only way you can detect truth in any subject is through personal experience, and even then it is subjective. Otherwise you base your belief in faith, trust, understanding, knowledge, and so on.

You could follow your fancy or your feelings. But if there truly is only one right God, then following your fancy or your feelings doesn't seem like the best route to take. There should be a more reliable and more respectable way to arrive at belief in God.

The most reliable is your self, this can also be the most unreliable, so self-realisation is where it all starts.

And since you have no first-hand knowledge of God and all you have ever heard in relation to God was by people, you have to rely on them or the texts they refer to. Which brings you back to the beginning.

What would you class as first-hand knowledge?
How would you know it was such?

If you are someone who is so far unsure about God, but you want to honestly and seriously believe in God, then you're in big trouble, to say the least.

If you are "unsure" about God, then you are unsure. What process of knowledge was used to come to this conclusion?

Your options are either

1. to blindly follow some theists or their texts,
2. to give in to your personal fancies or feelings,
3. to remain unsure - and thus is perpetual trouble,
4. to give up your desire for believing in God.

Either way, you're going to be in trouble:

These options don't really mean anything.

1. If you blindly follow some theists or their texts, your faith won't be worth much and you won't be able to rely on it, because it's blind faith.

But you can come to understand God through reading texts, or being inspired by people who follow the rules and regulations of their particular scripture.

2. If you give in to your personal fancies or feelings, who knows where you end up in.

You may end up understanding God through reading texts, or being inspired by people who follow the rules and regulations of their particular scripture.

3. If you remain unsure, you'll be in perpetual agony.

Why would you remain unsure?

4. If you give up your desire for believing in God, you could be buying yourself a ticket to hell.

Maybe, it depends on your actions.

Jan.

 

[greenberg]

Can you really be "unsure" about God?
Or do you mean not sure whether to believe in God or not?

Both.

Theists all around you tell you theirs is the only true faith. They claim they know God. Their claims are often mutually exclusive.

This is an exageration.

It's not. Jehowah's Witnesses claim everyone else is wrong, so do Calvinists, Mormons, etc.

What do you mean by "first-hand knowledge of God"?

To know the truth about God myself and not having to rely on scripture or people (anymore).

The most reliable is your self, this can also be the most unreliable, so self-realisation is where it all starts.

I am beginning to think that the necessary requirement for freely and responsibly believing in God is Enlightenment, being completely without suffering and knowing true lasting happiness.
Because otherwise, one will always be biased and unsure in some way or another.

If you are "unsure" about God, then you are unsure. What process of knowledge was used to come to this conclusion?

Hearing a multitude of accounts that claim to be the truth about God.
Not knowing which one to believe.

But you can come to understand God through reading texts, or being inspired by people who follow the rules and regulations of their particular scripture.

And what to do with the millions of other people who oppose you and claim that your understanding of God is wrong?

Why would you remain unsure?

Because of the discrepancies in what people declare to be the truth about God.

Can you refute Calvinism?
If Calvinism is true, then there is really nothing I can do about my own belief (or lack thereof) in God.

 

[Jan Ardena]

greenberg,

It's not. Jehowah's Witnesses claim everyone else is wrong, so do Calvinists, Mormons, etc.

They are theists, but they do not constitute being "all around".

To know the truth about God myself and not having to rely on scripture or people (anymore).

What knowledge do you, I, or anyone, possess, that can decide the "truth" about God, without resorting to scripture or people?

I am beginning to think that the necessary requirement for freely and responsibly believing in God is Enlightenment, being completely without suffering and knowing true lasting happiness.
Because otherwise, one will always be biased and unsure in some way or another.

Why do you think this?

Hearing a multitude of accounts that claim to be the truth about God.
Not knowing which one to believe.

What truth do you possess?

And what to do with the millions of other people who oppose you and claim that your understanding of God is wrong?

I would ask them why is my understanding wrong.

Because of the discrepancies in what people declare to be the truth about God.

It appears that you rely heavily on what other people say, especially if they are en-masse. I don't really know how to respond to that.

Can you refute Calvinism?
If Calvinism is true, then there is really nothing I can do about my own belief (or lack thereof) in God.

Does it resonate with scriptures?
I'm not very familiar with 'calvinism' (but am going look into it), but the first thing I would look for is how much it resonates with scriptures.

Jan.

 

[SetiAlpha6]

Can you refute Calvinism?
If Calvinism is true, then there is really nothing I can do about my own belief (or lack thereof) in God.

The Bible itself both teaches and refutes Calvinism, so you can pretty much throw out the Bible as a perfect compass for truth. The Koran is self-inconsistent as well so you can throw that one out also. And so is the Book of Mormon. I guess that leaves just the Flying Spaghetti Monster. As far as I know, at least with him, there are no "basic to the faith" contradictions.

Best Wishes!

May you be touched by His noodly appendage and be blessed!

Ramen...

 

[greenberg]

They are theists, but they do not constitute being "all around".

True, meeting them usually doesn't happen in a big meeting hall where all religions would be present. But in the human mind, it is like being in such a hall.

To know the truth about God myself and not having to rely on scripture or people (anymore).

What knowledge do you, I, or anyone, possess, that can decide the "truth" about God, without resorting to scripture or people?

Currently, I do not know. But if other people and those who wrote the scriptures possess that knowledge, then why couldn't I?
If other people claim to know the truth about God for themselves, why would it be so preposterous for me to want the same?

I am beginning to think that the necessary requirement for freely and responsibly believing in God is Enlightenment, being completely without suffering and knowing true lasting happiness.
Because otherwise, one will always be biased and unsure in some way or another.

Why do you think this?

When one suffers, when one is deluded, one obviously cannot see clearly. Thus, one also cannot see God clearly. So I conclude that in order to see God clearly, one would first have to be free of suffering and delusion (which include being free from hatred and lust).

Hearing a multitude of accounts that claim to be the truth about God.
Not knowing which one to believe.

What truth do you possess?

I possess (" ") the truth that I know that different people claim different things about God.

And what to do with the millions of other people who oppose you and claim that your understanding of God is wrong?

I would ask them why is my understanding wrong.

That makes for a task that takes years and years to accomplish.

It appears that you rely heavily on what other people say, especially if they are en-masse. I don't really know how to respond to that.

Like I said several times - I have no first-hand knowledge of God, all I have is what people are telling me.

Does it resonate with scriptures?
I'm not very familiar with 'calvinism' (but am going look into it), but the first thing I would look for is how much it resonates with scriptures.

They say it does. And if anyone disagrees, the Calvinists will say that person doesn't understand correctly.

 

[Dr Mabuse]

one could subscribe to, and 'relax' into a simple idea of...

"though the paths of men are many... they all lead to me..."

'me' being the concept of a, usually anthropomorphised, god...

all your ideas in your post had already ruled that simple thought out...

the idea that one couldn't avoid "honestly and seriously believe(ing) in God" if one wanted to... it was inevitable...

for one quick thought on the matter...

 

[greenberg]

You could always Ask God for guidance.

But then again if your will deep down is to resist God then even if God comes along and say "Hi there greenberg i am God and this is my will" you can always reason it away as a figment of your imagination or that you only heard it because you wanted to.

You are forgetting that I don't already believe in God. What you are saying would apply only if I already would believe in God.


But you don't understand that.

 

[greenberg]

Ohhh it's amazing what people can do if their minds are set on doing it.

People like you will never acknowlegde me as an honest person, will you?

 

[Donnal]

wow i couldnt have said it better myself greenberg
thats how i percieve religeon it dont matter who or what u choose to bow too
theres always sumone looking over ur shoulders

 

[Jan Ardena]

greenberg,

What knowledge do you, I, or anyone, possess, that can decide the "truth" about God, without resorting to scripture or people?

Currently, I do not know. But if other people and those who wrote the scriptures possess that knowledge, then why couldn't I?

Knowledge requires qualification, are you qualified?

If other people claim to know the truth about God for themselves, why would it be so preposterous for me to want the same?

Other people?

When one suffers, when one is deluded, one obviously cannot see clearly. Thus, one also cannot see God clearly. So I conclude that in order to see God clearly, one would first have to be free of suffering and delusion (which include being free from hatred and lust).

So how do we get out of suffering?

I possess (" ") the truth that I know that different people claim different things about God.

Therefore you should understand that there must be a source i.e scriptures.
What is your take on the source?

That makes for a task that takes years and years to accomplish.

Examine the nature of your question.

Like I said several times - I have no first-hand knowledge of God, all I have is what people are telling me.

I have no first-hand knowledge of cavier (spelling), but i'll be dammed if I'm going to rely on "other people" to explain its essence, in an attempt to understand it.

They say it does. And if anyone disagrees, the Calvinists will say that person doesn't understand correctly.

What do you say?

Jan.

 

[Sarkus]

Ohhh it's amazing what people can do if their minds are set on doing it.

"Yep - it sure is" he says as he looks at the vast swathes of theists.

 

[(Q)]

If you are someone who is so far unsure about God, but you want to honestly and seriously believe in God ... then you're in big trouble, to say the least.

It really has nothing to do with beliefs or gods and everything to do with indoctrination. No one really "wants" to be indoctrinated as this is abuse, but unfortunately, parents and the church have the ultimate say.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

People like you will never acknowlegde me as an honest person, will you?

*************
M*W: No, they won't, because we are a threat that might expose their delusion for what it is.
*************
M*W's Friendly Atheist Quote of the Day:

"Men make themselves believe what they believe." ~ Michel Eyquem de Montaigne

 

[greenberg]

Knowledge requires qualification, are you qualified?

I don't know. It seems I am not.
And frankly, I am losing the desire to deal with what people say about God. Even at the cost of my own going to hell. Because my having to deal with what anyone or anything claims about God and always being open-minded about it, always having to be willing to completely overhaul my understanding and never knowing any certainty or safety - this is hell right here already. I might as well not believe in God at all.

If other people claim to know the truth about God for themselves, why would it be so preposterous for me to want the same?

Other people?

Other people, yes, like Adstar or Photizo here.

So how do we get out of suffering?

My best guess is - Continually check our actions, our intentions, and the results of our actions for whether they lead to harm or not. If they do, abandon those actions and those intentions; if they don't, continue.

I possess (" ") the truth that I know that different people claim different things about God.

Therefore you should understand that there must be a source i.e scriptures.
What is your take on the source?

That it was written by people.

This is not to say that simply because it was written by people, it can be dismissed.
But with an important thing like believing in God and matters of the meaning of life, I won't simply believe a book about such important matters the way I would a cookbook about cooking or a math textbook about math.

Like I said several times - I have no first-hand knowledge of God, all I have is what people are telling me.

I have no first-hand knowledge of cavier (spelling), but i'll be dammed if I'm going to rely on "other people" to explain its essence, in an attempt to understand it.

I think so too.

They say it does. And if anyone disagrees, the Calvinists will say that person doesn't understand correctly.

What do you say?

I don't know.
Either way I would try to answer the challenge of Calvinist claims, I would be speaking beyond my competence, trying to make a decision about something that is not within my power to know.

 

[greenberg]

It does not matter at all what i think about you greenberg. If you want to proudly boast about how honest you are go right ahead.

But know this such statements and arguments no matter how eloquently put forward will cut it with God upon the day of judgement,

How you twist what I say.

You want me to believe you and what you say, but you do not believe me.
You want me to trust you and what you say, but you do not trust me.
You want me to respect you and what you say, but you do not respect me.


And you think this is perfectly allright.

 

[Jan Ardena]

greenberg,

And frankly, I am losing the desire to deal with what people say about God.

Well I'm glad we've cleared that up, at least we know your exact position.

Even at the cost of my own going to hell.

You do not believe in God, so why even consider hell.

I might as well not believe in God at all.

noted.

Other people, yes, like Adstar or Photizo here.

Your position is, a) you WILL not bring yourself to believe, b) you are losing the desire to deal with what people (scriptures) say about God.
As you take what others say seriously, take this, be on your way, don't waste time with something you have no interest in.

My best guess is - Continually check our actions, our intentions, and the results of our actions for whether they lead to harm or not. If they do, abandon those actions and those intentions; if they don't, continue.

Good standard.

This is not to say that simply because it was written by people, it can be dismissed.

Then where do you go from here?

But with an important thing like believing in God and matters of the meaning of life, I won't simply believe a book about such important matters the way I would a cookbook about cooking or a math textbook about math.

Fair dos.

Jan.

 

[nova900]

Trusting in human beings is the surest way a person can be lead to destruction.

Human beings wrote the bible, so...based on your very own comment,why should we trust every human author of the bible and everything they say about God??