Why doesn't God just show himself?

[P. M. Thorne]

Hey, to Lemming3K..

You did write this: "strangly i always find the journey tends to be better than the destination."

That is not so good. Is this something like anticipation is better than realization? Gosh, I disagree mucho! But to say that your journey is better than your destination...how do you know? You are not there yet, fella. Hang on! It gets better.

 

[P. M. Thorne]

MARIO.........

Here is my response to your free will comments, (even though these seem more like the subject of another thread! ).

Mario: I'll try to explain my thoughts on freewill again. I said freewill can work if god doesn't know what we will choose before we actually choose it. But according to the bible god already knows what man will do. That countries will go to war.

Okay, knowing that countries will war against each other in no way affects free will. I know that it will rain again, but this does nothing to the weather pattern, right?

Mario: That an antichrist will be born and have no choice but to start armageddon.

Knowing that something will happen does not mean that the happening had no choice. I know that someone will be elected president this year, if the Lord tarries and the world stands, but I do not know yet whom.

Mario: Another example is when jesus told peter that he will deceive him not once, not twice, but exactly 3 times before the cock crows.

You need to get your story straight, kiddo. In each of the gospel, it is recorded that Peter would “deny” Christ three times, not deceive him. (?)

Mario: I hope that makes things a little clearer.

I am afraid not. Your whole argument is faulty insomuch as your base is confusing. You do ramble. If you do not believe the bible, fine. If you do, this is fine, but all this nonsense about free will, is just that. As I stated before, we do have choices, but our choices are limited by external conditions and inherent qualities. I say, if you disagree with this, give an argument for your disagreement, rather than hashing the same thing over and over again. Because, your taking scriptures out of context and presenting them in such an ambiguous way is not a valid argument, especially when add or take away from them, by misquoting, okie dokie?

 

[§outh§tar]

How much pompous arrogance does it take to preach from a book? What about to pretend that your book is representative of the creator of the universe? IMO, that is about as pompous and arrogant as it gets.

Since there is no "pretence", I don't know what you are talking about.. And as for preaching from a book I already pointed out the ways by which we know God, which I see you did not bother with..

Who is 'we'? You mean "believers"? How do you know that "believers" believe the same thing? You think Jenyar thinks it's cool for you to speak for him in that context? What about Rosa? What about PMT? Should we all just accept your vision as what "we" see? Have you considered the possiblity that your idea of ME for instance, in your mind, is really the equivalent of a stimulus-based imaginary friend, and vice-versa? What if your "holy spirit" is a delusion, made up by you in the same sense that people anthopomorphize the construct in their mind of their friends, or people they interact with? Why is god more than your imaginary friend? Why are you so sure? You don't think that your sureness is pompous or arrogant?

'We' as in humankind. Well, let me clarify things. My "holy spirit" is not made up. I see you failed to read my subsequent reply as well. My assurance is based on the points I listed in my reply, if you had read it. From my reply, you should be able to tell that there should be no arrogance whatsoever..

God is definately real, but only as a fantasy in the minds of those who contemplate god. Any further assertion of god is pure arrogant tripe.

Which takes us back to my reply, which discussses how we come to know God...

How the shit do you know what I refuse to do? What if I'm a lot smarter than you and I simply see past your stupid crap?

Intelligence is useless when it comes to knowing God.. again if you had read my reply.

What if I'm a lot more stupid than you and, no matter how many times you repeat your 'truth', I can't possibly get it because I'm literally incapable? What if, due to the way my mind is shaped (in the abstract sense), there is no way to see your perspective? What if it's the other way around? What about both? You are simply smarmy and sanctimonious to accuse me of "refusing to see".

As for your mind being inclined to rejecting what I'm saying, that is a possibility I don't deny. But what exactly is your point here? I am not being smarmy, I never forced you to do anything did I? And to think you accuse me of being smarmy and sanctimonious..

So what, I should take YOUR word for it right? Maybe Jenyars? LOL. Who is pompous and arrogant?

You are.

Hence

Got ASSHAT?

If you read my reply, you would know that it isn't my "word" you should be accepting. I don't know why you refuse to base this on what I said in my reply but here it is for ya:

All we know about God is what He has told us (in the Bible or through the Holy Spirit or through people the Holy Spirit reveals to) and what we see in nature.

As you can see, its only one sentence. Your whole argument purposely overlooked it in your effort to attack me and call me 'smarmy'.

Thank you.

 

[water]

SouthStar,

Whenever you say things like that

All we know about God is what He has told us (in the Bible or through the Holy Spirit or through people the Holy Spirit reveals to) and what we see in nature.

*do* add that all *we*/*you* know about God is not all there is to know about God.


You would spare everyone of a lot of grief and bad blood.

 

[JustARide]

Holy shit! 363 replies!

I didn't have anything to say... just holy shit.

Please continue.

Josh

 

[Jenyar]

Who is 'we'? You mean "believers"? How do you know that "believers" believe the same thing? You think Jenyar thinks it's cool for you to speak for him in that context? What about Rosa? What about PMT? Should we all just accept your vision as what "we" see?

And there is agreement in what I, Rosa, PMT and others believe. Even with what you believe, believe it or not. The Spirit is recognizable by love and truth. It's not what SouthStar believes that is right, nor I, nor Rosa, PMT, or anybody... it's the Spirit of Truth. We're anthropomorphizations of it.

(I'm not speaking for anybody here, but you can recognize something when you're familiar with it)

 

[water]

But there is agreement in what I, Rosa, PMT and others believe. Even with what you believe, believe it or not. The Spirit is recognizable by love and truth. It's not what SouthStar believes that is right, nor I, nor Rosa, PMT, or anybody... it's the Spirit of Truth. We're anthropomorphs of it.

Why is it that only *after* someone -- I don't want to mention any names -- starts spitting sulphur and fire that someone else finally comes up with this idea!?!?

Arrgghhh.

 

[Jenyar]

"Truth, like leaves, sometimes needs to be shaken loose, sometimes picked up" - Jenyar

 

[Lemming3k]

Hey, to Lemming3K..

You did write this: "strangly i always find the journey tends to be better than the destination."

That is not so good. Is this something like anticipation is better than realization? Gosh, I disagree mucho! But to say that your journey is better than your destination...how do you know? You are not there yet, fella. Hang on! It gets better.

I just meant in general life, when im travelling or trying to get somewhere in life, but as for the destination at the end of life their may or may not be one, so i am making sure i enjoy the journey, just incase.
Life is one big road trip, we dont know the destination or even if there is one, but the journey can be amazing or crap depending on what you make it.

 

[P. M. Thorne]

Lemming3K...Thanks. That makes sense.

SouthStar: Whereas you have just as much right to write what you think as anyone else does, it seems that you are making no headway. Trust me when I tell you that it is much like trying to describe the world from your experience with one town. You have one concept of God and some folks have another or none. Furthermore, many folks do not believe that the Bible is anything special. As difficult as that is, and I am sure it is, for you to understand, it is true. You cannot prove something by the Bible to someone who is not interesting in what the Bible says. Do you get what I mean? Also, there are those who do not take the entire Bible literally.

Remember, SouthStar, Paul did not tell his fellow believers to read, he gave them his personal testemony.

That is about all I have to say. Back up, take a deep breath, and speak from your heart rather than from your denomination. When you believe in what you do and do what you believe in, you will always have a song in your heart! ^^^^^^^pmt

 

[wesmorris]

"you can't know god through intellect"

IMO, that's because a reasonable intellect yields that god is unknowable.

As a result, you can't know god.

You can't accept that or aren't interested in it, so you delude yourself as you feel necessary. Rock on.

 

[P. M. Thorne]

Well, fortunately, you do not have the last word on that.
>
pmt

 

[wesmorris]

I do not intend to "have the last word". Other people's delusions only become my problem when they start imposing them on me, and that's not really possible online I don't think. Regardless, rationally speaking we cannot assert god. IMO, to do so is to claim authority that you simply don't have and can't get - PERIOD. Feel however you feel about it - that is fine. You may personally believe in god, that's fine. It's when it's asserted as factual, or relevent to anything beside your feelings that is blatantly unreasonable.

 

[BigBlueHead]

All we know about God is what He has told us (in the Bible or through the Holy Spirit or through people the Holy Spirit reveals to) and what we see in nature.

So "we" find out about God
1) from a book
2) from our friends
3) by listening to the voices in our heads
4) by guessing (this doesn't work for much of the world... sorry)

Well ain't that cute. But these are all unreliable unverifiable chains of knowledge that lead back to nothing... someone made all this up, and 3 and 4 only happen if you already have 1 and 2. Unless you'd like to tell me about a person who converted to Christianity without ever meeting a Christian or reading the Bible... Jesus doesn't count...

'We' as in humankind. Well, let me clarify things. My "holy spirit" is not made up. I see you failed to read my subsequent reply as well. My assurance is based on the points I listed in my reply, if you had read it. From my reply, you should be able to tell that there should be no arrogance whatsoever..

In your lack of arrogance you've counted me in your "we", which isn't quite correct because I don't believe in your cosmic chessmaster. The idea that you've decided (decided!) to denounce your own free will in favour of pretending fealty to a nonexistent entity is abhorrent to me. So be careful with that "we", if you don't want to sound pompous.

I find it interesting that you claim that man has no free will, but somehow invented sin. This is exactly the kind of problem that often arises with religions because they involve conflicting absolutes. There are only two possibilities:
1) God invented sin, because he invented everything in the universe.
2) Man invented sin, and has free will thereby... because if he doesn't, then he was made to sin by God who consequently invented sin.

Take your pick. You can't have both.

(Hint: Usually, at this point, the amateur theologist will retrench to the "Ineffable Plan" argument, which is the metaphysical equivalent of putting your hands over your ears and going "LA LA LA I'm not listening".)

 

[CathDAT]

Maybe it's just because he doesn't like you...

 

[BigBlueHead]

Then he would be NOT AS DESCRIBED. He's supposed to be perfect and love everyone, no?

Welcome to Sciforums, CathDAT.

 

[§outh§tar]

So "we" find out about God
1) from a book
2) from our friends
3) by listening to the voices in our heads
4) by guessing (this doesn't work for much of the world... sorry)

Well ain't that cute. But these are all unreliable unverifiable chains of knowledge that lead back to nothing... someone made all this up, and 3 and 4 only happen if you already have 1 and 2. Unless you'd like to tell me about a person who converted to Christianity without ever meeting a Christian or reading the Bible... Jesus doesn't count...

Your "list" is not even close to what I wrote. Nice try though...

In your lack of arrogance you've counted me in your "we", which isn't quite correct because I don't believe in your cosmic chessmaster. The idea that you've decided (decided!) to denounce your own free will in favour of pretending fealty to a nonexistent entity is abhorrent to me. So be careful with that "we", if you don't want to sound pompous.

Denial is a clear sign..

I find it interesting that you claim that man has no free will, but somehow invented sin. This is exactly the kind of problem that often arises with religions because they involve conflicting absolutes. There are only two possibilities:
1) God invented sin, because he invented everything in the universe.
2) Man invented sin, and has free will thereby... because if he doesn't, then he was made to sin by God who consequently invented sin.

Take your pick. You can't have both.

Where did I say man invented sin? Besides the point, does sin have to be "invented" to "exist"?

(Hint: Usually, at this point, the amateur theologist will retrench to the "Ineffable Plan" argument, which is the metaphysical equivalent of putting your hands over your ears and going "LA LA LA I'm not listening".)

And the malicious heretic ineffectively bases an argument on what I did not say.

 

[§outh§tar]

Lemming3K...Thanks. That makes sense.

SouthStar: Whereas you have just as much right to write what you think as anyone else does, it seems that you are making no headway. Trust me when I tell you that it is much like trying to describe the world from your experience with one town. You have one concept of God and some folks have another or none. Furthermore, many folks do not believe that the Bible is anything special. As difficult as that is, and I am sure it is, for you to understand, it is true. You cannot prove something by the Bible to someone who is not interesting in what the Bible says. Do you get what I mean? Also, there are those who do not take the entire Bible literally.

Remember, SouthStar, Paul did not tell his fellow believers to read, he gave them his personal testemony.

That is about all I have to say. Back up, take a deep breath, and speak from your heart rather than from your denomination. When you believe in what you do and do what you believe in, you will always have a song in your heart! ^^^^^^^pmt

What do you mean by "Paul did not tell his fellow believers to read"?

I'll respond fully after your reply.

 

[§outh§tar]

SouthStar,

Whenever you say things like that



*do* add that all *we*/*you* know about God is not all there is to know about God.


You would spare everyone of a lot of grief and bad blood.

What do the asterisks imply?

 

[wesmorris]

"Your "list" is not even close to what I wrote. Nice try though..."

Why not try translating instead of smarmy comments? As far as I can tell, that is exactly what you wrote.

Let me walk you through this. You said:

All we know about God is what He has told us (in the Bible or through the Holy Spirit or through people the Holy Spirit reveals to) and what we see in nature.

Okay so in pieces that correspond to what BBH cited (mind you I wrote a response that I accidentally lost last night that broke them down into 4 categories as well, similar to BBH's. He however, was much more succint than I. I agree with his post though and the point was the same so thank you BBH for doing the deed).

1) from a book

All we know about God is what He has told us (in the Bible

Sorry that your "that isn't at all what I said" doesn't work, but it doesn't work at all - as you can plainly see above: the bible is a book. Nice try though.

2) from our friends

through people the Holy Spirit reveals to

Perhaps your friends aren't people, but you are wrong again. How do you know if the "holy spirit" is revealed to them? They have to tell you, so you (and blue was being nice) "hear it from your friends", where as you said "people". I suppose that is WAY off. No wait, it isn't. I'd say it's dead on.

3) by listening to the voices in our heads

This is the case from 2) where the "people" is yourself. Look how good BBH is! He's right on it, covering what you said exactly but you pretend it's not happening. You had the opportunity to straighten it out, but instead just say "nice try" and don't bother. How exactly christian of you.

4) by guessing (this doesn't work for much of the world... sorry)

what we see in nature

Hmmm.. I believe what BBH is saying is that if you don't have a prove or reasonable evidence by which to compel serious consideration, you are just guessing. How very scientific of him. What a bastard, he made you wrong. Bad BBH!