A great many theists, especially those who are part of western monotheistic traditions like Christianity and Islam, would be aghast at the very idea of anyone presuming to judge God. After all, isn’t God so much better than us that it is presumptuous to sit in judgment? Ironically, the very attempt to assert that God is too good for us to judge is, in fact, itself a judgment.
We have then a couple of options. We can insist on trying to arrive at an honest judgment, good or bad, depending upon whatever the evidence tells us. We can refuse to offer any judgment at all and therefore also refuse to label this God as good, bad, or indifferent. Finally, we can accept what religious leaders claim that this God has said about itself and, thus, label this God as “good” simply because it (or its representatives) has said that it is good.
http://atheism.about.com/b/2004/09/12/week...judging-god.htm
Full Version: Judging God
I have often heard it said by others that if God people were to judge him by our standards, he would be held gulity & judged very harshly indeed.
QUOTE (norwood1026 @ May 14 2008, 10:39 AM) 
I have often heard it said by others that if God people were to judge him by our standards, he would be held gulity & judged very harshly indeed.
From the information available I find his behaviour rather confusing. Here is another aspect to judging God:
No Christian can afford to claim that we cannot judge God. If God creates the rules by which behavior must be judged and if the rules do not bind their Creator, then there is nothing that is improper for God. Therefore, when God promises that Christians will go to heaven and atheists will go to hell, there is no reason to believe that he will not break his promise and send Christians to hell and atheists to heaven. In fact, it is just as likely that he will break his promise as it is that he will not.
What possible grounds could the Christian have for maintaining that God will keep the promise in question? God’s love for Christians? But we could not call him unloving if he sent ChristIans to hell, for this would be to judge God. Could we say that God will keep his promise because he is honorable? But again, if God broke his promises we could not judge him to be dishonorable, for that too would be a judgment.
If, then, we must hold that whatever God does is the right thing, then we have no way of knowing what he will do. The Christian who insists that we cannot judge God is also adhering (although inadvertently) to the belief that Christians will go to heaven is just a guess, and anyone else’s guess is just as good. If Christians are right and we cannot judge God, then Christianity is in serious trouble. It is not a religion but, in fact, only a self-confessed haphazard guess.
http://atheism.about.com/b/a/256290.htm
I would ask what definition of "judging" is being used. In some ways, we make judgements every day. As we cross the road, we look left and right and make a judgement as to whether we can get across in time before the oncoming cars mow us down. We make judgements about what is right and wrong when we watch the news and see a murderer or rapist get caught. Or we could proclaim judgement against a person as having disobeyed God and take harsh retribution.
Which form of "judgement" is being referred to by the articles and/or the thread starter?
The "judgement" that we may or may not make against God for his actions as being good/evil is a different kind of "judgement" that we use when we assert that God is the creator and so much bigger than us and cannot be judged, is in itself a different kind of judgement. In my humble and most biased opinion, of course
Which form of "judgement" is being referred to by the articles and/or the thread starter?
The "judgement" that we may or may not make against God for his actions as being good/evil is a different kind of "judgement" that we use when we assert that God is the creator and so much bigger than us and cannot be judged, is in itself a different kind of judgement. In my humble and most biased opinion, of course
QUOTE (Paranoid Android @ May 14 2008, 12:47 PM)
Which form of "judgement" is being referred to by the articles and/or the thread starter?
The "judgement" that we may or may not make against God for his actions as being good/evil is a different kind of "judgement" that we use when we assert that God is the creator and so much bigger than us and cannot be judged, is in itself a different kind of judgement. In my humble and most biased opinion, of course
The "judgement" that we may or may not make against God for his actions as being good/evil is a different kind of "judgement" that we use when we assert that God is the creator and so much bigger than us and cannot be judged, is in itself a different kind of judgement. In my humble and most biased opinion, of course
"The thread starter" would like you to explain a little further the differences you perceive between those two supposed 'forms' of judgments.
But it is late and she is going to bed now
QUOTE (Belle. @ May 14 2008, 04:22 AM)
Ironically, the very attempt to assert that God is too good for us to judge is, in fact, itself a judgment.
<vBg> Hammer. Nail. Head.
Of course we should judge (question) anything which demands we praise and obey the self imposed authority of an entity which cannot be shown to exist.
If a stranger approached you and said 'kneel before and praise me' one would likely not do so... God is a stranger, and most don't recognize this.
God is a scary thing. He demands worship - and people obligingly worship without benefit of actual knowledge of existence. How gullible can some of us be? Very...apparently.
God is: good, bad, loyal, betrayer, love, hate..etc. How can one not judge/question such confusion?
I'd judge god to be schizophrenic, if I believed in it.
QUOTE (Belle. @ May 14 2008, 11:08 PM)
"The thread starter" would like you to explain a little further the differences you perceive between those two supposed 'forms' of judgments.
But it is late and she is going to bed now
The first - judgement that we may or may not make about/against God's actions being good/evil - requires a call to decide the rightness/wrongness of an action. But it is late and she is going to bed now
The second - when we assert that God is the creator and so much bigger than us and therefore cannot be judged - is simply an observation based on what we have seen.
Perhaps I did not explain myself as well as I should have. I'll try to do so now, but considering the time of night, I hope I can give it credit. We, as Christians, observe that God created everything, and therefore is in control of everything, in charge of everything, and rules everything. To then say "we cannot judge this creator" is an observation based on those understandings. The only "judgement" that can be seen in this section is to ascertain the validity of the statements from the Bible that support this.
To then say we cannot judge (cast aspersions) on the actions is not an observation, but a value call - made by us, about God's character and reasoning. We can try and answer to an extent, based on what we believe from the Bible (and again, this comes to judgement of the validity of the Bible), but ultimately, to "judge" God on the basis of said actions is to move beyond the observation of the text and to make a moral and ethical decision.
That said, you are correct that there may be a certain amount of hypocrisy in that Christians will sometimes point to an action of God and assign a value to that action as being "good" or "proper". But that "hypocrisy" comes from the acceptance of the validity of the commentary about said event in the Bible. The Judgement is not necessarily made by our own standards. When it comes to the events that we have to make moral/judgemental calls and are not aided by the commentary of the Bible, this is when I think the foot should come down and we should stop making those judgements. And that we do for the same reason as mentioned earlier.
I can see where you're coming from, and perhaps from your point of view there is little difference. From where I sit, I see a very subtle, but defining difference in the concepts.
Hope that helps with your answer. As I said, it's late, so if something I've said doesn't seem to make sense, please ask for clarification and I'll gladly try and provide it. All the best,
QUOTE (Paranoid Android @ May 14 2008, 05:37 PM)
The first - judgement that we may or may not make about/against God's actions being good/evil - requires a call to decide the rightness/wrongness of an action.
The second - when we assert that God is the creator and so much bigger than us and therefore cannot be judged - is simply an observation based on what we have seen.
Perhaps I did not explain myself as well as I should have. I'll try to do so now, but considering the time of night, I hope I can give it credit. We, as Christians, observe that God created everything, and therefore is in control of everything, in charge of everything, and rules everything. To then say "we cannot judge this creator" is an observation based on those understandings. The only "judgement" that can be seen in this section is to ascertain the validity of the statements from the Bible that support this.
To then say we cannot judge (cast aspersions) on the actions is not an observation, but a value call - made by us, about God's character and reasoning. We can try and answer to an extent, based on what we believe from the Bible (and again, this comes to judgement of the validity of the Bible), but ultimately, to "judge" God on the basis of said actions is to move beyond the observation of the text and to make a moral and ethical decision.
That said, you are correct that there may be a certain amount of hypocrisy in that Christians will sometimes point to an action of God and assign a value to that action as being "good" or "proper". But that "hypocrisy" comes from the acceptance of the validity of the commentary about said event in the Bible. The Judgement is not necessarily made by our own standards. When it comes to the events that we have to make moral/judgemental calls and are not aided by the commentary of the Bible, this is when I think the foot should come down and we should stop making those judgements. And that we do for the same reason as mentioned earlier.
I can see where you're coming from, and perhaps from your point of view there is little difference. From where I sit, I see a very subtle, but defining difference in the concepts.
Hope that helps with your answer. As I said, it's late, so if something I've said doesn't seem to make sense, please ask for clarification and I'll gladly try and provide it. All the best,
The second - when we assert that God is the creator and so much bigger than us and therefore cannot be judged - is simply an observation based on what we have seen.
Perhaps I did not explain myself as well as I should have. I'll try to do so now, but considering the time of night, I hope I can give it credit. We, as Christians, observe that God created everything, and therefore is in control of everything, in charge of everything, and rules everything. To then say "we cannot judge this creator" is an observation based on those understandings. The only "judgement" that can be seen in this section is to ascertain the validity of the statements from the Bible that support this.
To then say we cannot judge (cast aspersions) on the actions is not an observation, but a value call - made by us, about God's character and reasoning. We can try and answer to an extent, based on what we believe from the Bible (and again, this comes to judgement of the validity of the Bible), but ultimately, to "judge" God on the basis of said actions is to move beyond the observation of the text and to make a moral and ethical decision.
That said, you are correct that there may be a certain amount of hypocrisy in that Christians will sometimes point to an action of God and assign a value to that action as being "good" or "proper". But that "hypocrisy" comes from the acceptance of the validity of the commentary about said event in the Bible. The Judgement is not necessarily made by our own standards. When it comes to the events that we have to make moral/judgemental calls and are not aided by the commentary of the Bible, this is when I think the foot should come down and we should stop making those judgements. And that we do for the same reason as mentioned earlier.
I can see where you're coming from, and perhaps from your point of view there is little difference. From where I sit, I see a very subtle, but defining difference in the concepts.
Hope that helps with your answer. As I said, it's late, so if something I've said doesn't seem to make sense, please ask for clarification and I'll gladly try and provide it. All the best,
If its not a typo I wonder how that is possible x_X
QUOTE (Condescending @ May 15 2008, 01:48 AM)
If its not a typo I wonder how that is possible x_X
Again, the whole late-night thing got to me. To clarify, when I say "observe", I mean observing the actions of God as portrayed in the Bible. Thanks for the question, yah QUOTE (Paranoid Android @ May 14 2008, 05:49 PM)
Again, the whole late-night thing got to me. To clarify, when I say "observe", I mean observing the actions of God as portrayed in the Bible. Thanks for the question, yah
Yeah I assumed so but I had to point it out
QUOTE (Condescending @ May 15 2008, 01:55 AM)
Yeah I assumed so but I had to point it out
Hmm, now where's that "ban" button again???? I had it here a second ago..... there's gotta be some law against this somewhere...... Gawd, my memory's going in my old age 
J/k - Thanks, Condescending, lol
I wish you the best, and a very good night. Later all,
I do think that many who do not believe in God can only judge God as a concept. They are not truly judging God for they do not believe in God but just judging what little or much they know about God as a concept. This is done in the same way I can judge the character the character of Lucianus in Hamlet who is actually a character in a play that merely takes place within the play of Hamlet.
No, it is not an affront to me that others would try and judge God but in the same vain it does not affect my belief in God one way or another. I do think that placing us all in some box that we would be offended, by those who judge God harshly only in an attempt to disprove Him or on the other end of the extreme those who question God to make sense of things, is not fair but understand many will do this regardless. I take no offense at either and to stereotype us as all doing the same thing is just that: stereotyping.
Firstly, no where does the Bible state that Christians will go to heaven and atheists will go to hell. That is a construct of people in their thinking in reference to the Bible but that is not something the Bible mentions specifically. Atheists can be good people and people who claim they are Christians can be rotten to the core. This is something we should take into account as well.
Secondly, there are many promises within the Bible. Speaking about the promise that Christians go to heaven automatically and atheists to hell is not a promise I see anywhere in the Bible. As for one of the many promises in the Bible I do see the promises in Acts 2:38-39 as very valid.
God allows us to choose to worship Him or not and does not demand it from us today. He did of the ancient Israelites for they were marked as a holy national vessel to preserve the knowledge of Him until that knowledge could be disseminated world wide. He did allow certain things to happen to them when they fell out of that worship until they returned to Him but overall they had a choice and many of them made it time and time again. Outside of that context, to the other tribes around them and in the world then, and to all the people living today no one is forced to worship God nor does He demand it.
God as 'a scary thing and demands worship' is something that only exists in the minds of those who view it as such. It is their construct and does not reflect the God I worship or the God I see in the Old Testament who was faithful to His people and protected them 'ultimately' throughout many ages.
I do think that one of the reasons God does not demand we worship Him is so that we can choose to be part of the Bride of Christ. Who wants a spouse that is forced to marry you? Who wants a spouse that did not freely choose you? Also we are not forced to worship God because then anyone could come along with enough exertion of power and force us to worship another. This is why many who worship the God of Abraham can easily choose to become a martyr when such a force is applied to us.
The choice to worship God was available in the Old Testament and was never demanded.
The choice is still the same. No one is forced to cleanse themselves in this manner and many choose not to.
Let us not forget the Bible mentions many times there will be plenty of disbelievers and so very few believers. So it is not a surprise or a shock to run into them and we should not treat them with any contempt even if they choose to do so to us for our beliefs.
No, it is not an affront to me that others would try and judge God but in the same vain it does not affect my belief in God one way or another. I do think that placing us all in some box that we would be offended, by those who judge God harshly only in an attempt to disprove Him or on the other end of the extreme those who question God to make sense of things, is not fair but understand many will do this regardless. I take no offense at either and to stereotype us as all doing the same thing is just that: stereotyping.
QUOTE (Belle. @ May 14 2008, 05:44 AM)
Therefore, when God promises that Christians will go to heaven and atheists will go to hell, there is no reason to believe that he will not break his promise and send Christians to hell and atheists to heaven.
...
What possible grounds could the Christian have for maintaining that God will keep the promise in question?
...
http://atheism.about.com/b/a/256290.htm
...
What possible grounds could the Christian have for maintaining that God will keep the promise in question?
...
http://atheism.about.com/b/a/256290.htm
Firstly, no where does the Bible state that Christians will go to heaven and atheists will go to hell. That is a construct of people in their thinking in reference to the Bible but that is not something the Bible mentions specifically. Atheists can be good people and people who claim they are Christians can be rotten to the core. This is something we should take into account as well.
Secondly, there are many promises within the Bible. Speaking about the promise that Christians go to heaven automatically and atheists to hell is not a promise I see anywhere in the Bible. As for one of the many promises in the Bible I do see the promises in Acts 2:38-39 as very valid.
QUOTE
Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the LORD our God shall call.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the LORD our God shall call.
QUOTE (graylady2 @ May 14 2008, 09:52 AM)
God is a scary thing. He demands worship - and people obligingly worship without benefit of actual knowledge of existence. How gullible can some of us be? Very...apparently.
God is: good, bad, loyal, betrayer, love, hate..etc. How can one not judge/question such confusion?
I'd judge god to be schizophrenic, if I believed in it.
God is: good, bad, loyal, betrayer, love, hate..etc. How can one not judge/question such confusion?
I'd judge god to be schizophrenic, if I believed in it.
God allows us to choose to worship Him or not and does not demand it from us today. He did of the ancient Israelites for they were marked as a holy national vessel to preserve the knowledge of Him until that knowledge could be disseminated world wide. He did allow certain things to happen to them when they fell out of that worship until they returned to Him but overall they had a choice and many of them made it time and time again. Outside of that context, to the other tribes around them and in the world then, and to all the people living today no one is forced to worship God nor does He demand it.
God as 'a scary thing and demands worship' is something that only exists in the minds of those who view it as such. It is their construct and does not reflect the God I worship or the God I see in the Old Testament who was faithful to His people and protected them 'ultimately' throughout many ages.
I do think that one of the reasons God does not demand we worship Him is so that we can choose to be part of the Bride of Christ. Who wants a spouse that is forced to marry you? Who wants a spouse that did not freely choose you? Also we are not forced to worship God because then anyone could come along with enough exertion of power and force us to worship another. This is why many who worship the God of Abraham can easily choose to become a martyr when such a force is applied to us.
The choice to worship God was available in the Old Testament and was never demanded.
QUOTE
Joshua 24:15 And if it is evil in your eyes to serve the LORD, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD."
The choice is still the same. No one is forced to cleanse themselves in this manner and many choose not to.
QUOTE
2 Timothy 2:21 Therefore, if anyone cleanses himself from what is dishonorable, he will be a vessel for honorable use, set apart as holy, useful to the master of the house, ready for every good work.
Let us not forget the Bible mentions many times there will be plenty of disbelievers and so very few believers. So it is not a surprise or a shock to run into them and we should not treat them with any contempt even if they choose to do so to us for our beliefs.
QUOTE (Paranoid Android @ May 14 2008, 08:37 AM)
The first - judgement that we may or may not make about/against God's actions being good/evil - requires a call to decide the rightness/wrongness of an action.
The second - when we assert that God is the creator and so much bigger than us and therefore cannot be judged - is simply an observation based on what we have seen.
Perhaps I did not explain myself as well as I should have. I'll try to do so now, but considering the time of night, I hope I can give it credit. We, as Christians, observe that God created everything, and therefore is in control of everything, in charge of everything, and rules everything. To then say "we cannot judge this creator" is an observation based on those understandings. The only "judgement" that can be seen in this section is to ascertain the validity of the statements from the Bible that support this.
To then say we cannot judge (cast aspersions) on the actions is not an observation, but a value call - made by us, about God's character and reasoning. We can try and answer to an extent, based on what we believe from the Bible (and again, this comes to judgement of the validity of the Bible), but ultimately, to "judge" God on the basis of said actions is to move beyond the observation of the text and to make a moral and ethical decision.
That said, you are correct that there may be a certain amount of hypocrisy in that Christians will sometimes point to an action of God and assign a value to that action as being "good" or "proper". But that "hypocrisy" comes from the acceptance of the validity of the commentary about said event in the Bible. The Judgement is not necessarily made by our own standards. When it comes to the events that we have to make moral/judgemental calls and are not aided by the commentary of the Bible, this is when I think the foot should come down and we should stop making those judgements. And that we do for the same reason as mentioned earlier.
I can see where you're coming from, and perhaps from your point of view there is little difference. From where I sit, I see a very subtle, but defining difference in the concepts.
Hope that helps with your answer. As I said, it's late, so if something I've said doesn't seem to make sense, please ask for clarification and I'll gladly try and provide it. All the best,
The second - when we assert that God is the creator and so much bigger than us and therefore cannot be judged - is simply an observation based on what we have seen.
Perhaps I did not explain myself as well as I should have. I'll try to do so now, but considering the time of night, I hope I can give it credit. We, as Christians, observe that God created everything, and therefore is in control of everything, in charge of everything, and rules everything. To then say "we cannot judge this creator" is an observation based on those understandings. The only "judgement" that can be seen in this section is to ascertain the validity of the statements from the Bible that support this.
To then say we cannot judge (cast aspersions) on the actions is not an observation, but a value call - made by us, about God's character and reasoning. We can try and answer to an extent, based on what we believe from the Bible (and again, this comes to judgement of the validity of the Bible), but ultimately, to "judge" God on the basis of said actions is to move beyond the observation of the text and to make a moral and ethical decision.
That said, you are correct that there may be a certain amount of hypocrisy in that Christians will sometimes point to an action of God and assign a value to that action as being "good" or "proper". But that "hypocrisy" comes from the acceptance of the validity of the commentary about said event in the Bible. The Judgement is not necessarily made by our own standards. When it comes to the events that we have to make moral/judgemental calls and are not aided by the commentary of the Bible, this is when I think the foot should come down and we should stop making those judgements. And that we do for the same reason as mentioned earlier.
I can see where you're coming from, and perhaps from your point of view there is little difference. From where I sit, I see a very subtle, but defining difference in the concepts.
Hope that helps with your answer. As I said, it's late, so if something I've said doesn't seem to make sense, please ask for clarification and I'll gladly try and provide it. All the best,
Pa okhams razor my freind
....In other words you make judgements about god based on the contents of the bible....through the use of subjective reasoning....via the words on the paper , or what your pastor( the authority)tells you about gods character correct????
QUOTE (Supra Sheri @ May 14 2008, 12:00 PM)
In other words you make judgements about god based on the contents of the bible....through the use of subjective reasoning....via the words on the paper
And through the experience of the Spirit, guidiance from the Spirit, and through the very objective proof some of us see in rare cases manifest itself in the physical world. Mr Walker has explained that just because you wish to define such proof as pure subjective does not make it so.
QUOTE (Clovis @ May 14 2008, 10:05 AM)
And through the experience of the Spirit, guidiance from the Spirit, and through the very objective proof some of us see in rare cases manifest itself in the physical world. Mr Walker has explained that just because you wish to define such proof as pure subjective does not make it so.
clovis, science deals in evidence not jibberish , for very sound reason also if we have no standards on our beleif claims we are inferring that they are all of equal merit and value when in truth this is not so...this is called discernment .....in the course of reasoning we make judgments its part of the process of thinkiing...
clovis, we supply the data for our experinces, they are not passive , we make contributions to them...hence our experiential understanding of the world ensues......the principle of caustation is a way of making sense of the patterns that we discern through the filters that we bring to the table...
the presumptions of uniformity of nature is something that we cannot generalize from the experinces we've already had , because we supply them..... cause and effect make sense of the patterns that we discern through the filters that we bring to the actual sensory exprinces as they occur...experience is subjective we construe it we render it into sense.....Remember I have had lots of god sightings myself ......
QUOTE (Supra Sheri @ May 14 2008, 12:16 PM)
clovis, science deals in evidence not jibberish .
And some people use science for what it is valid for and use trust in God for what it is valid for. Just because you deny one does not mean we all should. Just because you judge all our experience as invalid does not make it so.
The mistake you make in calling our beliefs jibberish is the same mistake that creationist make in calling science jibberish. Your view does not represent science but only yourself just as a creationists' view does not represent God but only them.
Some of use see validity in both science and God and do not see them at odds. It is that simple.
QUOTE (Clovis @ May 14 2008, 06:05 PM)
And through the experience of the Spirit, guidiance from the Spirit, and through the very objective proof some of us see in rare cases manifest itself in the physical world. Mr Walker has explained that just because you wish to define such proof as pure subjective does not make it so.
I would suggest the 'proof' you speak of is subjective, not objective. Unless you were to know intimately all the working of the body (its chemistry etc) and the psyche, and be able to divorce yourself from the effects these components of you may have on your perception then you cannot state with any certainty any alleged experience of divinity is objective.
Firstly, it requires subjective belief to conclude the experience is the divinity you happen to grant existence to (and this would be based on your cultural background and/or learned knowledge).
Secondly, if you are speaking of 'miracles', these are only unexplained insofar as we have not the requisite knowledge/technology to be able to explain/duplicate the phenomenon. This is not to say we would never have such knowledge/technology. I'm sure many things we accept as commonplace today would be viewed as miraculous 2000 years ago - and possibly no amount of explanation to the natives of that era could convince them otherwise.
Thirdly, the mind is a phenomenally powerful and very little understood thing. Our knowledge of the mind, the brain, how neurochemistry, natural energies (such a seismic activity) and slight changes to our own physiology can have dramatic effect on our perceptual capability is increasing - but there is still much we do not know.
Aye but I was not referring to the spiritual experience which is common among some believers.
What I was referring to are the rare cases where the Spirits and even other spirits manifest themselves in the physical world outside of our own personal spiritual experiences.
As far as the chemical and neurological processes that can bring about spiritual experience I do believe that that is how God works. How miraculous would it be to have a spiritual experience from God or even other spirits within ourself yet such is not channeled physically through these very processes. It might all be signals bouncing around in our brains and in our bodies but in what other way would it work?
QUOTE
the very objective proof some of us see in rare cases manifest itself in the physical world
What I was referring to are the rare cases where the Spirits and even other spirits manifest themselves in the physical world outside of our own personal spiritual experiences.
As far as the chemical and neurological processes that can bring about spiritual experience I do believe that that is how God works. How miraculous would it be to have a spiritual experience from God or even other spirits within ourself yet such is not channeled physically through these very processes. It might all be signals bouncing around in our brains and in our bodies but in what other way would it work?
QUOTE (Paranoid Android @ May 14 2008, 04:37 PM)
The first - judgement that we may or may not make about/against God's actions being good/evil - requires a call to decide the rightness/wrongness of an action.
The second - when we assert that God is the creator and so much bigger than us and therefore cannot be judged - is simply an observation based on what we have seen.
Perhaps I did not explain myself as well as I should have. I'll try to do so now, but considering the time of night, I hope I can give it credit. We, as Christians, observe that God created everything, and therefore is in control of everything, in charge of everything, and rules everything. To then say "we cannot judge this creator" is an observation based on those understandings. The only "judgement" that can be seen in this section is to ascertain the validity of the statements from the Bible that support this.
To then say we cannot judge (cast aspersions) on the actions is not an observation, but a value call - made by us, about God's character and reasoning. We can try and answer to an extent, based on what we believe from the Bible (and again, this comes to judgement of the validity of the Bible), but ultimately, to "judge" God on the basis of said actions is to move beyond the observation of the text and to make a moral and ethical decision.
That said, you are correct that there may be a certain amount of hypocrisy in that Christians will sometimes point to an action of God and assign a value to that action as being "good" or "proper". But that "hypocrisy" comes from the acceptance of the validity of the commentary about said event in the Bible. The Judgement is not necessarily made by our own standards. When it comes to the events that we have to make moral/judgemental calls and are not aided by the commentary of the Bible, this is when I think the foot should come down and we should stop making those judgements. And that we do for the same reason as mentioned earlier.
I can see where you're coming from, and perhaps from your point of view there is little difference. From where I sit, I see a very subtle, but defining difference in the concepts.
Hope that helps with your answer. As I said, it's late, so if something I've said doesn't seem to make sense, please ask for clarification and I'll gladly try and provide it. All the best,
The second - when we assert that God is the creator and so much bigger than us and therefore cannot be judged - is simply an observation based on what we have seen.
Perhaps I did not explain myself as well as I should have. I'll try to do so now, but considering the time of night, I hope I can give it credit. We, as Christians, observe that God created everything, and therefore is in control of everything, in charge of everything, and rules everything. To then say "we cannot judge this creator" is an observation based on those understandings. The only "judgement" that can be seen in this section is to ascertain the validity of the statements from the Bible that support this.
To then say we cannot judge (cast aspersions) on the actions is not an observation, but a value call - made by us, about God's character and reasoning. We can try and answer to an extent, based on what we believe from the Bible (and again, this comes to judgement of the validity of the Bible), but ultimately, to "judge" God on the basis of said actions is to move beyond the observation of the text and to make a moral and ethical decision.
That said, you are correct that there may be a certain amount of hypocrisy in that Christians will sometimes point to an action of God and assign a value to that action as being "good" or "proper". But that "hypocrisy" comes from the acceptance of the validity of the commentary about said event in the Bible. The Judgement is not necessarily made by our own standards. When it comes to the events that we have to make moral/judgemental calls and are not aided by the commentary of the Bible, this is when I think the foot should come down and we should stop making those judgements. And that we do for the same reason as mentioned earlier.
I can see where you're coming from, and perhaps from your point of view there is little difference. From where I sit, I see a very subtle, but defining difference in the concepts.
Hope that helps with your answer. As I said, it's late, so if something I've said doesn't seem to make sense, please ask for clarification and I'll gladly try and provide it. All the best,
Is it so simply "an observation based on these understandings"
You are judging him as unjudgable is what I believe it comes down to. Could it be similar to the whole authority figures cannot be judged because perhaps they have more information than us so we cannot judge/understand/contextualise their behaviour ( lol I could talk about world politics now but won't). I don't really think it is such a simple observation because by deciding that something is worthy of worship, by virtue of being powerful, have you not already made a value judgement about good and evil? By saying he is unjudgable you are judging his character/nature. It is a moral judgement to deem him worthy of worship, by virtue of his ‘nature’.
I don't think the word 'undjudgable' really exists, oh well
Edit :Cheers for clarifying - I understand your demarcation better now.
Ok, this is meant to bash but as long as we're talking about judging God I would think that ( again by mans laws) Would not God be judged for genocide?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide
God does not Judge, God is unconditional love. People Judge and place human qualities on God and than turn into a fashionable religion asking for donations.
QUOTE (manandmachine @ May 15 2008, 05:12 AM)
God does not Judge, God is unconditional love. People Judge and place human qualities on God and than turn into a fashionable religion asking for donations.
Hmmm - I wonder if we've read the same bible. What about Sodom and Gomorrah ? Jericho? Lot's wife? The flood, of Ark fame? The list could go on and on...
I guess "unconditional love" is subjective...
QUOTE (norwood1026 @ May 14 2008, 11:40 PM)
Ok, this is meant to bash but as long as we're talking about judging God I would think that ( again by mans laws) Would not God be judged for genocide?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide
Well, by man's law, I would probably have to say yes. And even in the Bible, one of the Commandments is Thou shall not kill... But we're not supposed to judge God in the first place. He just is, and will do as He pleases. And that Commandment was a law from God, given to us. Since God created us, perhaps He has a right to do with us what He will. One of the issues that I have though, is back on this whole thing where God knows everyone, everything, what will happen, what won't happen, etc., then... He will already know who's going to worship Him, or not. And basically, his only request (since we can't really use demand... ;P) is that we worship Him, and only Him. All of our other sins can be washed away, forgiven, cast aside, etc. So of course if we don't believe in God, then how can He forgive us of our sins if we don't ask for forgiveness? ...Since someone who doesn't believe in God obviously wouldn't turn to Him to forgive them?
And again about judging God, I know this is wrong, quite possibly, especially in the Christian view, to compare God to Man and vice versa, but... let's face it. When given orders by a higher authority to obey certain rules, it only makes sense that this higher authority sticks to the same rules given as well. Otherwise, even if they have higher power than you, it is going to be wrong when they do it, and the 'lower' people are going to be bitter or less likely to follow in that leader's footsteps, since the authority figure did not lead the example that he/she has set upon them. It's kind of like, "If even our leader could not obey the laws given to us, then why should we comply?" ...Which I know should probably not apply to someone as all-powerful as God, but it is just one of the views that some people might see. It's a kind of 'lead by example' thing.
QUOTE (manandmachine @ May 15 2008, 11:12 AM)
God does not Judge, God is unconditional love. People Judge and place human qualities on God and than turn into a fashionable religion asking for donations.
God does judge & in the bible he says he will judge everyone.
Now wait a minute Norwood.....
manandmachine obviously has his beliefs, being that God doesn't judge must be one of them. Did you just tell him he's wrong? Really? The answer you just gave him is YOUR interpretation of the Bible and apparently not HIS. Weird, since you don't believe in God or the Bible. Huh. How bizarre.
Sorry, that's the kind of comment that irritates me.
I happen to believe God doesn't judge... gonna tell me I'm wrong? I think that would be unwise my friend.
manandmachine obviously has his beliefs, being that God doesn't judge must be one of them. Did you just tell him he's wrong? Really? The answer you just gave him is YOUR interpretation of the Bible and apparently not HIS. Weird, since you don't believe in God or the Bible. Huh. How bizarre.
Sorry, that's the kind of comment that irritates me.
I happen to believe God doesn't judge... gonna tell me I'm wrong? I think that would be unwise my friend.
QUOTE (MissMelsWell @ May 15 2008, 09:23 PM)
Now wait a minute Norwood.....
manandmachine obviously has his beliefs, being that God doesn't judge must be one of them. Did you just tell him he's wrong? Really? The answer you just gave him is YOUR interpretation of the Bible and apparently not HIS. Weird, since you don't believe in God or the Bible. Huh. How bizarre.
Sorry, that's the kind of comment that irritates me.
I happen to believe God doesn't judge... gonna tell me I'm wrong? I think that would be unwise my friend.
manandmachine obviously has his beliefs, being that God doesn't judge must be one of them. Did you just tell him he's wrong? Really? The answer you just gave him is YOUR interpretation of the Bible and apparently not HIS. Weird, since you don't believe in God or the Bible. Huh. How bizarre.
Sorry, that's the kind of comment that irritates me.
I happen to believe God doesn't judge... gonna tell me I'm wrong? I think that would be unwise my friend.
Does not the bible say that God will judge everyone at the end of days? Did he not pass judgment on those when he caused the flood?
Romans 2:
You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? 4Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?
5But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. 6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11For God does not show favoritism.
12All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) 16This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.
I guess if your not talking biblically then your ok but I am just stating what the bible does say.
QUOTE (Clovis @ May 14 2008, 11:01 AM)
Aye but I was not referring to the spiritual experience which is common among some believers.
What I was referring to are the rare cases where the Spirits and even other spirits manifest themselves in the physical world outside of our own personal spiritual experiences.
As far as the chemical and neurological processes that can bring about spiritual experience I do believe that that is how God works. How miraculous would it be to have a spiritual experience from God or even other spirits within ourself yet such is not channeled physically through these very processes. It might all be signals bouncing around in our brains and in our bodies but in what other way would it work?
What I was referring to are the rare cases where the Spirits and even other spirits manifest themselves in the physical world outside of our own personal spiritual experiences.
As far as the chemical and neurological processes that can bring about spiritual experience I do believe that that is how God works. How miraculous would it be to have a spiritual experience from God or even other spirits within ourself yet such is not channeled physically through these very processes. It might all be signals bouncing around in our brains and in our bodies but in what other way would it work?
Examples please and thanks :]? How can you tell if the spirit is truly physical and not just a product of chemical and electrical imbalances in the brain? Do schizophrenics truly believe "spirits", people, demons, etc are talking to them? Yes, until they're diagnosed with schizophrenia and put on medication. How would you be able to prove that this spirit is truly, truly physical knowing all of the things that can go wrong with the human brain and how it perceives reality? Perhaps these physical entities are only "real" in one's own reality? Does that make them physically real? Not necessarily. But, this can be said about all instances of spiritual phenomenon, not just Christianity. The human brain is far more powerful and deceptive than we would like to admit.
QUOTE (Lady Otterwynnd @ May 15 2008, 03:24 PM)
Examples please and thanks :]? How can you tell if the spirit is truly physical and not just a product of chemical and electrical imbalances in the brain? Do schizophrenics truly believe "spirits", people, demons, etc are talking to them? Yes, until they're diagnosed with schizophrenia and put on medication. How would you be able to prove that this spirit is truly, truly physical knowing all of the things that can go wrong with the human brain and how it perceives reality? Perhaps these physical entities are only "real" in one's own reality? Does that make them physically real? Not necessarily. But, this can be said about all instances of spiritual phenomenon, not just Christianity. The human brain is far more powerful and deceptive than we would like to admit.
Both my mother in law ( who has since died) and my mother both had/have schizophrenia it is part of the illness to have visions, hear voices, see spirits , feel spirits , have god sightings and demons, angels etc...... In a court of law visons and hearing god and spirits is considered a form of mental illness and you can have two family members have a person making these claims put on a 24 hour observation hold in a mental health facility.....they also do not feel they need medication ..So its a good question how do we possibly say this is something other than ????
QUOTE (norwood1026 @ May 15 2008, 05:08 PM)
Does not the bible say that God will judge everyone at the end of days? Did he not pass judgment on those when he caused the flood?
...
I guess if your not talking biblically then your ok but I am just stating what the bible does say.
...
I guess if your not talking biblically then your ok but I am just stating what the bible does say.
Biblically the message of judgment is not the main point of the Bible so it is not one of the easiest topics to understand. God through Jesus is the one who creates the law. The law judges and for a believer that is the Word but for a non-believer the law is written on their hearts and it will be their conscience that excuses or accuses them. Just as you posted in Romans 2. Where it says God judges the secrets of men through Jesus it means he will know them all (secrets) just as a judge today pours through all the facts of a case but their hands are tied in a sense because they have to apply the law. The difference is Jesus is not like a judge today because He does not decide guilty or innocent through the evidence. Because the law is perfect the law can be directly applied and it is the law that is used to judge but it really is our own actions that judge us when applied and compared to against the law. That is the biblical view not me telling anyone their actions when compared through the law will judge them.
Again just because Jesus set forth the law and is a judge does not mean He judges. Just because He judges secrets does not mean He judges you. This is the difference between a an unsophisticated view of the Bible over parts that do not add or take away from the important message of Love and a system of salvation -and- a view which if going to look in depth into other facets of the Bible will pour over all parts of it to come to a more accurate understanding.
QUOTE
Luke 12:14 But he said to him, "Man, who made me a judge or arbitrator over you?"
Jesus claimed He was not the judge or arbitrator. Arbitration occurs when there is two sides to a story and someone has to decide. Jesus does not decide.
QUOTE
John 8:15 You judge according to the flesh; I judge no one.
Jesus judges no one.
QUOTE
John 8:16 Yet even if I do judge, my judgment is true, for it is not I alone who judge, but I and the Father who sent me.
Right after He says He judges no one He says this. His 'judgment is true' means it is not a decision of who is bad or who is not but that his judgment = truth. The truth is the law and it judges.
QUOTE
John 12:47 If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world.
He did not come to judge the world. That is not His mission and it never was.
QUOTE
John 12:48 The one who rejects me and does not receive my words has a judge; the word that I have spoken will judge him on the last day.
The word is the perfect law and it will judge.
Now if someone does not believe in the Bible they do not believe in the perfect law, or in God, or that God set forth a law. So it should not matter to them but if they take an interest they can read the plain words even if they appear confusing at first. God does not judge. Not in Noah's day. Not in ours.
QUOTE (Lady Otterwynnd @ May 15 2008, 05:24 PM)
Examples please and thanks :]? How can you tell if the spirit is truly physical and not just a product of chemical and electrical imbalances in the brain? Do schizophrenics truly believe "spirits", people, demons, etc are talking to them? Yes, until they're diagnosed with schizophrenia and put on medication. How would you be able to prove that this spirit is truly, truly physical knowing all of the things that can go wrong with the human brain and how it perceives reality? Perhaps these physical entities are only "real" in one's own reality? Does that make them physically real? Not necessarily. But, this can be said about all instances of spiritual phenomenon, not just Christianity. The human brain is far more powerful and deceptive than we would like to admit.
The spirit might be a product of the chemical and elctrical imbalances of the brain and most likely is. That is the way God works. Is the spirit supposed to work and no detectable changes occur? Schizophrenics have many symptoms including auditory hallucinations. Maybe others have truly heard God vocalize but many that I know do not hear voices mmkay. When someones says we are imagining our spiritual experiences they are not speakin fact but opinion. Sure they can turn around and say then it is just our opinion but they have no clue because they are not experiencing what we are and are just using their experiences as their frame of reference. Some can even say I have felt what you have but it was due to this or this defines their situation only even if parallels exists all cases of this happening there is not an exact match and whole differences. I am glad therapy and drugs have fixed their situations.
Here are my examples. Some of it is mixed in with other opinions and such so I trust the read to be able to differentiate what were spiritual experiences and what was actually the spirits manifesting in the physical which then goes beyond subjective experience.
QUOTE (Clovis @ May 2 2008, 07:49 AM)
Hello DH. I did not see any bitterness in IS's post either. Once someone is only focused on disproving spirituality as all imaginary though many usually then move forward to say that science somehow trumps a whole world of believers which in then turns to a conflict view of science and faith which hurts the world more than a consensus view would.
Once someone starts throwing around scripture out of context to somehow prove the Bible is negative then it becomes more clear they have other intentions and that is usually the best time to simply say that is not at all what it says and move on.
As far as the question I base my experiences as being real on more than just a personal spiritual experience but in the way God and spirits physically works in the world. When empty gas tanks get a full up with two dollars after praying to God to be carried another week, when people break destructive habits like fifteen year hard core drug usage after one night after praying to God when nothing worked before, when mothers and fathers say I had feeling to pray to God about you right at the moment of a violent physical attack on their child they had no way of knowing about, when weapons formed against you fail and a gun that was poised to fire jams, when a whole church several times can be in full praise and all simultaneously quiet down at the same exact moment and within a five seconds after someone speaks loud and clear in a voice that is of power and simply says pray more and have more faith, when closed solid doors open for no reason when there is no one in front or behind to pull or push them then I have enough physical proof for myself to know not only God but spirits can affect the physical and the examples of others are many.
All but one of the things above happened to me personally and I have seen many other things and have not been the only one to see them at the same time. Science cannot even begin to explain many things but it can theorize. The gun jamming might have just been simple chance as well. Many people have miracles and tell those closest to them about it, they are not bragging, they are not attempting to swindle anyone, they are not attempting to convert anyone, they are simply sharing the physical things they have witnessed and in many cases others around them saw the same exact things.
That is why when someone who claims they are using science to disprove spirituality and the way it can manifest in the physical I simply have to say science cannot disprove spirituality in every instance of it and no one should attempt to use it to say for fact every experience is merely people imagining things. It is fine to theorize and interesting to do so when one says maybe religion is a figment of human imagination but to continue and say this is fact and you are wrong if you disagree then they are no better than a terrible preacher who will say the same thing. Science I do not think intends to do that but people who make it their mission to disprove spirituality do. Not all spirituality is God based either. I hope my answer was satisfactory for you DH.
All I can add is a reiteration that those who make it a mission to disprove spirituality to others engage in a fruitless campaign regardless of how much they personally are convinced.
Once someone starts throwing around scripture out of context to somehow prove the Bible is negative then it becomes more clear they have other intentions and that is usually the best time to simply say that is not at all what it says and move on.
As far as the question I base my experiences as being real on more than just a personal spiritual experience but in the way God and spirits physically works in the world. When empty gas tanks get a full up with two dollars after praying to God to be carried another week, when people break destructive habits like fifteen year hard core drug usage after one night after praying to God when nothing worked before, when mothers and fathers say I had feeling to pray to God about you right at the moment of a violent physical attack on their child they had no way of knowing about, when weapons formed against you fail and a gun that was poised to fire jams, when a whole church several times can be in full praise and all simultaneously quiet down at the same exact moment and within a five seconds after someone speaks loud and clear in a voice that is of power and simply says pray more and have more faith, when closed solid doors open for no reason when there is no one in front or behind to pull or push them then I have enough physical proof for myself to know not only God but spirits can affect the physical and the examples of others are many.
All but one of the things above happened to me personally and I have seen many other things and have not been the only one to see them at the same time. Science cannot even begin to explain many things but it can theorize. The gun jamming might have just been simple chance as well. Many people have miracles and tell those closest to them about it, they are not bragging, they are not attempting to swindle anyone, they are not attempting to convert anyone, they are simply sharing the physical things they have witnessed and in many cases others around them saw the same exact things.
That is why when someone who claims they are using science to disprove spirituality and the way it can manifest in the physical I simply have to say science cannot disprove spirituality in every instance of it and no one should attempt to use it to say for fact every experience is merely people imagining things. It is fine to theorize and interesting to do so when one says maybe religion is a figment of human imagination but to continue and say this is fact and you are wrong if you disagree then they are no better than a terrible preacher who will say the same thing. Science I do not think intends to do that but people who make it their mission to disprove spirituality do. Not all spirituality is God based either. I hope my answer was satisfactory for you DH.
All I can add is a reiteration that those who make it a mission to disprove spirituality to others engage in a fruitless campaign regardless of how much they personally are convinced.
QUOTE (norwood1026 @ May 15 2008, 03:08 PM)
Does not the bible say that God will judge everyone at the end of days? Did he not pass judgment on those when he caused the flood?
I guess if your not talking biblically then your ok but I am just stating what the bible does say.
I guess if your not talking biblically then your ok but I am just stating what the bible does say.
Wow, you still don't get it.
What you just said would be akin to me saying to you: So, why don't you Druids still practice human sacrifice to your blood thirsty Gods anymore?
That would be a super stupid thing for me to say right? That would be me judging history that can't be verified, and gods that I don't believe in.
So you can't really judge me and my God, just like I can't judge you and yours. It makes no sense to do so.
Sometimes when preachers just want to accuse others and claim they are wrong and such no amount of logic, fairness, compassion, or understanding will allow them to see the way they are truly being. The same principles work when forming similar view points that only seek to condemn. As far as preachers some of the things they seem to hate the most are the exact ones they themselves are guilty of. I have notices this a few times. People judge each other. They should not but they do.
This is insane I am not judging ANYONE HERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am showing you people what the BIBLE says about God judging us. Geesh! 
Clovis,
I'm not sure if you believe everything in the bible, I was taught to as a Christian. These days there seems to be alot of picking & choosing as what to believe. Which is up to the person to do so it's thier choice in the end.
Bibically speaking Romans 2 say that God does judge I am not trying to speak nor judge anyone here I am just pointing out what the verse says.
I'm not sure if you believe everything in the bible, I was taught to as a Christian. These days there seems to be alot of picking & choosing as what to believe. Which is up to the person to do so it's thier choice in the end.
Bibically speaking Romans 2 say that God does judge I am not trying to speak nor judge anyone here I am just pointing out what the verse says.
Right, the point is, that what the Bible says, and what it means to people are two completely different things.
I launched into this admitted diatribe because someone posted that they do not not believe that God judges us. That God is love.
You came back with an implied snicker and said "that's not what the bible says" ...
He obviously already knows what the Bible says, he disagrees with your interpretation. As would 25% of Christians who believe God is purely benevolent. You can look up the Antioch University study that shows this. If I get a moment before work is over, I'll post that study.
I apologize for being short here Norwood, I really do, but I find those kinds of comments exremely frustrating.
I launched into this admitted diatribe because someone posted that they do not not believe that God judges us. That God is love.
You came back with an implied snicker and said "that's not what the bible says" ...
He obviously already knows what the Bible says, he disagrees with your interpretation. As would 25% of Christians who believe God is purely benevolent. You can look up the Antioch University study that shows this. If I get a moment before work is over, I'll post that study.
I apologize for being short here Norwood, I really do, but I find those kinds of comments exremely frustrating.
QUOTE (MissMelsWell @ May 16 2008, 01:00 AM)
Right, the point is, that what the Bible says, and what it means to people are two completely different things.
I launched into this admitted diatribe because someone posted that they do not not believe that God judges us. That God is love.
You came back with an implied snicker and said "that's not what the bible says" ...
He obviously already knows what the Bible says, he disagrees with your interpretation. As would 25% of Christians who believe God is purely benevolent. You can look up the Antioch University study that shows this. If I get a moment before work is over, I'll post that study.
I apologize for being short here Norwood, I really do, but I find those kinds of comments exremely frustrating.
I launched into this admitted diatribe because someone posted that they do not not believe that God judges us. That God is love.
You came back with an implied snicker and said "that's not what the bible says" ...
He obviously already knows what the Bible says, he disagrees with your interpretation. As would 25% of Christians who believe God is purely benevolent. You can look up the Antioch University study that shows this. If I get a moment before work is over, I'll post that study.
I apologize for being short here Norwood, I really do, but I find those kinds of comments exremely frustrating.
Maybe I mis-read what he said the & I am sorry. Most preachers I know personally agree with what the bible says 100%. Are they wrong for believing that or the people wrong for not beliving the same? I think everyone has a different way of seeing things it doesn't make then wrong just different.
Again these are my thoughts.
I agree with what the Bible says 100% but the message is not that God judges. The law judges. For some it means the conscience excuses or accuses. That is what the Bible says and no one is forced to believe it as true.
Romans 2 mentions three things: 'God's judgment' which is not the same thing as God judges. God's judgment is through the law He does nothing.
'For God does not show favoritism' and favoritism would be a form of judging.
'God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ' is again not the same as God judges. Judging secrets is not judging men.
Romans 2 mentions three things: 'God's judgment' which is not the same thing as God judges. God's judgment is through the law He does nothing.
'For God does not show favoritism' and favoritism would be a form of judging.
'God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ' is again not the same as God judges. Judging secrets is not judging men.
QUOTE (Clovis @ May 16 2008, 01:18 AM)
'God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ' is again not the same as God judges. Judging secrets is not judging men.
Clovis I have to say that seems to be splitting hairs. He is judging something that man has/does. Doesn't that confer that he is judging man? Or at the very least judging an aspect of man?
QUOTE (Clovis @ May 16 2008, 12:18 AM)
I agree with what the Bible says 100% but the message is not that God judges. The law judges. For some it means the conscience excuses or accuses. That is what the Bible says and no one is forced to believe it as true.
Romans 2 mentions three things: 'God's judgment' which is not the same thing as God judges. God's judgment is through the law He does nothing.
'For God does not show favoritism' and favoritism would be a form of judging.
'God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ' is again not the same as God judges. Judging secrets is not judging men.
Romans 2 mentions three things: 'God's judgment' which is not the same thing as God judges. God's judgment is through the law He does nothing.
'For God does not show favoritism' and favoritism would be a form of judging.
'God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ' is again not the same as God judges. Judging secrets is not judging men.
Whos law? Who made the law? Did not God make everything? He created the 10 commandments are those the laws he is going by?
if one can truely judge god fairly they should quickly realize most problems people have are preventable by human standards. either that or a learning experience.
god made everything people forget he has left alot of us to our own devices.
i see no reason to judge god. not when there are so many foolish humans.
god made everything people forget he has left alot of us to our own devices.
i see no reason to judge god. not when there are so many foolish humans.
@ norwood: The law written in your heart since you are a non-believer in my view since that is what the Bible simply says.
@ Belle: Yes we have to split hairs not just in a negative sense always since sometimes we have to do so in a positive sense. Sure someone can say the Bible contradicts itself and walk away but others will attempt to actually find out why some things seem to contradict themselves on face value. Look at John 8:15 and 16. The two verses seem to be saying the opposite. We have to look deeper to understand what is actually being said. Luckily the important message is not like this so even if I read it wrong it makes no difference in the end but I am confident anyone would come to the same conclusion with an open mind because the text can be very plain at times. Nothing is esoteric or hidden knowledge.
Consider passages that say free will exists while others say predetermination does. It makes no sense to pick one side and ignore the other when we can then see both exist. God does not judge directly as in playing favorite but the law judges. Jesus is a judge but he does not judge. Confusing at times and I understand those that give up and walk away in disbelief. Not sure how it all works but through prayer and reading of the Word the Spirit dwells within me and that is my ultimate proof.
Without the Spirit I would be the same judgmental person condemning all others to hell as I was years ago. Even condemning myself to hell. What a sad state to live in full of fear. That is why I can understand how it is to be faithless, or how it is to be in fear, but now I know how it is to be free. I know I always go off into the Spirit but it is so important to me.
@ Belle: Yes we have to split hairs not just in a negative sense always since sometimes we have to do so in a positive sense. Sure someone can say the Bible contradicts itself and walk away but others will attempt to actually find out why some things seem to contradict themselves on face value. Look at John 8:15 and 16. The two verses seem to be saying the opposite. We have to look deeper to understand what is actually being said. Luckily the important message is not like this so even if I read it wrong it makes no difference in the end but I am confident anyone would come to the same conclusion with an open mind because the text can be very plain at times. Nothing is esoteric or hidden knowledge.
Consider passages that say free will exists while others say predetermination does. It makes no sense to pick one side and ignore the other when we can then see both exist. God does not judge directly as in playing favorite but the law judges. Jesus is a judge but he does not judge. Confusing at times and I understand those that give up and walk away in disbelief. Not sure how it all works but through prayer and reading of the Word the Spirit dwells within me and that is my ultimate proof.
Without the Spirit I would be the same judgmental person condemning all others to hell as I was years ago. Even condemning myself to hell. What a sad state to live in full of fear. That is why I can understand how it is to be faithless, or how it is to be in fear, but now I know how it is to be free. I know I always go off into the Spirit but it is so important to me.
QUOTE (Clovis @ May 16 2008, 03:35 AM)
@ norwood: The law written in your heart since you are a non-believer in my view since that is what the Bible simply says.
Ummm ok that's not really an anwser but.....
QUOTE (norwood1026 @ May 15 2008, 07:44 PM)
Ummm ok that's not really an anwser but.....
Actually, it's the only answer....
QUOTE (MissMelsWell @ May 16 2008, 07:29 AM)
Actually, it's the only answer....
No it's not not even close if thats in the bible I want to see it.
QUOTE (Clovis @ May 15 2008, 05:11 PM)
Jesus judges no one.
Didn't Jesus judge the moneychangers in the temple? His wrath fully displayed by his actions, according to the bible?
Supposedly - when Jesus returns he will return with a sword... Sounds like judgement to me.
QUOTE
@ norwood: The law written in your heart since you are a non-believer in my view since that is what the Bible simply says.
Ummm ok that's not really an anwser but.....
No it's not not even close if thats in the bible I want to see it.
Ummm ok that's not really an anwser but.....
No it's not not even close if thats in the bible I want to see it.
QUOTE
Romans 2:14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them 16 on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.
In bold is where it plainly says that and the next scripture says God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus means that like a judge Jesus will uncover those secrets. Judging secrets is not judging men. He is not going to send a secret to hell is He now? But truly the part in bold, your own conscience will accuse or excuse you, and the law is written on your heart in the biblical view of things.
QUOTE
Didn't Jesus judge the moneychangers in the temple? His wrath fully displayed by his actions, according to the bible?
Supposedly - when Jesus returns he will return with a sword... Sounds like judgement to me.
Supposedly - when Jesus returns he will return with a sword... Sounds like judgement to me.
Jesus cleaning out His own house is not judging it is property rights. I would boot out vendors from my front yard too. And returning with a sword will be done after He removes His Spirit from the Earth (2 Thessalonians 2:7-8) to allow Satan through the beast have one last shot of taking all he can of humanity under the spirit of the antichrist and its system. Then Christ will return to wage war on the beast to cleanse the planet of those who willingly chose to follow the beast. This is not judging this is warfare over territory that Satan cannot cannot have in the end. This is only the biblical view and no one has to believe it but that is why He is not judging anyone in either of those cases.
gee how did i miss this thread?
This is not always so.I appreciate the difference between objective and subjective experiences. For example, it is exremely rare for subjective experiences to be shared. While this has been claimed on occasions such claims have usually been proven to be constructed. In my case there are independent witnesses to events, and I know the claims are not constructed. While i cannot expect others to necessarily believe me, this is enough to put beyond any doubt ifor me that these were not purely subjective experiences. .Second physical manifestations were observed by others. Same thing applies. Dont know what they were, but they werent hallucinations or delusions or some other objective experience
In a way i'll grant you this. My own observations on this site have been "If it walks like a god, acts like a god and talks like a god(especially when it manifests a peculiar interest in you) then a wise and prudent man might best assume it is a god" and so yes you might say this is a construction of my belief.
However if the angel, for example, really did appear and give me a miracle i find it interesting that i did not know that angels took this form until i researched it (and thus would have had difficulty constructing such a culturally valid image from my own consscious/subconscious mind,) and that it took me so long both to recognise and to accept what it was. As a rational athiest I was in complete denial until further experiences put the question beyond doubt. Again you only have my word for all this, but again it is convincing logically to me.
So i dont agree entirely that it requires subjective belief.to conclude such an entity is a divinity The belief can be forced on you by the evidence which is available to you, combined with a logical rational analysis of that evidence.
This is absolutely true, and in fact I do think god is a real natural element of the universe with either inbuilt abilities from his nature or developed technological skills. He is god because of those abilities, and because of his personal interest in me. That is what classically defines a god.
I do not necesarily see him as the omniscient, all powerful god others do. That's because they can contsruct such an image of god and do not have to validate it or examine it rationally. Because i know god exists as as a "real" living entity, i have to be more circumspect ,and only attribute to it the powers and abilities it has displayed to me.
These are more than enough to earn it the title of "a god if not "the god." .For example he/it can see the future, pass that knowledge onto others, and enable them to change it or change it personally. He can manipulate matter, manifest things physically in the real world, and alter things in the real world. He can communicate physically, aurally, visually and telepathically( for want of a better word.) These all indicate powerful physical abilities or technologies.
Very true and a strong belief of mine. As well as the physical reality of god, it appears there must be some receptor ability in a human for him/her to perceive god. Dont know if this is physiological or psychological . My experience suggests both.
I did not recognise the presence of god until he quite violently and physically intruded himself upon me. Even then. i did not immediately recognise it for what it was (and it had been part of my life unrecognised for at least 10 years) Speaking in religious terms, once my eyes and heart were opened, i saw many things differently. and god was able to enter into me.
In human terms, once certain preconceived ideas, and psychological blocks were removed, i got a clearer view of all the world around me, and could no longer live in a state of partial denial. Once that happened, god was able to become a constant part of my life, living in me, and around me, just like all the other physical elements of the universe interact with me.
This state has continued and developed for over 30 years now, and it has not only given me a more integrated understanding of the many paranormal experiences of my life, it has increased my connectivity with them, and made them a more solid and accepted part of my human existence.
It has also completely changed me as a human being, but i accept that his change can happen to other peolpe simply through faith in god. That would never have happened to me without physical proof of gods existence
and thanks for that info supra. I guess it just as well that im incontrovertibly sane, and that all my family members will attest to that (well as far as visitations from god go anyway) and that i have the paper work from the top experts in the field as further attestation.
Now this is a subjective belief, but a comparative observation of myself and others around me suggests i'm one of the sanest people i know. Certainly one of the most logical, rational, and skeptical anyway.
QUOTE
I would suggest the 'proof' you speak of is subjective, not objective. Unless you were to know intimately all the working of the body (its chemistry etc) and the psyche, and be able to divorce yourself from the effects these components of you may have on your perception then you cannot state with any certainty any alleged experience of divinity is objective.
This is not always so.I appreciate the difference between objective and subjective experiences. For example, it is exremely rare for subjective experiences to be shared. While this has been claimed on occasions such claims have usually been proven to be constructed. In my case there are independent witnesses to events, and I know the claims are not constructed. While i cannot expect others to necessarily believe me, this is enough to put beyond any doubt ifor me that these were not purely subjective experiences. .Second physical manifestations were observed by others. Same thing applies. Dont know what they were, but they werent hallucinations or delusions or some other objective experience
QUOTE
Firstly, it requires subjective belief to conclude the experience is the divinity you happen to grant existence to (and this would be based on your cultural background and/or learned knowledge).
In a way i'll grant you this. My own observations on this site have been "If it walks like a god, acts like a god and talks like a god(especially when it manifests a peculiar interest in you) then a wise and prudent man might best assume it is a god" and so yes you might say this is a construction of my belief.
However if the angel, for example, really did appear and give me a miracle i find it interesting that i did not know that angels took this form until i researched it (and thus would have had difficulty constructing such a culturally valid image from my own consscious/subconscious mind,) and that it took me so long both to recognise and to accept what it was. As a rational athiest I was in complete denial until further experiences put the question beyond doubt. Again you only have my word for all this, but again it is convincing logically to me.
So i dont agree entirely that it requires subjective belief.to conclude such an entity is a divinity The belief can be forced on you by the evidence which is available to you, combined with a logical rational analysis of that evidence.
QUOTE
Secondly, if you are speaking of 'miracles', these are only unexplained insofar as we have not the requisite knowledge/technology to be able to explain/duplicate the phenomenon. This is not to say we would never have such knowledge/technology. I'm sure many things we accept as commonplace today would be viewed as miraculous 2000 years ago - and possibly no amount of explanation to the natives of that era could convince them otherwise
This is absolutely true, and in fact I do think god is a real natural element of the universe with either inbuilt abilities from his nature or developed technological skills. He is god because of those abilities, and because of his personal interest in me. That is what classically defines a god.
I do not necesarily see him as the omniscient, all powerful god others do. That's because they can contsruct such an image of god and do not have to validate it or examine it rationally. Because i know god exists as as a "real" living entity, i have to be more circumspect ,and only attribute to it the powers and abilities it has displayed to me.
These are more than enough to earn it the title of "a god if not "the god." .For example he/it can see the future, pass that knowledge onto others, and enable them to change it or change it personally. He can manipulate matter, manifest things physically in the real world, and alter things in the real world. He can communicate physically, aurally, visually and telepathically( for want of a better word.) These all indicate powerful physical abilities or technologies.
QUOTE
Thirdly, the mind is a phenomenally powerful and very little understood thing. Our knowledge of the mind, the brain, how neurochemistry, natural energies (such a seismic activity) and slight changes to our own physiology can have dramatic effect on our perceptual capability is increasing - but there is still much we do not know.
Very true and a strong belief of mine. As well as the physical reality of god, it appears there must be some receptor ability in a human for him/her to perceive god. Dont know if this is physiological or psychological . My experience suggests both.
I did not recognise the presence of god until he quite violently and physically intruded himself upon me. Even then. i did not immediately recognise it for what it was (and it had been part of my life unrecognised for at least 10 years) Speaking in religious terms, once my eyes and heart were opened, i saw many things differently. and god was able to enter into me.
In human terms, once certain preconceived ideas, and psychological blocks were removed, i got a clearer view of all the world around me, and could no longer live in a state of partial denial. Once that happened, god was able to become a constant part of my life, living in me, and around me, just like all the other physical elements of the universe interact with me.
This state has continued and developed for over 30 years now, and it has not only given me a more integrated understanding of the many paranormal experiences of my life, it has increased my connectivity with them, and made them a more solid and accepted part of my human existence.
It has also completely changed me as a human being, but i accept that his change can happen to other peolpe simply through faith in god. That would never have happened to me without physical proof of gods existence
QUOTE
In a court of law visons and hearing god and spirits is considered a form of mental illness and you can have two family members have a person making these claims put on a 24 hour observation hold in a mental health facility.....they also do not feel they need medication ..So its a good question how do we possibly say this is something other than ????
and thanks for that info supra. I guess it just as well that im incontrovertibly sane, and that all my family members will attest to that (well as far as visitations from god go anyway) and that i have the paper work from the top experts in the field as further attestation.
Now this is a subjective belief, but a comparative observation of myself and others around me suggests i'm one of the sanest people i know. Certainly one of the most logical, rational, and skeptical anyway.
However if the angel, for example, really did appear and give me a miracle,
" i find it interesting that i did not know that angels took this form until i researched it........"
(and thus would have had difficulty constructing such a culturally valid image from my own consscious/subconscious mind)
Mw, you have proven my argument with these lines.... the ones you quoted above....
we supply our experinces, they are not passive, we make contributions to them, hence our experiental understanding of the world... whether its conditionings of accumulated data or researched data it provides the meaning.........
A very interesting read is St Theresa of Avillia she also wasn't sure of what she saw, it had to be figured out .. also Samuel in the bible at first didn't see the voice he heard as the voice of god he finally concluded it was.. the encounters weren't transparent after all. it seems.......
the principle of causation says basically that this is a way a way of making sense of the patterns that we discern through the filters we bring .. or better stated the famous "I know god"..... experince is subjective, we construe it we render it into sense......Now many religious writers have insisted that these encounters are transparent , free of the need for interpretation , this in essence is not the case and again your posts demonstrates this very nicely .....
In other words MW you have decided this is the case for you including you are the only being that is able to be objective with your experinces..... (then you truly are a marvel )......
except . the observed and the observer are one in the same...
" i find it interesting that i did not know that angels took this form until i researched it........"
(and thus would have had difficulty constructing such a culturally valid image from my own consscious/subconscious mind)
Mw, you have proven my argument with these lines.... the ones you quoted above....
we supply our experinces, they are not passive, we make contributions to them, hence our experiental understanding of the world... whether its conditionings of accumulated data or researched data it provides the meaning.........
A very interesting read is St Theresa of Avillia she also wasn't sure of what she saw, it had to be figured out .. also Samuel in the bible at first didn't see the voice he heard as the voice of god he finally concluded it was.. the encounters weren't transparent after all. it seems.......
the principle of causation says basically that this is a way a way of making sense of the patterns that we discern through the filters we bring .. or better stated the famous "I know god"..... experince is subjective, we construe it we render it into sense......Now many religious writers have insisted that these encounters are transparent , free of the need for interpretation , this in essence is not the case and again your posts demonstrates this very nicely .....
In other words MW you have decided this is the case for you including you are the only being that is able to be objective with your experinces..... (then you truly are a marvel
)...... except . the observed and the observer are one in the same...
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.