Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Mello_

Why call him a God?

701 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Guyver
On 11/27/2019 at 4:13 AM, XenoFish said:

No point in believing in god when it has always been up to us. Faith in god is a sign of personal weakness and insecurity. 

False.  Once again you present your atheist opinion on spiritual matters as if it were factual - it isn’t.  For those of us who have some understanding of faith and spirituality, we know that you are mistaken and don’t know what you’re talking about regarding these matters.

Living and practicing a life of faith is more difficult than living a life without it from my experience, and for tens of millions of others like myself who have some experience in these matters.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
5 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

:P

 

:D

 

Here's the deal.

Free will isn't free. It costs a lot.

It's paid for with responsibility. 

Response ability.

Ability that is given everyone as a gift to use as they see fit. However the consequences. 

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
14 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Nothing causes more fear mongering than when someone in spiritual authority suggests that God doesn't exist and implies a person can do whatever they want. 

Nothing.

 

 

God may not exist, we don’t know one way or the other because we have no way to know.

Agnosticism is the appropriate starting point, meaning we don’t know if there is a god or if there isn’t. 
 

To imply there is a god when we really don’t know isn’t honest to me, it is knowingly and intentionally trying to pass off bogus information. 
 

As in what you are doing, you believe in god out of fear, the fear of consequences and being sinful and you are seeking to spread this fear. 

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver
On 11/27/2019 at 4:38 AM, Mello_ said:

Sin is evil. But what is evil. Emptiness of goodness. Imagine bottle. With no good liquid it empty. And that emptiness where is Belzebub. Where you start to do sins. Where you lost. But if you are good. There is no space for evil for Belzebub. Good is only force. You dont have good evil brain. If you loose your good brain well thats evil. Its called malefunction. 

..

Sin, as defined from the Greek means to miss the mark, or in other words, to err according to many bible scholars.  Since erring is human, I disagree with your definition of evil regarding sin.

Using your other definition, that is evil being the emptiness of goodness, I would agree to a greater degree, but still question this definition.  

Have you ever heard of an evil serial killer named Ted Bundy?  He tortured and killed many people, yet, according to his friends and family, he was also a person who was capable of good.  So, he was evil but not completely devoid of good.

i think that regarding sin, Christian religious types like yourself use the word sin many times when you should just say human.  For example....many Christians consider it a sin to be drunk or earn a hangover, yet nearly every person has done this before, including many famous bible figures like Noah and others.  So, being drunk or getting a hangover is something that people do and it may be a mistake sometimes, but I wouldn’t call it evil.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
6 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

:D

 

Here's the deal.

Free will isn't free. It costs a lot.

It's paid for with responsibility. 

Response ability.

Ability that is given everyone as a gift to use as they see fit. However the consequences. 

 

 

I rest my case, yes, Will under these terms there isn’t free will. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver
On 11/27/2019 at 4:43 AM, Mello_ said:

Sure its active. When peeps see hot other peeps wife...well...who cares about the brother. Look at her.

Thats evil. Thats sin. Thats Belzebub. 

No, that is not Beelzebub, it is a human trait called lust.  It is wrong to harm another person through the act of having sex, or even desiring to have have sex with another persons spouse....I agree and would call that a sin, but the fact is that sexuality, reproduction, and so forth is literally hard wired into the human race.  So, if you believe that such fault is evil, then you are saying indirectly that God is evil because he created the condition that allows this to occur.  I’m not sure if you meant to say that or even believe it.....but perhaps you should re-think your position.  If you actually believe what you’re saying here, then one of your great bible heroes, and greatly loved by God, as well as kingpin in Christ’s lineage - King David, was evil.  

Do you think King David was evil and deserves to fry and boil in hell’s deepest depths?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver
On 11/29/2019 at 1:12 AM, Truthseeker007 said:

From an X Christians perspective. I don't think the Bible god is really god but a book put together by priests to control people. 

I agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw

God, should he exist, has need for religions, which are the handiwork of man. Neither would he concern himself with sin, an abberrational construct describing human behaviors. Under it's definition, all have sinned and fallen short of the imagined perfection of deity. If there is a God, he is not a God of perfection but of compassion, human compassion for one another.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
1 hour ago, Guyver said:

False.  Once again you present your atheist opinion on spiritual matters as if it were factual - it isn’t.  For those of us who have some understanding of faith and spirituality, we know that you are mistaken and don’t know what you’re talking about regarding these matters.

Living and practicing a life of faith is more difficult than living a life without it from my experience, and for tens of millions of others like myself who have some experience in these matters.

It may be an opinion but I agree with him.  Weak minded people cling to someone else's picture of reality, hoping that they won't have to take responsibility for their thoughts and actions, they can blame the devil or they can give god the credit, both are ignorant and lazy in my opinion. 

I am not saying someone who has faith in something outside themselves is weak minded, I am saying that people who cling to someone else's proscribed religion and description of an unmerciful god that is so bipolar you have to fear being judged 24 hours a day, judging yourself constantly because you can never live up to the standards the liars controlling you claim are what their god expects.  (sorry for the run on sentence but I have no better way to phrase it)

So, people wallow in guilt and that wallowing in guilt causes them anger for not being allowed to be human or themselves or what ever and they lash out at others and then claim the devil made them do it, or worse, claim they are justified in their bad behaviour because of their faith in someone else's god.

 

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver
26 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

It may be an opinion but I agree with him.  Weak minded people cling to someone else's picture of reality, hoping that they won't have to take responsibility for their thoughts and actions, they can blame the devil or they can give god the credit, both are ignorant and lazy in my opinion. 

I am not saying someone who has faith in something outside themselves is weak minded, I am saying that people who cling to someone else's proscribed religion and description of an unmerciful god that is so bipolar you have to fear being judged 24 hours a day, judging yourself constantly because you can never live up to the standards the liars controlling you claim are what their god expects.  (sorry for the run on sentence but I have no better way to phrase it)

So, people wallow in guilt and that wallowing in guilt causes them anger for not being allowed to be human or themselves or what ever and they lash out at others and then claim the devil made them do it, or worse, claim they are justified in their bad behaviour because of their faith in someone else's god.

 

 

I understand your points and agree with you on some points.  What I don’t understand is why so many people equate the Bible’s presentation of God as being actual, or accurate in portraying God.  It seems nearly every type of person from atheist to believer consider the Bible to be descriptive of God.  I just don’t get it, except to say that it is a norm from Western Civilization.  It’s roots are deeply imbedded in our past and these vestiges of thought persist.

There are hundreds of other “Holy Books” or more in the world, but they don’t get the play or notoriety of the Bible so they are not considered.  But, even if they were considered, I wouldn’t just agree that they accurately portray God either.  I believe God exists personally, and I believe in a life of faith even though I often don’t practice it like I feel I should, but....Gods nature, definition, attributes and so forth.....I don’t see how we have any way of knowing any of this aside from our own beliefs and opinions.  I think God is just mysterious and almost unknowable in a sense.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
1 minute ago, Guyver said:

I understand your points and agree with you on some points.  What I don’t understand is why so many people equate the Bible’s presentation of God as being actual, or accurate in portraying God.  It seems nearly every type of person from atheist to believer consider the Bible to be descriptive of God.  I just don’t get it, except to say that it is a norm from Western Civilization.  It’s roots are deeply imbedded in our past and these vestiges of thought persist.

There are hundreds of other “Holy Books” or more in the world, but they don’t get the play or notoriety of the Bible so they are not considered.  But, even if they were considered, I wouldn’t just agree that they accurately portray God either.  I believe God exists personally, and I believe in a life of faith even though I often don’t practice it like I feel I should, but....Gods nature, definition, attributes and so forth.....I don’t see how we have any way of knowing any of this aside from our own beliefs and opinions.  I think God is just mysterious and almost unknowable in a sense.

The only people I know who consider the bible to be literally, a description of a real, single god, are the ones I mentioned who want someone else to tell them what to believe. 

Atheists do not think the bible describes anything real, so how could you think that they believe the bible describes an accurate portrayal of something they consider to be fantasy?    And there are many, many people who have walked away from religions that depend on belief that the bible depicts something real, without walking away from their personal belief in a god.  You are not alone in that.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
onlookerofmayhem
21 minutes ago, Guyver said:

 I think God is just mysterious and almost unknowable in a sense.

 

21 minutes ago, Guyver said:

I believe God exists personally

I don't understand how you can make both of these statements. 

How do you define god?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver
36 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

The only people I know who consider the bible to be literally, a description of a real, single god, are the ones I mentioned who want someone else to tell them what to believe. 

Atheists do not think the bible describes anything real, so how could you think that they believe the bible describes an accurate portrayal of something they consider to be fantasy?   

Because so many use it as a means of criticizing God.  God is bipolar, this that and the other....in fact - didn’t you do the same thing in post # 259?

Atheists don’t believe God exists, so the Bible has to be a bunch of fables and so forth anyway,  For an atheist to use the Bible to make criticisms about God seems like the poorest of tactics.  That so many people exist who actually believe the Bible and/or the religions based on them, gives them a point to criticize, especially around here, and I guess makes some of them feel theologically superior.  

I don’t care for it - maybe you do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver
31 minutes ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

 

I don't understand how you can make both of these statements. 

How do you define god?

I make both of the statements because of my experiences and practices.  After many years of thought and study, I’ve come to a place where I don’t attempt to make any definitions of God whatsoever, personally.  If I were really pressed, I could offer my opinions on that and include some (what I consider) logical necessities, but these should be fairly basic.  Yet, on almost any statement, one could consider its opposite, or someone could criticize or disagree.

For example, if I said that God is the omnipotent, omniscient, and all loving supreme Maker of the universe and all universes who happens to be eternal and exists apart from time and space as we know it. .....how would I be able to validate any of these statements?

A gifted physicist from Tulane University wrote a book some years ago, proposing that God is a supercomputer from the future. Well, if he is right (excusing the obvious time paradox), then everything I just proposed about God is inaccurate, and we literally created God ourselves when we invented supercomputers and A.I.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver

PS.  On second thought, God being a supercomputer from the future does not necessarily create a time paradox.  If we are a simulation, there is no paradox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
onlookerofmayhem
12 minutes ago, Guyver said:

I make both of the statements because of my experiences and practices.  After many years of thought and study, I’ve come to a place where I don’t attempt to make any definitions of God whatsoever, personally.

Thanks for the response. 

I'm still confused on how you can believe in something that you can't/care not to define. What exactly are you claiming to believe in if you don't define god. 

It sounds rather vague. Akin to when people say, "The Universe is god." or "Everything is god."

Is a god a being? Is it alive? I, for one, would need some kind of descriptors to start with in order to proceed with matching them to what can be observed. 

16 minutes ago, Guyver said:

For example, if I said that God is the omnipotent, omniscient, and all loving supreme Maker of the universe and all universes who happens to be eternal and exists apart from time and space as we know it. .....how would I be able to validate any of these statements?

Well that's kind of the point. Nobody has ever been able to validate that god exists, let alone the details of who or what it is. How is anyone coming to these conclusions in the first place?

Every monotheistic person rules out every other god proposed other than their own.

With thousands of gods to choose from, what makes anybody lean one way or the other?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver
14 minutes ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

 

With thousands of gods to choose from, what makes anybody lean one way or the other?

 

I think the obvious answer is that much of religious belief and practice is culturally derived.  People believe and or practice the religions they were raised in.  Many don’t, I know there are many people around here who were raised in religion, only to abandon those beliefs in later life...but there are also many people who just stay in it their whole life.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver
19 minutes ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

Thanks for the response. 

I'm still confused on how you can believe in something that you can't/care not to define. What exactly are you claiming to believe in if you don't define god. 

It sounds rather vague. Akin to when people say, "The Universe is god." or "Everything is god."

Is a god a being? Is it alive? I, for one, would need some kind of descriptors to start with in order to proceed with matching them to what can be observed. 

You are welcome.

How can I believe in something I can’t define?  Well, I believe in love but I can’t really completely define that, lol.  I believe in a God because I have experienced that something like God exists.  That’s just the honest answer.  

Since I have never seen God or had an interview with him to report to you, I can’t offer any concrete information for you to consider.  Since I hold no religious beliefs, I have no doctrines to offer you.  I would say that God is good because all my interactions with him have been positive, but I’m not sure I could say the same thing about life.  In life, there are good things and bad things.  There are things I appreciate, and things I hate.  Some days are good, some not...so on and so forth.

So, while I believe in God and consider him good, life (the thing he presumably created) is both good and bad, or neither.  It very well could be that life just is - neither good nor bad - and these labels are just the product of our own cognition and preference.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
onlookerofmayhem
48 minutes ago, Guyver said:

Well, I believe in love but I can’t really completely define that, lol.  I believe in a God because I have experienced that something like God exists.  That’s just the honest answer.  

To me love is a concept same as god. It only exists in the mind. Just as you said applies to good and bad. 

Personally I have never encountered anything in my life that has been any kind of god-like across multiple definitions of the term. 35 years of not seeing what millions of others seem to see.

That's why I asked for clarification on how you defined god. In an attempt to narrow down the many differences people hold for the supposed same entity. 

54 minutes ago, Guyver said:

Since I have never seen God or had an interview with him to report to you, I can’t offer any concrete information for you to consider.

How do you know your interactions were with a/the god? Or even that it may be/have been?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver
38 minutes ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

To me love is a concept same as god. It only exists in the mind. Just as you said applies to good and bad. 

Personally I have never encountered anything in my life that has been any kind of god-like across multiple definitions of the term. 35 years of not seeing what millions of others seem to see.

That's why I asked for clarification on how you defined god. In an attempt to narrow down the many differences people hold for the supposed same entity. 

How do you know your interactions were with a/the god? Or even that it may be/have been?

Good and bad are concepts, not conscious beings, I agree.  Love is also not a conscious being - so I also agree.  I used it as an example of believing in something I don’t understand tongue in cheek.  

On your last question, I know it the same way I know anything else, and the same way that anybody knows anything.  I think what you are getting at, is could I be mistaken about my experiences?  The answer is yes, of course that is possible.  I am convinced that I am correct in my recollections of these events, but I understand how you would be skeptical since you claim that you have never had any experience at all that would allow you to believe.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jypsijemini
On 11/27/2019 at 5:09 PM, Mello_ said:

...22 And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” 23 So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden...

https://www.biblica.com/bible/niv/genesis/3/

And yet in Genesis 2:17, "but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die."

So were they meant to be immortal right from the get-go, or was immortality something they would have from eating from the Tree of Life?

Most assume that death didn't exist in the beginning because everything was "perfect". God didn't tell them they could eat any of the animals. It's unknown whether the animals were in fact eating each other. There's pain and suffering for animals who are killed by other animals - so my uneducated and amateur guess is that everybody was vegetarian/vegan, even the animals (somehow).

So if Adam and Eve had no concept of death, what kind of threat was this? They didn't have any knowledge because they hadn't eaten from the Tree of Knowledge yet - and knowledge is gleaned from learning, and learning is a product of making mistakes and experimenting with different outcomes until you stop failing and find success. Which is seemingly impossible in a state of perpetual perfection.

"Or you will surely die," - to me, meant nothing to "Adam and Eve". What's death, God?

Where's their free will if they had no concept of Good and Evil? "Just remain here in this monotonous state of bliss, potentially living for eternity in a timeless physical form, a realm of perfection where all your needs are met - therefore there's really no reason to be creative because I've given you everything you'll ever need and want already. And considering you don't know right from wrong, you really don't know anything. Yes. I see it and it is good. I have created perfection, and y'all are so stupid and human that you'll jeopardise this just because you want to know as much as I do."

*slapping myself in the face*

I can't believe I used to believe this book.
 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jypsijemini
1 hour ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

To me love is a concept same as god. It only exists in the mind. Just as you said applies to good and bad.

Have you checked out the water and plant experiments?

Water and newly sprouted plants are subjected to words for a period. "I love you", "I hate you" etc.

The water crystallises differently, The plants grow at different rates. There's something to it. The other circumstances are the same. Same potting mix, same amount of water and sunlight. The only variable is what is being said to each.

If nature reacts in this way to different emotions, how can love just be a 'concept'?

And hate is only a lack or absence of love.

Somebody's bio struck me today. In short, "Love is the only thing we can't get enough of, and love is the only thing we can't give enough of."

There's something more to love than just concepts, words and brain chemistry. At least to me. Each to their own.

But in my almost-30 years on this planet, I've come to believe that Love is the only 'spiritual' thing I can identify that unites all living things.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jypsijemini
6 hours ago, Guyver said:

False.  Once again you present your atheist opinion on spiritual matters as if it were factual - it isn’t.  For those of us who have some understanding of faith and spirituality, we know that you are mistaken and don’t know what you’re talking about regarding these matters.

Living and practicing a life of faith is more difficult than living a life without it from my experience, and for tens of millions of others like myself who have some experience in these matters.

That's like a child saying, "I know that Santa is real because I've seen him. I sat on his lap at the mall. He even visited my school. I wrote letters to him and sent them to the North Pole. He even sends me a little elf in December who moves around my house and makes sure I've been good. I've got countless books about Santa and even my mum and dad say he's real. Christmas is nothing without Santa. Almost everybody at my school believes in Santa too so he must be real. People who don't believe in Santa are just mistaken. They have no idea what they're talking about."

Edited by jypsijemini
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
onlookerofmayhem
3 minutes ago, jypsijemini said:

Have you checked out the water and plant experiments?

Water and newly sprouted plants are subjected to words for a period. "I love you", "I hate you" etc.

The water crystallises differently, The plants grow at different rates. There's something to it. The other circumstances are the same. Same potting mix, same amount of water and sunlight. The only variable is what is being said to each.

If nature reacts in this way to different emotions, how can love just be a 'concept'?

And hate is only a lack or absence of love.

Somebody's bio struck me today. In short, "Love is the only thing we can't get enough of, and love is the only thing we can't give enough of."

There's something more to love than just concepts, words and brain chemistry. At least to me. Each to their own.

But in my almost-30 years on this planet, I've come to believe that Love is the only 'spiritual' thing I can identify that unites all living things.

No but I have heard that talking to plants is good for them. I have no opinions either way. 

Do you have a link to these experiments?

Love is a concept in the way the definition is elastic. It means different things to different people. 

One person might say that letting go is a sign of love. Another can say that holding on is a sign of love.  Another could say both are in a different way. Neither are right or wrong.

I don't agree with hate being the lack or absence or love.

I lack love for a lot of things, but that in no way implies that I hate them. I am indifferent. 

Hate, to me, involves an extreme dislike or prejudice towards something. Either mentally or physically.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jypsijemini

Water experiment: https://highexistence.com/water-experiment/

Plant experiment: https://dailytimes.com.pk/297417/the-science-behind-power-of-words-2/

@onlookerofmayhem I very much agree with all of your statements.

I'd add to it, however. Other languages have different words for different forms of love. We really only have one. We can expand on it with "adoration, deep affection, intimacy, warmth" etc - but on their own, these words merely describe an element or type of love, and do not define love itself.

Love is such an overused, misused word. To "love" a person and to "love" a place, thing or idea are completely different. As is to love oneself and to love another. There's different expressions and reasons behind this love.

To say, "I love what you just said," is to try to express that you wholeheartedly agree, you resonate with their words. To say, "I love you" can mean all kinds of things entirely. It depends on the intention behind the use of the word.

For me, I've broadened and fine-tuned my understanding of Love the best that I can. To me, Love is unconditional, forgiving, patient, understanding, non-judgemental, accepting, kind, impartial to reciprocation, constant (unfailing) and above all, a choice.

Edited by jypsijemini
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.