God (Ask Me Anything)

[+joc]

2 hours ago, Mark Sanders said:

Not silly, just a mental exercise to put someone into either of two extremes, it has nothing to do with knowledge or understanding. It is compareable to Jesus eating & drinking and John the Baptist's ascetic way of life, a damned if you do, damned if you don't kind of deal.

I always thought it was a silly question.  So, I'm gathering that maybe you wish to be questioned on the content of the Word of God, rather than philosophical meanderings of non-importance to the believer.

Regardless...there is a question of that philosophical meandering that I don't think is answerable but it gets to the heart of Creation.

Where did God come from?  How did God come into existence?

[Herbert Sanders]

39 minutes ago, joc said:

I always thought it was a silly question.  So, I'm gathering that maybe you wish to be questioned on the content of the Word of God, rather than philosophical meanderings of non-importance to the believer.

Regardless...there is a question of that philosophical meandering that I don't think is answerable but it gets to the heart of Creation.

Where did God come from?  How did God come into existence?

Where did life come from? How did life come into existence? Or math...

If God is not seen as an entity but more as a system by which things exist then God and existence go hand in hand. But because existence follows logic the logic must come first. The logic is the subject of science and religion. Where does logic come from? It comes from God, as the word (logic) was God

Quote

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. - John 1:1

Edited January 26, 2020 by Mark Sanders

[+joc]

8 minutes ago, Mark Sanders said:

Where did life come from? How did life come into existence?

If God is not seen as an entity but more as a system by which things exist then God and existence go hand in hand. But because existence follows logic the logic comes first. The logic is the subject of science and religion.

According to religion...God created the Heavens and the Earth...and goes into quite a bit of detail about exactly how He did that.  7 days, including the day he rested...Sun being created on the 4th day...etc.  No where in scripture does it say that God was the light...God said, Let there be light.  Therefore, God is an Entity...the Bible is very clear that God is a Living God...not a system.   So, if a system created God, and God is alive, then the 'system' must have created God as well.  Logic does precede everything we know because without logic we know nothing really.

So...to get into the weeds of the question...if energy is all that exists, and energy cannot be destroyed, then energy created God, who in turn, created the universe.  If that is true, where did energy originate?  And if energy created God, how many Gods did energy create?

Just let me know when I am becoming intolerable and I'll stop

 

Edited January 26, 2020 by joc

[MissJatti]

How do you know God is God, and not some super intelligently advanced Alien from outta space, who'd ultimately kill us all.

[Herbert Sanders]

49 minutes ago, joc said:

According to religion...God created the Heavens and the Earth...and goes into quite a bit of detail about exactly how He did that.  7 days, including the day he rested...Sun being created on the 4th day...etc.  No where in scripture does it say that God was the light...God said, Let there be light.  Therefore, God is an Entity...the Bible is very clear that God is a Living God...not a system.   So, if a system created God, and God is alive, then the 'system' must have created God as well.  Logic does precede everything we know because without logic we know nothing really.

So...to get into the weeds of the question...if energy is all that exists, and energy cannot be destroyed, then energy created God, who in turn, created the universe.  If that is true, where did energy originate?  And if energy created God, how many Gods did energy create?

Just let me know when I am becoming intolerable and I'll stop

The bible often makes a statement in short, then repeats it a chapter later and exands upon it while infusing different layers of meaning as well. This messes with our sense of chronology, it bepuzzles us and we seem to think that the text contradicts itself and so we cast it aside as if it can not have any relevance.

God was the Word and the Word said let there be light. The Light comes from God. God is the God of the Living, it is a Living God all this is true, but this does not exclude it to be a system or living system. The system is not the creator of God, nor God's creation. It simply is one and the same. Energy follows a certain logic and so energy is not the starting point. If you are fixated or stuck at looking for a point of origin you will miss out on the descriptions of the internal workings, as described by the writers.

When we look at the 7 day's of creation we are looking at a school of thought from the hermetics, it is for alchemists.

38 minutes ago, MissJatti said:

How do you know God is God, and not some super intelligently advanced Alien from outta space, who'd ultimately kill us all.

God is not an entity. If aliens exist then they are subject to the same universal logic as we are, they might be more advanced in their understanding but that is it. We can apply logic to the extend that we are capable. But the universe, no matter our capabilities, is bound to logic as well.

Edited January 26, 2020 by Mark Sanders

[+joc]

29 minutes ago, Mark Sanders said:

God is not an entity.

Tell that to the millions upon millions of faithful who believe in their heart of hearts that God is a Living Entity.  

 

30 minutes ago, Mark Sanders said:

The bible often makes a statement in short, then repeats it a chapter later and exands upon it while infusing different layers of meaning as well. This messes with our sense of chronology, it bepuzzles us and we seem to think that the text contradicts itself and so we cast it aside as if it can not have any relevance.

God was the Word and the Word said let there be light. The Light comes from God. God is the God of the Living, it is a Living God all this is true, but this does not exclude it to be a system or living system. The system is not the creator of God, nor God's creation.

That's not a chapter later Mark.  John said that in The NT.  You are not doing a great job at answering the question in my humble opinion.  

Quote

The system is not the creator of God, nor God's creation.

So if The System did not create God...and God did not create the system...all we are left with is that God was created by the mind of man.  In other words...God is in our head and as an actual existing Entity...not so much.  Only in our belief does God exist.  We created Him.  Not the other way around.

So, the Scriptures should begin...In the beginning Man created God, and subjugated the creation of everything else to that Mental Image.

[Herbert Sanders]

16 minutes ago, joc said:

Tell that to the millions upon millions of faithful who believe in their heart of hearts that God is a Living Entity.  I hope we will get to that

 

That's not a chapter later Mark.  John said that in The NT.  You are not doing a great job at answering the question in my humble opinion.  OT/NT are not in conflict. The 7 days of creation is hermeticism not a chronological event of creation itself. Well it is as it is a series of steps within a system, I think you understand where I am going with this.

So if The System did not create God...and God did not create the system...all we are left with is that God was created by the mind of man.  In other words...God is in our head and as an actual existing Entity...not so much.  Only in our belief does God exist.  We created Him.  Not the other way around. No, God forbid, lol. The universe has observable rules and ordinances. We can learn to live with it (God), and if we don't then there will be repecussions in the same sense that the laws of nature apply. Try jumping off a cliff in denial of gravity.

So, the Scriptures should begin...In the beginning Man created God, and subjugated the creation of everything else to that Mental Image. Now you are getting carried away

 

Edited January 26, 2020 by Mark Sanders

[+joc]

I do indeed...you are going around in circles.

Quote

No, God forbid, lol. The universe has observable rules and ordinances. We can learn to live with it (God), and if we don't then there will be repecussions in the same sense that the laws of nature apply. Try jumping off a cliff in denial of gravity.

We can learn to live with it (God)   You have already stated the system did not create God nor did God create the system.  Now you are saying that the system IS God.

Rather than go around in your endless circle that always leads back to the point of The Universe is God...there is another thread already in session for that.  Did Consciousness Pervade the Universe?

To that end I will leave this discussion now since it is already established you failed to answer the question.  The question was Where did God come from?  Your answer:  The Universe is God.   I'll take the win.  But thanks for letting me play.    At least you know how to present an argument without personality getting all involved.  I sincerely thank you for that!

Edited January 26, 2020 by joc

[Herbert Sanders]

13 minutes ago, joc said:

I do indeed...you are going around in circles.

We can learn to live with it (God)   You have already stated the system did not create God nor did God create the system.  Now you are saying that the system IS God.

Rather than go around in your endless circle that always leads back to the point of The Universe is God...there is another thread already in session for that.  Did Consciousness Pervade the Universe?

To that end I will leave this discussion now since it is already established you failed to answer the question.  The question was Where did God come from?  Your answer:  The Universe is God.   I'll take the win.  But thanks for letting me play.    At least you know how to present an argument without personality getting all involved.  I sincerely thank you for that!

It is ok for you to leave with a win. Consciousness is indeed what it is about. Consciousness, by it's very nature, also means the ordinances and the concept of the sacrificial lamb. All these are bound together from creation until the end and so the doctrine will stand firm as well .

Edited January 26, 2020 by Mark Sanders

[+joc]

8 minutes ago, Mark Sanders said:

It is ok for you to leave with a win. Consciousness is indeed what it is about. Consciousness, by it's very nature, also means the ordinances and the concept of the sacrificial lamb. All these are bound together from creation until the end and so the doctrine will stand firm as well .

shhhhhsh...there is no creation...we have already established that! Don't blow what little cred you have left.....   

[Herbert Sanders]

7 minutes ago, joc said:

shhhhhsh...there is no creation...we have already established that! Don't blow what little cred you have left.....   

Well let's say from cycle to cycle the pattern is such that we cannot do away with the sacrificial lamb

Don't be amazed, every cycle has a beginning and an end. Cycles come and go, large and small and witin every set of intertwining strands you will see this play itself out. If we focus on absolutes, same as in Matthew 11:16-19, then we are missing the point. Is God omnipotent? Where did he start/end? These are questions asked for the purpose of entrapment in absolutes or to be able to dismiss simple teachings in favor of subjectivism.

Edited January 26, 2020 by Mark Sanders

[+joc]

7 hours ago, Mark Sanders said:

Well let's say from cycle to cycle the pattern is such that we cannot do away with the sacrificial lamb

Don't be amazed, every cycle has a beginning and an end. Cycles come and go, large and small and witin every set of intertwining strands you will see this play itself out. If we focus on absolutes, same as in Matthew 11:16-19, then we are missing the point. Is God omnipotent? Where did he start/end? These are questions asked for the purpose of entrapment in absolutes or to be able to dismiss simple teachings in favor of subjectivism.

There is no entrapment in absolutes...because absolutes establish what is real and what is fantasy.  Subjective is the absence of absolutes.  In other words...fantasy...imagination...what we think could be rather that what we know actually is.

Simple teachings are just that...they need no God or Entity or Universal Acceptance to be.   The Sacrificial Lamb is about as subjective as it gets.

[Herbert Sanders]

1 minute ago, joc said:

There is no entrapment in absolutes...because absolutes establish what is real and what is fantasy.  Subjective is the absence of absolutes.  In other words...fantasy...imagination...what we think could be rather that what we know actually is.

Simple teachings are just that...they need no God or Entity or Universal Acceptance to be.   The Sacrificial Lamb is about as subjective as it gets.

There is an absute middle within the paradox of duality. Which is why leaning to one or the other brings misunderstanding.

I agree with the notion that simple teachings are just that, regardless of position. However a body of doctrine (or teaching) is easily disgarded if one erroneously falsifies .

The sacrificial lamb is a type that pervades the structure of the bible. It is the key to unlocking the paradox. Only by understanding the notion of Christ can objectivity be had. Without this piece the whole structure collapses into subjectivism.

[+joc]

Just now, Mark Sanders said:

The sacrificial lamb is a type that pervades the structure of the bible. It is the key to unlocking the paradox. Only by understanding the notion of Christ can objectivity be had. Without this piece the whole structure collapses into subjectivism.

Explain to me then this objectivity of Christ.  Know that I grew up in the church, was a Christian most of my life, and know considerable about the scriptures, the life of Jesus, etc.  Just so you don't go with a 'preaching' attitude toward me.  I rather loathe that...plus...it is against forum rules...so, how is anything about the Sacrificial Lamb objective?  

[Habitat]

2 minutes ago, joc said:

Explain to me then this objectivity of Christ.  Know that I grew up in the church, was a Christian most of my life, and know considerable about the scriptures, the life of Jesus, etc.  Just so you don't go with a 'preaching' attitude toward me.  I rather loathe that...plus...it is against forum rules...so, how is anything about the Sacrificial Lamb objective?  

I really think churches and other such places should be banned for people under the age of legal responsibility, and no-one should be able to feed religion to children, the same way as you aren't allowed to serve liquor to children anywhere. Think how that would have gone for you, joc.

[Herbert Sanders]

37 minutes ago, joc said:

Explain to me then this objectivity of Christ.  Know that I grew up in the church, was a Christian most of my life, and know considerable about the scriptures, the life of Jesus, etc.  Just so you don't go with a 'preaching' attitude toward me.  I rather loathe that...plus...it is against forum rules...so, how is anything about the Sacrificial Lamb objective?  

There was a question earlier about why the was evil in the world to which I answered the following:

On 1/25/2020 at 7:18 PM, Mark Sanders said:

Evil comes with a material existence, it encourages the unjust by temptation. It suppresses the innocent and brings affliction.

However with time the tides do turn. And cycles repeat. Evil has to be overcome by bravery. Spirit over matter.

This is a pattern that we can actually observe throughout history, even in our present day, it can be pointed out. This itself might not showcase the 'lamb' to many as it shows itself merely as bloom periods after hardships.

But at the heart of it it is more. Taken as an abstract the pattern truly is about innocense trumping evil. And the courage it takes for some to pick up the proverbial cross.

I don't have to tell you how Jesus acts as an intercessor for sinners, that only makes him a paper tiger. Because one would need to accept the notion of sin first. To me, although this crystalized form is relevant, should not be the meat of the game.

I think it is best to concentrate on what we can perceive. We know what to look for and we understand the pitfalls of confirmatiom bias. There must be data available that could enrich our understanding in the underlying mechanisms.

And so i would propose to make it a subject of study.

Edited January 27, 2020 by Mark Sanders

[Crikey]

On ‎1‎/‎25‎/‎2020 at 6:37 PM, XenoFish said:

There is no truth to religion. It is only a belief. A belief that people often wish to validate using science. I had thought about cutting believers some slack, be a bit more understanding in regards to their faith. I see now such a stance would be a mistake on my part. 

 

Jesus wasn't a "religion", he was JESUS, a solid flesh and blood dood seen and heard by thousands, you either like him or you don't..

[Crikey]

31 minutes ago, Habitat said:

I really think churches and other such places should be banned for people under the age of legal responsibility, and no-one should be able to feed religion to children, the same way as you aren't allowed to serve liquor to children anywhere.

 

Yes, some years ago a kid said in the AOL Religion chatroom "My parents make me go to church with them but I don't want to go, what should I do?"

so I said- "Refuse pointblank to go".

I gather he took my advice and  his parents later complained about me to AOL and I was warned and almost banned..

[Habitat]

On 1/26/2020 at 4:37 AM, XenoFish said:

There is no truth to religion. It is only a belief. A belief that people often wish to validate using science. I had thought about cutting believers some slack, be a bit more understanding in regards to their faith. I see now such a stance would be a mistake on my part. 

Oh well, they say it is the thought that counts.

[+joc]

17 minutes ago, Mark Sanders said:

There was a question earlier about why the was evil in the world to which I answered the following:

This is a pattern that we can actually observe throughout history, even in our present day, it can be pointed out. This itself might not showcase the 'lamb' to many as it shows itself merely as bloom periods after hardships.

But at the heart of it it is more. Taken as an abstract the pattern truly is about innocense trumping evil. And the courage it takes for some to pick up the proverbial cross.

I don't have to tell you how Jesus acts as an intercessor for sinners, that only makes him a paper tiger. Because one would need to accept the notion of sin first. To me, although this crystalized form is relevant, should not be the meat of the game.

I think it is best to concentrate on what we can perceive. We know what to look for and we understand the pitfalls of confirmatiom bias. There must be data available that could enrich our understanding in the underlying mechanisms.

And so i would propose to make it a subject of study.

I have already studied it.  The entire premise is set upon the fall of Adam in the garden of Eden.  The scriptures teach us that all things were created by God for his pleasure.  

Problems:

1.  Serpents do not speak.

2.  The knowledge of good and evil came about as a conceptualization of what was 'evil' based upon the human indecency of individuals.  I.e.  out of the bounds of considered societal norms.

3.  The concept of sin is a response to the concept of evil.

4.  God presenting an opportunity to his new found creations...made in his image...to eat from the Tree of Knowledge is in it's most simplest form, a temptation placed upon the new creation where no temptation was necessary.

5.  In essence, God tempted Creation, knowing it would sin.  Then constructed a way for that sin to be vanquished...ie the sacrificial lamb.

In my opinion the entire exercise is one of an illogical thought process of humans NOT possessed with any real knowledge about anything.  Those who were deemed 'evil' by the Society in question were put to death or exiled.

There is no need for a Sacrificial Lamb because the entire premise of sin is a misconceived Construct made by primitive humans who were attempting to create justice in things they really only superficially understood.  In today's church...the teachings of Christ...which should be considered as absolutely relevant, are not considered at all.  The prerequisite for salvation is based upon belief.  Belief is irrelevant with regards to truth.

Therefore the whole business of Sacrificial Lamb is a false premise.

[Habitat]

The BIG question is, did Adam and Eve have  belly buttons ? Nothing much else matters.

[Herbert Sanders]

7 hours ago, joc said:

I have already studied it.  The entire premise is set upon the fall of Adam in the garden of Eden.  The scriptures teach us that all things were created by God for his pleasure.  

Problems:

1.  Serpents do not speak. To my knowledge this is a scene played out in the heavens, or sky. Aug 2, 3899 BC greg. A story, an allegory and a scene.

2.  The knowledge of good and evil came about as a conceptualization of what was 'evil' based upon the human indecency of individuals.  I.e.  out of the bounds of considered societal norms. Evil comes to a materialistic world through ignorance.

3.  The concept of sin is a response to the concept of evil. Perhaps. Wages of sin is death. Try to be a terrorist as a profession.

4.  God presenting an opportunity to his new found creations...made in his image...to eat from the Tree of Knowledge is in it's most simplest form, a temptation placed upon the new creation where no temptation was necessary. Such is nature, we start ignorant. Temptation also propels us forward but at a cost, we have to forsake comfortable territory.

Forsake family life for career or forsake career for family life. Forsake the world for deep understanding. Sacrifice is the price we pay for the lives we live.

5.  In essence, God tempted Creation, knowing it would sin.  Then constructed a way for that sin to be vanquished...ie the sacrificial lamb. That is the paper tiger yes.

In my opinion the entire exercise is one of an illogical thought process of humans NOT possessed with any real knowledge about anything.  Those who were deemed 'evil' by the Society in question were put to death or exiled.

There is no need for a Sacrificial Lamb because the entire premise of sin is a misconceived Construct made by primitive humans who were attempting to create justice in things they really only superficially understood.  In today's church...the teachings of Christ...which should be considered as absolutely relevant, are not considered at all.  The prerequisite for salvation is based upon belief.  Belief is irrelevant with regards to truth.

Therefore the whole business of Sacrificial Lamb is a false premise.

Take a step back. Look at lives from a distance and you will see. I understand that the deal 'sucks'. Anger and resentment is not the solution. Your post reads as if trauma has been inflicted upon you by those who were ignorant. It has become close minded and that is a shame.

I agree that belief is irrelevant. It is about knowledge and understanding. Churches make me cringe it.

Edited January 27, 2020 by Mark Sanders

[+joc]

20 minutes ago, Mark Sanders said:

I agree that belief is irrelevant. It is about knowledge and understanding. Churches make me cringe it.

There is no separation from the belief and the church...they are one and the same because the 'church' wrote the Bible.  The High Priests, etc. 

We can conclude our discussion with...you gave a valiant effort and failed marvelously.  You are in your heart an atheist. You just haven't realized it yet.  

You are a good guy Mark...eventually you will find an 'answer' that makes sense to you...one that doesn't have to be extrapolated from ancient writings by people who had little knowledge and understanding to begin with.  

[Herbert Sanders]

46 minutes ago, joc said:

There is no separation from the belief and the church...they are one and the same because the 'church' wrote the Bible.  The High Priests, etc. 

We can conclude our discussion with...you gave a valiant effort and failed marvelously.  You are in your heart an atheist. You just haven't realized it yet.  

You are a good guy Mark...eventually you will find an 'answer' that makes sense to you...one that doesn't have to be extrapolated from ancient writings by people who had little knowledge and understanding to begin with.  

It is true that belief and church cannot be separated same as that the masses cannot understand scientific research but they end up using products as consumers.

I have been an atheist for 2/3 of my life, I went the other way around . Can't unsee what has been seen. I come from an angle that both science and religion should not be mutually exclusive. If done right they cannot ever falsify each other. If it does then we are wrong. In all, it isn't rocket science and should be easily understood by a willing mind.

Thanks for the kind words.

Edited January 27, 2020 by Mark Sanders

[Herbert Sanders]

21 minutes ago, iridescence said:

What do you mean by material existence? And you didn't ask my question. Is God death?

The be thrown into the material world, having consciousness, having an outer shell (corpus), and a purpose (animus), we act on what we desire. For some that is through temptation for others it is to balance 'the system' out through the concept of justice. And now we dance .

Is God death? God has many forms, life and death. Two sides of God. The death side is an unabating grinding down on the side of life but same could be said for life overcoming death. Our actions determine on what side we stand. Now I am not necessarily implying eternal life here because that is taking it too far (again Matthew 11:16-19). But the treatment of disease by taking away corrupted parts, we can see this in our lives. Left to die, or assisted in life, life seems to have its limits.

Edited January 27, 2020 by Mark Sanders