Are people who claim to know God liars?

[Dinos Constantinou]

Hi Nakosis

I like the way you present your case.

One thing you wrote, " However if I can't validate my own experience, how can I really trust someone else being able to validate theirs?" I believe this view fits in with the concept of solipsism (the view or theory that the self is all that can be known to exist). It's not much use if you enjoy communicating with other life forms.


For those who believe that the Bible is God-inspired and is somehow helpful to learn or understand God from, I fail to see how they can honestly explain the contradictions. For example, we read in Exodus that God gave Moses the Ten Commandments:

Exodus 31:18 King James Version (KJV)
18 And he gave unto Moses when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tablets of testimony, tablets of stone, written with the finger of God.

If this really happened, how and why did the Hebrews enlarge them to 613 laws or commandments?

From Leviticus 20, we learn that Capital Punishment was exercised on those who transgressed some of the laws within. Below is just a short extract:

9 For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.

10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

11 And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

12 And if a man lie with his daughter in law, both of them shall surely be put to death: they have wrought confusion; their blood shall be upon them.

I would just like to ask, is "his blood shall be upon him," or "their blood shall be upon them," truly an excuse for execution which requires that the executors break the sixth commandment written by the "finger of God" on the stone tablets? Please be honest in your answers.


After Christ came and gave us a new covenant, has the killing stopped? Do the Christians who believe in the Bible think it is helpful or necessary that the USA, the UK and Russia have bombed Syria resulting in the deaths of children as collateral damage? Are we who come from these countries that profess to be Christian free from sin or blood guilt because we didn't personally participate in the bombings?

I sincerely hope for some sensible answers because it's my belief that the concept of the afterlife, so important to Christianity, has facilitated these atrocities. God will save those who should be saved and damn those who He deems to deserve that fate. It's my view that this concept of the afterlife has devalued our earthly existence. Super Powers can do what they like to the people from lesser countries because God will take care of those who deserve a heavenly afterlife.

Peace and love to all,

Dinos

 

[Muffled]

That is one way of looking at it, but I'm more inclined to think one is creating their own subjective reality. The imagination is far more powerful than most consider or admit.

I believe your imagination trumps mine.

 

[Muffled]

It all ends up being a matter of who you choose to believe for whatever reasons.

I believe people who believe reality is imagination are less believable.

 

[Muffled]

You've never question whether, you've subconsciously, are deceiving yourself?

I don't believe people do this on purpose. The religious experience seems to be a "real" experience of the conscious mind.

The subconscious mind creates the reality that is experienced by the conscious self. To the point that what you consciously experience doesn't actually exist.

For example the color pink doesn't actually exist. It's a fabrication of the subconscious mind. However you still experience seeing the color pink.

The Color Pink Doesn't Exist? So Why Can We See It?

Now if your brain can make you see a color that doesn't actually exist, what else can your subconscious mind cause you to see/experience which doesn't actually exist?

I believe it was disconcerting once when things didn't happen as expected. I am more apt to examine my interpretations for rationality these days. Even logical reasoning has failed me on occasion. So now I am more careful that I listen to God instead of what seems logical.

Are you saying that the subconscious mind could turn water into wine simply because Jesus consciously desired it? I don't think that makes sense.

I believe that falls within the mirage category. However the phenomenon exists whether it is what it is perceived to be or not. After a while we learn what our perceptions mean and don't make the mistake of thinking there is water on the road.

I believe a reasoning of this to that does not work. Are you going to say that perception of the color blue or green or red isn't real as well? So the answer is that one may question an experience but not assume that all experiences are created by the subconscious.

 

[MonkeyFire]

Don't deal in absolutes.

 

[Nakosis]

I believe people who believe reality is imagination are less believable.

Which is why I prefer a method of scientific validation.

 

[Nakosis]

I believe it was disconcerting once when things didn't happen as expected. I am more apt to examine my interpretations for rationality these days. Even logical reasoning has failed me on occasion. So now I am more careful that I listen to God instead of what seems logical.

Personally, I'm more concerned with what is provable. If I'm going to rely on some claim, I'd liked to be able to validate that claim first. If I make a claim, I have to be able to prove it to other folks. Then I have some certainty it is something that can be relied on.

Are you saying that the subconscious mind could turn water into wine simply because Jesus consciously desired it? I don't think that makes sense.

Only in regards to what you personally experience. For example if prayer works, you should be able to prove this to be the case to anyone's reasonable criteria.

I believe that falls within the mirage category. However the phenomenon exists whether it is what it is perceived to be or not. After a while we learn what our perceptions mean and don't make the mistake of thinking there is water on the road.

Sure, after you've learned this to be true. What about the "mirages" you have no knowledge of? You can test the mirage and prove the case consistently so accept this as knowledge. What about where you cannot test the case? What's not testable remains in doubt.

I believe a reasoning of this to that does not work. Are you going to say that perception of the color blue or green or red isn't real as well? So the answer is that one may question an experience but not assume that all experiences are created by the subconscious.

The experience of pink is as real as the experience of these other colors. As real as the experience of the mirage. You see what you see. The brain interprets what it senses so you experience seeing the color blue.

The brain creates an interface for you to interact with reality. Like the display of your computer screen. What you see on the screen is not the actual data used by your computer. It is simply an interface which allows you to conveniently interface with that date.

If you knew machine code, you would be closer to being able to interact directly with the data. You'd still need some rudimentary interface to convert the electrical pluses into something you could read.

With the brain however we are still far from being able to understand how the electrical/chemical information transmitted by the central nervous system becomes this interface we use to interact with reality.

The problem with your conscious interface is that it is not perfect. It's flawed and we've been able to show that it's flawed. Kind of like if your computer display would not display all of the characters sometimes on the screen. Or sometimes show the wrong character. Like the experience of seeing a mirage.

That being said, I don't know what your experience of God has been. Some see God, some talk to God, Some just feel the presence of God. A lot seem to simply feel inspired in their actions by God.

Others, when they refer to listening to what God says, just refer to what is written in the Bible. IOW they have not had a personal experience with God.

If you are of the later type then you are trusting the claims made in a books for whatever your personal reasoning is. If the former, then you are relying on a conscious interface, which is known to be flawed.

 

[Nakosis]

Hi Nakosis

I like the way you present your case.

One thing you wrote, " However if I can't validate my own experience, how can I really trust someone else being able to validate theirs?" I believe this view fits in with the concept of solipsism (the view or theory that the self is all that can be known to exist). It's not much use if you enjoy communicating with other life forms.

Actually I'm fine with scientific validation. I'm just saying that if it is something that we can't scientifically validate then it is something we still have to question the reality of.

The rest of your post seems geared towards Christians so I'll leave them to answer it.

 

[Rick B]

Don't deal in absolutes.

Are you absolutely sure about that?

 

[MonkeyFire]

Are you absolutely sure about that?

Yes, but I also don't fight.

 

[Rick B]

Yes, but I also don't fight.

If by "fight" you mean defend and contend, you just did.

 

[Hawkins]

My position is man knows nothing about God. I assume this is the default position of atheists. Am I wrong?

Your reasoning is in reversed human self-centered way.

The question boils down to if God is true, how He should make Himself known to humans.

The most efficient way for God to make Himself known to humans is by showing up in front of humans. However God has a reason not showing up because by a covenant between God and man humans need faith to be saved. So if He shows up it means that mankind is no longer savable.

The second most efficient way is for Him to show up in front of a small group of eyewitnesses, and for them to spread the message to the rest of humans. That's how we know God from the book we call Bible.

 

[Nakosis]

Your reasoning is in reversed human self-centered way.

The question boils down to if God is true, how He should make Himself known to humans.

The most efficient way for God to make Himself known to humans is by showing up in front of humans. However God has a reason not showing up because by a covenant between God and man humans need faith to be saved. So if He shows up it means that mankind is no longer savable.

The second most efficient way is for Him to show up in front of a small group of eyewitnesses, and for them to spread the message to the rest of humans. That's how we know God from the book we call Bible.

There were witnesses to the Lord Krishna. It was also written in a book called the Bhagavad Gita.

Why should I have anymore faith in one over the other? Or is faith in any God enough?

 

[MonkeyFire]

If by "fight" you mean defend and contend, you just did.

I'm passive, I believe.

 

[Rick B]

I'm passive, I believe.

I don't know, your avatar looks pretty aggressive.

 

[MonkeyFire]

I don't know, your avatar looks pretty aggressive.

There's no way to fighting for God, He is an instant overkill. He can be passive and enjoy burning hell telepathically, all of hell, at once, and LOVE makes it forever. Hell is it's own torment, you just need peace of mind.

 

[Muffled]

Which is why I prefer a method of scientific validation.

I believe there is no way to scientifically validate spiritual things and despite what people think it can't be used to validate historical things either.

 

[Nakosis]

I believe there is no way to scientifically validate spiritual things and despite what people think it can't be used to validate historical things either.

In which case my point is that whatever evaluation of these experience is done is open to personal bias along with all the known faults with human perception. Even with scientific examination the conclusions can be wrong. Without it, it's a crapshoot.

IOW your guess is as good as mine. So I might as well create my own narrative vs accepting one that someone else came up with.

 

[syo]

People who say God is whatever... loving, all powerful, Just, merciful, has a plan for all of us etc.
From whence does this knowledge about God come from?

from Jesus.

 

[Nakosis]

from Jesus.

How do you know? Did you check his ID card?

Does this apparition state his name or do folks just assume because of the spiritual nature of the vision, it was Jesus?