Are you an atheist? if so, What is your POV about God?

[McBell]

My argument remains standing. You haven't refuted it, and you barely scrutinized it. So yes, I took to grandstanding.

wait, you presented an argument?
What is that argument?
I ask because I must have missed it.

 

[Sonofason]

wait, you presented an argument?
What is that argument?
I ask because I must have missed it.

Sorry, I forget the question.

 

[McBell]

Sorry, I forget the question.

Ah, so then I did not miss an argument presented by you?
Just another bold empty claim?

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

So you are suggesting that you have electrodes connected to my brain that is causing me to have an experience that is the same kind of experience that one might experience when they are experiencing God? I am not surprised.

How did you even interpret it that way? Paranoid much? I'm only saying that magnetic, electrical, and chemical stimulation can make a person feel lots of different ways, including a sense of connecting with the divine (provided the person has such an ability, because apparently some people literally can't). For the materialists, this is evidence that these feelings are simply neural manipulations, nothing more. In order for you (or I) to prove that God is the stimulus and not a magnet or something, we need to identify the (S)ource, like tracking a cell phone signal. Not sure if I know how to pull that off, but I'm guessing neither do you.

And I sincerely hope your "proof" isn't merely "god said he is the only one", be cause that would be hearsay, not proof.

Especially since we can trace Yahweh to a Canaanite pantheon ... and Baal kills Him in Baal's version.

You can find reference to some of those god's in Genesis chapter 6.

If you believe the bible, why do you not know that Yahweh's dad is El? It downplays it, sure, but other texts plus archaeology confirm the pantheon. El, Astarte, Asherah, Baal, Anat, Yahweh/Yam ... they were all part of a pantheon and it's only when henotheistic and then monotheistic priests got involved (couldn't have anything to do with wanting a monopoly on tithes and power, right?) that suddenly the gods "didn't exist except Yahweh".

I have a claim that I share with millions of people who make the same claim.

People are, generally, really stupid, though. It's like saying "I know I'm right for choosing C is the answer, because everyone in class always just puts C."

Actually, many claims are documented. The Bible is full of documented claims.

Almost none of which are written by the actual supposed claimants, either.

So you are unwilling to look at the map. That is very telling of your bias to the existence of God.

The map brings up more questions, like, "WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING IN MY YARD?"

Then, by god revelation, your prayers were answered. One day a doctor you haven't seen in years comes and tests her. Now she is in good health. You prayed for divine intervention for weeks. Then your family who you have bad relations with come up with money for the doctors bills. Then your family slowly comes together...

Sometimes the answer is also "Nope. They gonna die."

Even with Jesus being so against it.

Jesus is someone who wanted us to keep our faith on the DL while attending to large groups in public spectacles. It comes honest.

But in the end, I decide on what is right. I decide what is wrong. I decide if something is just or unjust. I decide what is and is not evidence. You just don't get to make those decisions for me.

Didn't you just say you don't believe anything comes from ourselves/our brains, that it's all external?

I hear what you are saying about placebos, but I cannot say that such a concept is real. I have never experienced a placebo effect. I have never seen anyone who has experienced a placebo effect. Thus, I cannot say such a thing actually exists. The fact that people talk about it doesn't make it real.

I'm a nurse. While it's sadly illegal to use blatant placebos (at least where I am now), yes, it is quite possible to manipulate others into being "helped" just by giving them a suggestion. And "The fact that people talk about it doesn't make it real" is HILARIOUS considering you are justifying your claims of belief in God with "other people claim it too."

 

[Sonofason]

Ah, so then I did not miss an argument presented by you?
Just another bold empty claim?

No, I have no argument to present to you. I believe you interjected into a discussion that I was having with someone else. I honestly feel no compulsion to go back and dig through previous statements in order to find an argument that I may or may not have presented to someone else. For all I know I was making a statement of belief which I find myself under no obligation to defend. If you know the claim that you are referring to...then present it. And then if I feel the claim warrants an argument, then I will present one.

 

[Sonofason]

How did you even interpret it that way? Paranoid much? I'm only saying that magnetic, electrical, and chemical stimulation can make a person feel lots of different ways, including a sense of connecting with the divine (provided the person has such an ability, because apparently some people literally can't). For the materialists, this is evidence that these feelings are simply neural manipulations, nothing more. In order for you (or I) to prove that God is the stimulus and not a magnet or something, we need to identify the (S)ource, like tracking a cell phone signal. Not sure if I know how to pull that off, but I'm guessing neither do you.

Well, I wasn't actually trying to suggest that you actually have electrodes connected to my brain causing me to experience those experiences that I have had which I believe are from God, I was merely trying to show you that you do not have electrodes connected to my brain capable of causing me to experience anything at all. I have experienced God without your electrodes.

But I understand what you were trying to suggest. You are trying to suggest that those experiences that I have had might be able to be duplicated if I had electrodes connected to my brain. However, even if that is true, I'm not sure how you make the association that just because science might be capable of making people feel as though they are having some kind of experience does not negate the possibility that God is capable of causing us to have experiences of Him as well. So, in my opinion your electrode example fails the test of reason.

I would imagine that electrodes could be placed on one's brain in some particular way causing that person to experience a sensation on their feet, as though they were standing in a stream of cold water. If they cannot do that today, maybe they can do it tomorrow. But that in no way undermines the fact that a person can stand in cold stream of water and feel the sensation of it.

If God is going to have us experience anything about Him, it is going to have to be something physical. I do not believe it is possible to experience something that is not physical. Everything we experience has a physical component. It may be that all components of an experience are a direct result of something physical happening to us. We all know that when we have experiences, that the actual noticing of the experience takes place in the brain. An extremity of the body comes into contact with something, signals are sent to the brain, our brains interpret the signals, and we recognize that we have just had an experience of some kind. If God is so inclined as to have us experience anything about Him, He is going to have to use the natural processes of our bodies to accomplish that. If science is now capable of reproducing those kinds of experiences that God is capable of causing in us, then I believe we have reached a sad moment in human history. Do you think it is a good thing that science might be capable of manipulating the human mind? I see that as a recipe for disaster.

If you believe the bible, why do you not know that Yahweh's dad is El? It downplays it, sure, but other texts plus archaeology confirm the pantheon. El, Astarte, Asherah, Baal, Anat, Yahweh/Yam ... they were all part of a pantheon and it's only when henotheistic and then monotheistic priests got involved (couldn't have anything to do with wanting a monopoly on tithes and power, right?) that suddenly the gods "didn't exist except Yahweh".

I really can't answer this without seeing the texts that you are referencing with the claims that you are making here. It would help if you could cite lines or verses from those texts that pertain to the claims you just made. I will be happy to review them and give you my answer.

People are, generally, really stupid, though. It's like saying "I know I'm right for choosing C is the answer, because everyone in class always just puts C."

Yes, that is true, and that is why I like to see that it is not just myself who claims to have experienced God. It is why I am pleased that millions of people have had the same experience that I have had, and interpret what they experienced in the same way that I have interpreted my experience. At least I'm not the only one having the experience. It doesn't mean that the experience is real, but it is a good indication that it might be. And since I am capable of living by faith, that is enough for me. I don't need proof of God's existence. To me, the experiences I've had, and seeing that others feel as I do is quite sufficient for me. And because I know that what you say is true, that "people are, generally, really stupid", I know that the only person I can really trust is me. Why would I listen to you, when what you say about people is so absolutely true?

Almost none of which are written by the actual supposed claimants, either.

I have seen claims that what you say here is true, but I have not seen any evidence that what you have said here is true. Please provide the evidence that you have to support this claim.

The map brings up more questions, like, "WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING IN MY YARD?"

That's pretty funny. I appreciate the humor. But now please address the actual question I asked. I believe it is relevent, and deserves an answer:

If I told you there was a beautiful one of a kind flower growing in your back yard, would you believe me? I saw it, and I promise you it's there. What if I were to draw you a map showing you where to find this flower, would you believe me? At this moment, if you do not go outside and look, you may not believe me, and you would be right that we do not choose what we believe. You can stay in your house believing that there is no special flower in your backyard because you haven't seen any evidence that such a flower exists in your backyard, or you can take the map I gave you and go look for it. When you find it, you will know that I was right. But you have to get off your *** and do something.

Didn't you just say you don't believe anything comes from ourselves/our brains, that it's all external?

I suppose you could say that, although that is not exactly what I said. A quote would be helpful. Nonetheless, I believe that everything we know, and everything we experience in some way originates from outside our selves. Yes, our brains receive the information. Our brains process the information, but all of the processing involves pieces of information that originated from outside our selves. We feel the warmth of the sun. We have incorporated into our bodies a physiology to feel this outside influence. If everything is in working order, signals of this experience are sent to our brains. Our brains process the information it receives. The source of the experience is the burning sun. The sun exists outside of ourselves.

So yes, whether consciously or subconsciously, I decide what is right and wrong. I decide what is just and unjust, and I decide what is evidence and what is not evidence. The decisions I make are the result of my brains processing of the information it has received from the experiences that I have had over my lifetime, that all originated from outside of myself. I see no contradiction. If you see one, please make it apparent for me to see.

I'm a nurse. While it's sadly illegal to use blatant placebos (at least where I am now), yes, it is quite possible to manipulate others into being "helped" just by giving them a suggestion. And "The fact that people talk about it doesn't make it real" is HILARIOUS considering you are justifying your claims of belief in God with "other people claim it too."

Oh well, I'm doing the best I can with what I've been given to work with.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

@Sonofason

But god is in you, through you, and with you. God isn't separate from you. If you believe we cannot see outside our own perspective and reality, to claim god is outside of our own perception is saying that we can define god.

The only way you can explain how god is outside of you is, like the sun, moon, and Advil pill, you'd have to show it's external in nature.

You'd have to separate god from you and, like the moon, give us a map that shows us there is a separate entity and what unique characteristics this entity has that does not mirror what humans have, want, or needs. If god is not like humans, what about him that makes him unique that isn't an idea coming from humans?

Well, I wasn't actually trying to suggest that you actually have electrodes connected to my brain causing me to experience those experiences that I have had which I believe are from God, I was merely trying to show you that you do not have electrodes connected to my brain capable of causing me to experience anything at all. I have experienced God without your electrodes.

This was to Kelly.

Without the electrodes, you wouldn't have the experiences. Your view of god and how you interpret him interacting with you causes a stimulation that originates from your body and mind. When your body and mind react, your mind interprets it as, maybe, love from god. Then you connect that stimulation (outside party) to your conclusion (love for god) without realizing in the process that with our without the stimulation, you can still have those same feelings from any number of things.

1. John get's made at me and curses. (Stimuli)

2. My response is shock and withdrawal (if not fighting and insult back)

The cause of my response is based on the neurons in my brain not John.

3. My body and mind creates a response from neurons firing and depending on where is depending on how I would react.

If I catch it in time, I can calm down and assertively address my body and mind's reaction because that is where the source of my response originates from me not from John.

If I addressed John thinking he is the origin of my response, then my response should disappear when John stops yelling. That isn't always the case. John can turn into the nicest person in the world the next second but because the origin of that experiences comes from you, you can't just switch your body's response based on John. You'd have to address your own body and mind to a healthy state before addressing the outside party.

4. If your response came from an outside source, you can shut John up and poof, your responses disappear! (That would be something!) That's not the case. The response comes from you. It's your body's response not John's.

It's the same with god.

The problem with god is compared to john is not only is the source come from you but you cannot prove that there is an outside source to begin with. All we know as outsiders is that you have a response to something we cannot judge for ourselves is real. It's not apparent. It's not universal.

So, the puzzle is more confusing.

1. You have X (an invisible entity only "experienced" by you)

2. That entity sends you love

3. Your body and mind responds to that love by nerves, neurons, electrodes

The response you receive is from the neurons in your brain not from god. If god all of the sudden vanishes, that doesn't mean your experiences and responses do. Your love and experiences are still there because they come from you not attached to god.

Unless you can identify an emotion that comes from the god of abraham only, people who do not believe in the god of abraham experience the same emotions and love that you do. We are not aliens to each other. That's why it comes from us. There is nothing unique about god experience that isn't part of human psychology.

Sorry, a repeat but emphases my point.

If you go to a therapy session and you say that someone hurt you, the therapist isn't going to address the stimuli-the person who hurt you (unless he still presents a present danger to you). He's going to address the cause/origin of the reaction which is your body and mind response to the stimulation. He's going to address your physiological and psychology responses because those things are what's causing you pain and turmoil not the person who hit you.

Someone else can be hit and get a positive experience. So it's not the outside party. It's from our body and mind.

Same with god.

However, this is more complicated because god is an entity and invisible. So you'd literally have to prove there is an outside party to begin with before proving that this outside party can do anything. Once you do that then the same argument applies to god.

You receive what you believe is the stimuli (god). That stimuli creates neurons etc to fire in the part of the brain and sensations you define as love. Instead of attaching the cause of this love to your brain and sensations you attribute it to god. Nothing wrong with that.

It's just technically inaccurate. People all around the world believe in different definitions of god(s) and spirit(s) and experience the same sensations that you do because you are not an alien to the rest of us.

And because you all experience the same thing and nothing is alien to each of your faiths, it doesn't come from the invisible party it comes from you.

In my last post, I know my family exists because they are from me, in me, and are a part of me. To say they are not is saying that I don't have a family.

So from that logic, I'd assume that god does not exist not because I haven't experienced god, but because you have separated this entity from yourself and because this entity is invisible, this is why you cannot describe your experience with him.

If you see god as part of you as Jesus did with his father, then explanations would be a whole lot easier just as jesus explanation was easy to his disciples. There was no faith. No "it's a mystery" and no lack of words. He knew. If god is the cause and is separate you should be able to explain who god is. Since he is a part of you and from you, it's hard to explain personal experiences.

And for that reason, and another reason, god isn't outside of you but in you. He is your experiences. Your life. To separate the spirit of god from you would kill you, to tell you honestly.

 

[Sonofason]

@Sonofason

But god is in you, through you, and with you. God isn't separate from you. If you believe we cannot see outside our own perspective and reality, to claim god is outside of our own perception is saying that we can define god.

The only way you can explain how god is outside of you is, like the sun, moon, and Advil pill, you'd have to show it's external in nature.

You'd have to separate god from you and, like the moon, give us a map that shows us there is a separate entity and what unique characteristics this entity has that does not mirror what humans have, want, or needs. If god is not like humans, what about him that makes him unique that isn't an idea coming from humans?



This was to Kelly.

Without the electrodes, you wouldn't have the experiences. Your view of god and how you interpret him interacting with you causes a stimulation that originates from your body and mind. When your body and mind react, your mind interprets it as, maybe, love from god. Then you connect that stimulation (outside party) to your conclusion (love for god) without realizing in the process that with our without the stimulation, you can still have those same feelings from any number of things.

1. John get's made at me and curses. (Stimuli)

2. My response is shock and withdrawal (if not fighting and insult back)

The cause of my response is based on the neurons in my brain not John.

3. My body and mind creates a response from neurons firing and depending on where is depending on how I would react.

If I catch it in time, I can calm down and assertively address my body and mind's reaction because that is where the source of my response originates from me not from John.

If I addressed John thinking he is the origin of my response, then my response should disappear when John stops yelling. That isn't always the case. John can turn into the nicest person in the world the next second but because the origin of that experiences comes from you, you can't just switch your body's response based on John. You'd have to address your own body and mind to a healthy state before addressing the outside party.

4. If your response came from an outside source, you can shut John up and poof, your responses disappear! (That would be something!) That's not the case. The response comes from you. It's your body's response not John's.

It's the same with god.

The problem with god is compared to john is not only is the source come from you but you cannot prove that there is an outside source to begin with. All we know as outsiders is that you have a response to something we cannot judge for ourselves is real. It's not apparent. It's not universal.

So, the puzzle is more confusing.

1. You have X (an invisible entity only "experienced" by you)

2. That entity sends you love

3. Your body and mind responds to that love by nerves, neurons, electrodes

The response you receive is from the neurons in your brain not from god. If god all of the sudden vanishes, that doesn't mean your experiences and responses do. Your love and experiences are still there because they come from you not attached to god.

Unless you can identify an emotion that comes from the god of abraham only, people who do not believe in the god of abraham experience the same emotions and love that you do. We are not aliens to each other. That's why it comes from us. There is nothing unique about god experience that isn't part of human psychology.

Sorry, a repeat but emphases my point.

In my last post, I know my family exists because they are from me, in me, and are a part of me. To say they are not is saying that I don't have a family.

So from that logic, I'd assume that god does not exist not because I haven't experienced god, but because you have separated this entity from yourself and because this entity is invisible, this is why you cannot describe your experience with him.

If you see god as part of you as Jesus did with his father, then explanations would be a whole lot easier just as jesus explanation was easy to his disciples. There was no faith. No "it's a mystery" and no lack of words. He knew. If god is the cause and is separate you should be able to explain who god is. Since he is a part of you and from you, it's hard to explain personal experiences.

And for that reason, and another reason, god isn't outside of you but in you. He is your experiences. Your life. To separate the spirit of god from you would kill you, to tell you honestly.

How can I say that God is in you and not see that God exists outside of myself? God is everywhere. He exists in me. He exists outside of me. I don't see why you are making this such a point of distinction when it is actually meaningless to the discussion.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

How can I say that God is in you and not see that God exists outside of myself? God is everywhere. He exists in me. He exists outside of me. I don't see why you are making this such a point of distinction when it is actually meaningless to the discussion.

He can't exist in you as a separate entity. There is no separation between you and god to say X exists in Y. They are one like Jesus and God is one.

As for the discussion since he is not outside of you, he is from you. To say he is separate and outside of you is like taking a heart out of a human being and still say that human has life even though he has no heart.

Jesus never separated himself from his father. That's why he considered himself one with his father. That's why his father considers jesus his son. Every person (or believer rather) is interconnected with each other as one body. However, talking about god, once you see god as an entity outside the body, then there is no body of Christ.

Which makes me think why people talk about the holy spirit. If god is spirit and he is everywhere and in everything, why (though another topic) does there need to be a holy spirit.

How can god be personal if he is outside of you rather than from you? (Like I mentioned with my family)

 

[Sonofason]

@Sonofason

But god is in you, through you, and with you. God isn't separate from you. If you believe we cannot see outside our own perspective and reality, to claim god is outside of our own perception is saying that we can define god.

The only way you can explain how god is outside of you is, like the sun, moon, and Advil pill, you'd have to show it's external in nature.

You'd have to separate god from you and, like the moon, give us a map that shows us there is a separate entity and what unique characteristics this entity has that does not mirror what humans have, want, or needs. If god is not like humans, what about him that makes him unique that isn't an idea coming from humans?

(some comments deleted here)

So from that logic, I'd assume that god does not exist not because I haven't experienced god, but because you have separated this entity from yourself and because this entity is invisible, this is why you cannot describe your experience with him.

If you see god as part of you as Jesus did with his father, then explanations would be a whole lot easier just as jesus explanation was easy to his disciples. There was no faith. No "it's a mystery" and no lack of words. He knew. If god is the cause and is separate you should be able to explain who god is. Since he is a part of you and from you, it's hard to explain personal experiences.

And for that reason, and another reason, god isn't outside of you but in you. He is your experiences. Your life. To separate the spirit of god from you would kill you, to tell you honestly.

After having responded to this comment of yours, I feel as though I may need to revisit it. I am seeing things that you are saying that I have not been noticing. I'm actually thinking that I agree with you to a great extent.

Yes God is in us. Is God in all of us? I don't know about that. It is possible. Is everything we do a reflection of God who is in us? I don't think so. Therefore, I can not say that I am God. God is in me, but God is not me. I am in God, but I am not God.

 

[Sonofason]

He can't exist in you as a separate entity. There is no separation between you and god to say X exists in Y. They are one like Jesus and God is one.

As for the discussion since he is not outside of you, he is from you. To say he is separate and outside of you is like taking a heart out of a human being and still say that human has life even though he has no heart.

Jesus never separated himself from his father. That's why he considered himself one with his father. That's why his father considers jesus his son. Every person (or believer rather) is interconnected with each other as one body. However, talking about god, once you see god as an entity outside the body, then there is no body of Christ.

Which makes me think why people talk about the holy spirit. If god is spirit and he is everywhere and in everything, why (though another topic) does there need to be a holy spirit.

How can god be personal if he is outside of you rather than from you? (Like I mentioned with my family)

Jesus is God. I am not Jesus. Jesus is in me, but He is not me. If there was a complete oneness between Christ and myself, then I would indeed be in complete oneness with God. But I am not. Perhaps I could be. But I am not. The day will come that I will be. That is my hope. But at this time, I am a sinful human being, and God has no part in that.

But now I think I understand the gist of what you have been trying to convey. And I agree with a lot of what you are saying. I believe that you are a bit premature in your assertions however. God has not yet made all things new as promised. We remain at the present time in a sinful state. God has not yet destroyed death. When all is fulfilled, maybe what you are saying will be a bit closer to the truth at that time.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Thank you.

After having responded to this comment of yours, I feel as though I may need to revisit it. I am seeing things that you are saying that I have not been noticing. I'm actually thinking that I agree with you to a great extent.

The placebo example may have thrown you off because it isn't personal and it makes it sound like god is a figment of your imagination. It's pointing out from a non religious perspective that the cause to our responses and experiences come from the body and mind rather than the stimuli.

Yes God is in us. Is God in all of us? I don't know about that. It is possible. Is everything we do a reflection of God who is in us? I don't think so. Therefore, I can not say that I am God. God is in me, but God is not me. I am in God, but I am not God.

My point of view outside scripture is that we and our environment make up what we call god. Our experiences, our thoughts, everything (life itself) is what god is. There is no hierarchy and no worship because we are all interconnected.

The biblical god would be in all of us if we called god the spirit/breathe of life. The Holy Spirit isn't in all people until they accepted Christ.

The second half, I'd say you and god/christ are one just as jesus said about himself and his father.

In my immediate living environment, I wouldn't say I am god but that is what I personally believe. I make up (better word) what we define as life just as you and I and our environment. Life (and the breathe of life) is god. Unfortunately, words are very limiting.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Jesus is God. I am not Jesus. Jesus is in me, but He is not me. If there was a complete oneness between Christ and myself, then I would indeed be in complete oneness with God. But I am not. Perhaps I could be. But I am not. The day will come that I will be. That is my hope. But at this time, I am a sinful human being, and God has no part in that.

But now I think I understand the gist of what you have been trying to convey. And I agree with a lot of what you are saying. I believe that you are a bit premature in your assertions however. God has not yet made all things new as promised. We remain at the present time in a sinful state. God has not yet destroyed death. When all is fulfilled, maybe what you are saying will be a bit closer to the truth at that time.

I don't hold the Christian belief and identity. I disagree that we are in a sinful state and that I am a sinner by nature. I also disagree of being defined by sin just because I am human.

When I got to know my family more (living and spirit) and physically experiencing their presence in the latter, I have so much of a different and positive outlook that Christ can never give me.

In that sense, my family Is me and I Am my family because we all share the same blood, and I take up a lot of things from my family and visa versa. To say I am not my family is like chopping off one of my limbs.

I was reading a couple of days ago in some parts of Africa (if I haven't said this already, sorry) that in their religion when a child is born, that child is believed to be the spirit of an ancestor. The words like " is, be, are " are strong that to say one thing is in some way even in language separate than another is devaluing who I am in relationship to my family.

For some reason, I cannot imagine how believers can see themselves a part from god or christ. But, I forgot about the sinful nature, so biblically in the christian view, I can see it. Just if I told an outsider I am my family because I carry X,Y,Z characteristics they may correct me on language and word use but they'd agree that we are a part of our family.

In god-beliefs, it isn't that common sense. So no matter how many words, scriptures, etc are given, it would go over an outsiders head. However, if you are christ (in his spirit and flesh as christ is to his father) and you spoke for christ (as christ spoke for his father) then at least outsiders will know Christ through his followers.

But to know him as an isolated entity, I don't see that.

 

[Sonofason]

He can't exist in you as a separate entity. There is no separation between you and god to say X exists in Y. They are one like Jesus and God is one.

As for the discussion since he is not outside of you, he is from you. To say he is separate and outside of you is like taking a heart out of a human being and still say that human has life even though he has no heart.

Jesus never separated himself from his father. That's why he considered himself one with his father. That's why his father considers jesus his son. Every person (or believer rather) is interconnected with each other as one body. However, talking about god, once you see god as an entity outside the body, then there is no body of Christ.

Which makes me think why people talk about the holy spirit. If god is spirit and he is everywhere and in everything, why (though another topic) does there need to be a holy spirit.

How can god be personal if he is outside of you rather than from you? (Like I mentioned with my family)

Read your Bible

You have said that Jesus and God are one. If you truly believe this, then I would surmise that you believe what Christ has said is true.

Jesus has said:
"When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father--the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father--he will testify about me. (John 15:26)

I personally recognize this advocate as the Holy Spirit. This Advocate that Jesus is speaking of must be sent to us. If He must be sent to us, we cannot say that He is in us until after He has been sent to us.

I will continue with more that Jesus said regarding this subject.
Jesus said, "If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you."

Where was this Comforter, this Spirit of Truth before the Father sent Him to me? I would have to say He was not in me before He was sent to me. And now that He has been sent to me by God, He now dwells with me, and therefore is now in me. And I do indeed now recognize His presence in me. Until He was sent to me, I could not recognize His presence in me because His presence was not in me before He was sent to me. And there is only one reason that He was sent to me, and that is because I love God's Son, Jesus The Christ.

Jesus continues:
At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

We are not God. We are nothing like Him...You cannot fathom how different you (we) are from Him. And those who do not keep His commandments will never experience His love, and they will never feel the presence of His Holy Spirit, and will never be capable of receiving Christ in them.

 

[Sonofason]

Thank you.


The placebo example may have thrown you off because it isn't personal and it makes it sound like god is a figment of your imagination. It's pointing out from a non religious perspective that the cause to our responses and experiences come from the body and mind rather than the stimuli.


My point of view outside scripture is that we and our environment make up what we call god. Our experiences, our thoughts, everything (life itself) is what god is. There is no hierarchy and no worship because we are all interconnected.

The biblical god would be in all of us if we called god the spirit/breathe of life. The Holy Spirit isn't in all people until they accepted Christ.

The second half, I'd say you and god/christ are one just as jesus said about himself and his father.

In my immediate living environment, I wouldn't say I am god but that is what I personally believe. I make up (better word) what we define as life just as you and I and our environment. Life (and the breathe of life) is god. Unfortunately, words are very limiting.

Please see post #654 for my response.

 

[Sonofason]

I don't hold the Christian belief and identity. I disagree that we are in a sinful state and that I am a sinner by nature. I also disagree of being defined by sin just because I am human.

When I got to know my family more (living and spirit) and physically experiencing their presence in the latter, I have so much of a different and positive outlook that Christ can never give me.

In that sense, my family Is me and I Am my family because we all share the same blood, and I take up a lot of things from my family and visa versa. To say I am not my family is like chopping off one of my limbs.

I was reading a couple of days ago in some parts of Africa (if I haven't said this already, sorry) that in their religion when a child is born, that child is believed to be the spirit of an ancestor. The words like " is, be, are " are strong that to say one thing is in some way even in language separate than another is devaluing who I am in relationship to my family.

For some reason, I cannot imagine how believers can see themselves a part from god or christ. But, I forgot about the sinful nature, so biblically in the christian view, I can see it. Just if I told an outsider I am my family because I carry X,Y,Z characteristics they may correct me on language and word use but they'd agree that we are a part of our family.

In god-beliefs, it isn't that common sense. So no matter how many words, scriptures, etc are given, it would go over an outsiders head. However, if you are christ (in his spirit and flesh as christ is to his father) and you spoke for christ (as christ spoke for his father) then at least outsiders will know Christ through his followers.

But to know him as an isolated entity, I don't see that.

Okay, I get it. You say you believe Jesus and God are one, but you do not believe what Christ has said. That is your opinion to keep. I disagree strongly.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

@Sonofason I think we're going backwards with this discussion here.

Read #653
Except:

I don't hold the Christian belief and identity. I disagree that we are in a sinful state and that I am a sinner by nature. I also disagree of being defined by sin just because I am human.

When I did read the full Bible, I realized that Jesus is not god the father. That was a big revelation for me and it made me see Christianity in a totally different light then mainstream is saying. I also realized mainstream Christianity doesn't define Christianity itself and what the Bible says.

Then, for me, I have to be honest and say "my family is a part of me and I am a part of my family. So however they speak with me, I feel it. I experience it. I cannot separate myself from it." So saying that my family isn't from me is basically saying I have no family.

I cannot imagine a believer saying they are separate from god. That doesn't make sense to me even if I believed in an supreme entity. Usually what is personal comes from and is in you. It defines you.

I can't see it any other way.

Now you know where I stand...

Read your Bible

You have said that Jesus and God are one. If you truly believe this, then I would surmise that you believe what Christ has said is true.

I have read the full Bible. Jesus and God are not each other. Jesus never said nor implied that he IS god. I am one with my mother and father because they are my parents. I am one with the earth because that is where I was born and that is where I will die. I am part of the earth and make it up. I am one with it. I am one with humanity. I make up humanity; and, I am one with it.

I am not my parents. I am not the earth. I am not you, Joe, and Jane.

There is a huge difference and every time I pick up the Bible and read another verse, I just laugh because the whole time jesus is referring to his father as a third person. Never as himself.

Why do you quote scripture? I am not Christian. The Bible doesn't say correct people who are not brothers and sisters of Christ with scripture. That's, how they say, throwing pearls to swine. Rude but it is what it is.

Post #653 is from my point of view and belief. I never said it was fact and some of it was just observation from responses you made. Like saying god is compared to the placebo affect. It's true but you call it blasphemy. So, I can't change what you believe. I don't know where you going with this.

Indented is my text. Non indented is clarification. Questions to you are in blue.

He can't exist in you as a separate entity. There is no separation between you and god to say X exists in Y. They are one like Jesus and God is one.
​

Jesus is not the father just as I am not my mother. I prefer to say I am my family because to say I am separate is like tearing off a limb. It's a choice in language. Jesus never says he IS his father. How can two people be one if there is only one person to begin with?

As for the discussion since he is not outside of you, he is from you. To say he is separate and outside of you is like taking a heart out of a human being and still say that human has life even though he has no heart.
​

This is what I believe. To separate him from you is like tearing the heart out of you. I am not a christian so you'd have to correct me on a logical standpoint not biblical. If it makes sense (regardless if you agree or not), then what are you saying?

Jesus never separated himself from his father. That's why he considered himself one with his father. That's why his father considers jesus his son. Every person (or believer rather) is interconnected with each other as one body. However, talking about god, once you see god as an entity outside the body, then there is no body of Christ.​

In the Bible jesus is not his father. I believe that we are our parents and we are one with our parents. The Bible doesn't teach we are one with our parents. It teaches that the father has a son and that son is an image of his father. If they both are the same then one can't be in the image of himself.

Which makes me think why people talk about the holy spirit. If god is spirit and he is everywhere and in everything, why (though another topic) does there need to be a holy spirit.
​

How can god be personal if he is outside of you rather than from you? (Like I mentioned with my family)

Spoiler: Also

We are not God. We are nothing like Him...You cannot fathom how different you (we) are from Him. And those who do not keep His commandments will never experience His love, and they will never feel the presence of His Holy Spirit, and will never be capable of receiving Christ in them.​

The who discussion is my saying that the experiences and feelings you have from the Holy Spirit is the same experiences I feel with my family and many people across the world. You are not special and you are human just as the rest of us. The stimuli is different: Yours is the god of abraham, mine is the spirits, and Vishnu to a Hindu. They all stimulate the same part of the brain-neurons etc and how we translate how we feel we attribute it to who or what we believe.

I also believe the sacraments of Christ in the Catholic Church and the Eucharist is the true presence and way to come to Christ. Christianity is not a Jewish faith but a Roman faith with Jewish origins (so to speak). I've already taken the sacraments and I have already experience the presence of Jesus.

"You cannot fathom..." is a harsh generalizations to those who actually did believe in Christ and purposely walked away for whatever reason. You are not special.

If you are, name a unique characteristic of god that the spirits do not have?

 

[Shad]

Still, they are seperate events which could occur moments, minutes or days apart. The experience happens in the present, conclusion is drawn (i.e. from memory). The argument against a conclusion doesn't work against experience (i.e. of the world).

Too bad it was never just an experience without a conclusion put forward.

 

[Shad]

My argument remains standing. You haven't refuted it, and you barely scrutinized it. So yes, I took to grandstanding.

You refuted it yourself by claim evidence is subject to individuals opinions thus what you think is evidence is subject to my opinion as well. Your evidence isn't evidence as your own point is not established to my whims. See how that works? You use no objective standard at all so you can not even support your experience is anything you claim. That is a refutation. Try again son.

Your grandstanding is nothing special, just another attempt to make an argument that you are incapable of making as you are incoherent and refute your own points as a result.

 

[Sonofason]

@Sonofason I think we're going backwards with this discussion here.

Read #653
Except:

When I did read the full Bible, I realized that Jesus is not god the father. That was a big revelation for me and it made me see Christianity in a totally different light then mainstream is saying. I also realized mainstream Christianity doesn't define Christianity itself and what the Bible says.



Now you know where I stand...



I have read the full Bible. Jesus and God are not each other. Jesus never said nor implied that he IS god. I am one with my mother and father because they are my parents. I am one with the earth because that is where I was born and that is where I will die. I am part of the earth and make it up. I am one with it. I am one with humanity. I make up humanity; and, I am one with it.

I am not my parents. I am not the earth. I am not you, Joe, and Jane.

There is a huge difference and every time I pick up the Bible and read another verse, I just laugh because the whole time jesus is referring to his father as a third person. Never as himself.

Why do you quote scripture? I am not Christian. The Bible doesn't say correct people who are not brothers and sisters of Christ with scripture. That's, how they say, throwing pearls to swine. Rude but it is what it is.

Post #653 is from my point of view and belief. I never said it was fact and some of it was just observation from responses you made. Like saying god is compared to the placebo affect. It's true but you call it blasphemy. So, I can't change what you believe. I don't know where you going with this.

Indented is my text. Non indented is clarification. Questions to you are in blue.

He can't exist in you as a separate entity. There is no separation between you and god to say X exists in Y. They are one like Jesus and God is one.
​

Jesus is not the father just as I am not my mother. I prefer to say I am my family because to say I am separate is like tearing off a limb. It's a choice in language. Jesus never says he IS his father. How can two people be one if there is only one person to begin with?

As for the discussion since he is not outside of you, he is from you. To say he is separate and outside of you is like taking a heart out of a human being and still say that human has life even though he has no heart.
​

This is what I believe. To separate him from you is like tearing the heart out of you. I am not a christian so you'd have to correct me on a logical standpoint not biblical. If it makes sense (regardless if you agree or not), then what are you saying?

Jesus never separated himself from his father. That's why he considered himself one with his father. That's why his father considers jesus his son. Every person (or believer rather) is interconnected with each other as one body. However, talking about god, once you see god as an entity outside the body, then there is no body of Christ.​

In the Bible jesus is not his father. I believe that we are our parents and we are one with our parents. The Bible doesn't teach we are one with our parents. It teaches that the father has a son and that son is an image of his father. If they both are the same then one can't be in the image of himself.

Which makes me think why people talk about the holy spirit. If god is spirit and he is everywhere and in everything, why (though another topic) does there need to be a holy spirit.
​

How can god be personal if he is outside of you rather than from you? (Like I mentioned with my family)

You're off on another tangent. I speak very clearly. I said that you said that you believe that Jesus and God are one. I did not say that you said that they are one in the same person. I did not say that you said that Jesus is just another name for God. While I believe that Jesus was and even is indeed a physical manifestation of God the Father, I recognize that the two are not exactly the same thing. But You said the two are one. Perhaps you meant one spirit, or of one accord...I don't care too much what you meant. I did not take your statement to be that they are the exact same entity. Yet, you do not believe what Jesus said. How can you believe that Jesus and God are one if you do not believe what Jesus has said? If I were one with God, then God could do nothing without me. And I assure you that is not the case. God is in heaven preparing a place for me right now. I am not there. I am not doing any of the work He has promised to do. All that is required of me is my love and devotion to Him and His commandments.