Do you see God here?

[RestlessSoul]

Well, I don't know about fruit trees or what evil fruit looks like, but I do know that faith can and does lead people to do some really horrible things to each other. History is littered with examples and its happening right now as we speak. I don't see faith as a gift at all - faith is inserted to close the gap between what we do know and what people hope is true about their own version of god. So unless you have the right god, your faith could cause you to waste your entire life. The only life we know for sure we have. What a shame.

Evil, in the context of fruit, means rotten.

If you deliberately misconstrue or disregard things that are obvious, you will naturally bypass clarity and head straight to confusion. That is your choice, as my path in life is my choice. I am happy with my choice. I wish you well with yours.

 

[RestlessSoul]

No I cannot work out the difference between Jesus and Manson in relation to whether they are messengers from god, if you cannot explain why you can then you cannot help me.

Well yes, it seems we are in agreement. I cannot help you, sorry.

 

[RestlessSoul]

They tell us, ever watched the videos of suicide bombers, I think that someone who shouts Allah Akba whilst detonating himself is giving us a big insight into what they are thinking.

Yes, I have watched some of those videos. They exert a chilling fascination, for sure.

I think, unless you have shared some of the life experiences of those guys, it would be very difficult indeed to get inside their heads. I suppose they must believe in their cause very strongly indeed, but beyond that I cannot say what their motives are, since I cannot imagine what drives a person to make their last act on earth, an act indiscriminate violence.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Reminds me of this:
“O Lord, our Lord, How excellent is Your name in all the earth, Who have set Your glory above the heavens! Out of the mouth of babes and nursing infants You have ordained strength, Because of Your enemies, That You may silence the enemy and the avenger. When I consider Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, The moon and the stars, which You have ordained, What is man that You are mindful of him, And the son of man that You visit him? For You have made him a little lower than the angels, And You have crowned him with glory and honor. You have made him to have dominion over the works of Your hands; You have put all things under his feet, All sheep and oxen— Even the beasts of the field, The birds of the air, And the fish of the sea That pass through the paths of the seas. O Lord, our Lord, How excellent is Your name in all the earth!”
‭‭Psalms‬ ‭8:1-9‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

 

[Moonjuice]

If you deliberately misconstrue or disregard things that are obvious, you will naturally bypass clarity and head straight to confusion.

This is meaningless unless we all agree on what is obvious.

 

[Link]

Mathematically, the universe, all Angels and indeed the earth and universe is like egg in palm of Angel of death, and those higher the Angels like Adam and Noah and Prophets and Chosen leaders/witnesses, all of them combined, would be zero compared to God, the equation of any finite over infinity is zero, and even if there was infinite universes, you add them all up, and still God's absolute infinity is higher since includes not only what exists but all that possible can exist or come to exist and according to math and set theory, all levels of infinity are nothing compared to God.

God is greater, greater then what the deceiving world has to offer as a reward, and greater than nature in bringing peace, and is the greatest reward as well.

 

[stvdv]

For me, it implies how non-existent god must be.

That much I figured out already

I agree with you (using your definition of God)

 

[Moonjuice]

That much I figured out already

I agree with you (using your definition of God)

I haven’t defined God. What do you think my definition is?

 

[stvdv]

For me, it implies how non-existent god must be

I haven’t defined God

Those two are inconsistent

 

[Moonjuice]

Those two are inconsisten

Non existent from the physical universe is not my definition of what god is, that is simply an observation about where god does not live.

 

[RestlessSoul]

This is meaningless unless we all agree on what is obvious.

Obviously

 

[Moonjuice]

Obviously

Touché

 

[InChrist]

I've seen "How Big is the Universe" type videos before, but nothing like this. It's really amazing! I'd encourage everyone to take 10 minutes and check it out.

When watching this video, I can help but to think about how small and insignificant we are. I wonder what that little blue dot, suspended in the sunbeam will be like in 1,000 years? Will people still think that some sort of all powerful creator cares about what food they eat here on this tiny speck of dust? Or who they have sex with? Will people still get convinced that their god is going to allow them to live forever in an invisible paradise that is outside of space and time, after they die? That our existence is part of some strange game where rewards and punishments are given out after dying? Seems unlikely to me.

The grandeur of the universe makes it seem so obvious to me that there has to be an infinite Creator God ...

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Genesis 1:1

 

[Etritonakin]

I've seen "How Big is the Universe" type videos before, but nothing like this. It's really amazing! I'd encourage everyone to take 10 minutes and check it out.

When watching this video, I can help but to think about how small and insignificant we are. I wonder what that little blue dot, suspended in the sunbeam will be like in 1,000 years? Will people still think that some sort of all powerful creator cares about what food they eat here on this tiny speck of dust? Or who they have sex with? Will people still get convinced that their god is going to allow them to live forever in an invisible paradise that is outside of space and time, after they die? That our existence is part of some strange game where rewards and punishments are given out after dying? Seems unlikely to me.

Actually, the "place" to look for God is before the initiation of our universe -before the singularity transformed what was (at least some portion) into what is.
If there was simplicity in the beginning, the singularity can not be the beginning, as it necessarily required the information which caused the universe specifically -including the elements which happen to lend themselves perfectly to the formation of self-replicating DNA, etc.
That which lies between greatest possible simplicity and the singularity is the development of that which could essentially package -then initiate -the universe and what it specifically and inevitably became.
That requires awareness of the nature of the previous (more basic) environment, forethought, memory, modelling, etc. -which would also allow for awareness of "self" as the processor.

Also, the bible actually says we are to inhabit the universe (created it not in vain) -after we are given improved bodies (like unto his glorious body, according to the working thereof he is able to subdue all things unto himself) with extreme creative power (that the creation itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory of the children of God) -and which are not bound to the earth as we now are.

Sex outside of marriage causes many problems -and it's not about us, but the well-being of offspring.
Though the original intent was two distinct genders for mankind, the creation can be adversely affected -ourselves included -which is one of the greatest lessons we needed to learn.

As for rewards and punishment, God is a refiner -a purifier.

Few get this part about "hell"....
1 Cor 3:13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. 14If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I've seen "How Big is the Universe" type videos before, but nothing like this. It's really amazing! I'd encourage everyone to take 10 minutes and check it out.

When watching this video, I can help but to think about how small and insignificant we are. I wonder what that little blue dot, suspended in the sunbeam will be like in 1,000 years? Will people still think that some sort of all powerful creator cares about what food they eat here on this tiny speck of dust? Or who they have sex with? Will people still get convinced that their god is going to allow them to live forever in an invisible paradise that is outside of space and time, after they die? That our existence is part of some strange game where rewards and punishments are given out after dying? Seems unlikely to me.

I know right....

In light of such videos, things like these are actually true statements:

If you would remove the milky way and everything it contains from existence (billions and billions of stars, each with their own planets - trillions of them).... then the universe at large would remain virtually the same.
It would be like you shedding a few dead skin cells.

 

[Etritonakin]

In order to determine whether something was created (by man or similar), present nature is referenced.
That which is impossible for present nature must have been created.
The development of creativity is a necessary intermediate stage.
The same principle would always apply.
Was the universe impossible for previous nature?

We know that simplicity -previous nature -made present nature generally possible.
The question is what made it specifically possible.
Each step of development/complexity makes possible the next.
Some believe that creativity required all that preceded man (or similar)
-that space and various atoms/elements and stars and planets upon which creators could reside, plants, animals, ecosystems made from those atoms, etc. must have developed before creativity.
This would mean that every last thing preceding man (or similar) was absolutely inevitable -could not have been any different -and did not require conscious decision.

It is true that conscious decision is an inevitable development that required that which preceded it, but it then made possible changing the otherwise inevitable.
It also makes possible things which indicate the existence of conscious decision -not only because they were otherwise impossible, but because they are what a conscious decision maker would logically need and want -and so do (I refer to them as no-brainers which required a brain).
Only after simplicity developed to the point of true conscious decision (though then simple itself) could it progress -based on the awareness of itself.

Consciousness is essentially the ability to mirror in memory, understand and consider/process that which exists.
Self-awareness is essentially consciousness of the fact that "one" has that ability -and that the system doing so ("I") is also part of that which exists.
Only after those developments would increasingly-complex things required and desired by a consciousness/self-awareness be possible -as such an aware processor is required to transform the self/environment -and increasingly so with increasing purposeful complexity.
The basic self/environment -that which could act and that which could be acted upon -then react -would develop/exist -then continue to develop in tandem.
Both/all would move toward increased purposeful complexity -as that which led to that point performed "functions", but "purpose" did not exist before that point.

Though what we "see" -looking back to the big bang -may indicate that the first belief is true, that belief is actually in reverse logical order.
We need to think beyond that point in the past.

To think that an extremely-purposefully-complex environment would simply develop which was ideally suited to the extremely-purposefully-complex bodies/consciousnesses/psychology it would only then produce -who would simply awaken as completely ignorant individuals in already-extremely-capable minds and bodies -who had absolutely no conscious input into anything until then being able to reverse-engineer that which already existed.... struggling to comprehend with their minds that which did not even require a mind....
is literally the opposite of logical.

 

[Magical Wand]

Will people still get convinced that their god is going to allow them to live forever in an invisible paradise that is outside of space and time, after they die?

I've heard many theologians saying that's a mistake. They claim that this universe will be "heaven". It will be transformed, but it will still be material. In addition, Bart Ehrman has argued that Paul thought the same thing; we will receive new material bodies (made of a 'finer' kind of matter that is imperishable and not subject to decay).

This is a fascinating stuff.

 

[Trailblazer]

In addition, Bart Ehrman has argued that Paul thought the same thing; we will receive new material bodies (made of a 'finer' kind of matter that is imperishable and not subject to decay).

Where did Paul say anything about bodies made of matter that are not subject to decay?

Paul said that there are two different kinds of bodies:

--- The glory of the heavenly bodies is different from the glory of the earthly bodies.

--- For just as there are natural bodies, there are also spiritual bodies.

Paul says that our physical bodies cannot inherit the Kingdom of God, and the Kingdom of God is in Heaven. When Paul says these dying bodies cannot inherit what will last forever, he is referring to the spiritual world (Heaven), which will last forever. Our physical bodies will die and we will be raised (resurrected) as spiritual bodies that will be suited to go to Heaven and last forever. There are no scriptures that says we will have new material bodies made of a 'finer' kind of matter that is imperishable and not subject to decay.

1 Corinthians 15:40-54 New Living Translation

40 There are also bodies in the heavens and bodies on the earth. The glory of the heavenly bodies is different from the glory of the earthly bodies.

44 They are buried as natural human bodies, but they will be raised as spiritual bodies. For just as there are natural bodies, there are also spiritual bodies.

50 What I am saying, dear brothers and sisters, is that our physical bodies cannot inherit the Kingdom of God. These dying bodies cannot inherit what will last forever.

51 But let me reveal to you a wonderful secret. We will not all die, but we will all be transformed!

54 Then, when our dying bodies have been transformed into bodies that will never die,[c] this Scripture will be fulfilled: “Death is swallowed up in victory.[d]

Read full chapter

What Paul said is fully congruent with what I believe:

“The answer to the third question is this, that in the other world the human reality doth not assume a physical form, rather doth it take on a heavenly form, made up of elements of that heavenly realm.” Selections From the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, p. 194

 

[Magical Wand]

Where did Paul say anything about bodies made of matter that are not subject to decay?

Paul said that there are two different kinds of bodies:

--- The glory of the heavenly bodies is different from the glory of the earthly bodies.

--- For just as there are natural bodies, there are also spiritual bodies.

Paul says that our physical bodies cannot inherit the Kingdom of God, and the Kingdom of God is in Heaven. When Paul says these dying bodies cannot inherit what will last forever, he is referring to the spiritual world (Heaven), which will last forever. Our physical bodies will die and we will be raised (resurrected) as spiritual bodies that will be suited to go to Heaven and last forever. There are no scriptures that says we will have new material bodies made of a 'finer' kind of matter that is imperishable and not subject to decay.

1 Corinthians 15:40-54 New Living Translation

40 There are also bodies in the heavens and bodies on the earth. The glory of the heavenly bodies is different from the glory of the earthly bodies.

44 They are buried as natural human bodies, but they will be raised as spiritual bodies. For just as there are natural bodies, there are also spiritual bodies.

50 What I am saying, dear brothers and sisters, is that our physical bodies cannot inherit the Kingdom of God. These dying bodies cannot inherit what will last forever.

51 But let me reveal to you a wonderful secret. We will not all die, but we will all be transformed!

54 Then, when our dying bodies have been transformed into bodies that will never die,[c] this Scripture will be fulfilled: “Death is swallowed up in victory.[d]

Read full chapter

What Paul said is fully congruent with what I believe:

“The answer to the third question is this, that in the other world the human reality doth not assume a physical form, rather doth it take on a heavenly form, made up of elements of that heavenly realm.” Selections From the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, p. 194

I encourage you to read "Heaven and Hell" by Bart Ehrman. In that book, Dr. Ehrman explained in details the reasons why Paul says spiritual bodies (which are still made of a matter) will be our new bodies.

 

[Trailblazer]

I encourage you to read "Heaven and Hell" by Bart Ehrman. In that book, Dr. Ehrman explained in details the reasons why Paul says spiritual bodies (which are still made of a matter) will be our new bodies.

Thanks. I went to look for the book but I see it is not free to read or download.

I would like to know where in the Bible Paul ever said we would have bodies made of matter because I go by what the Bible says, not by what Bart Ehrman interprets the Bible to mean.

I can concede that our spiritual bodies will be comprised of some kind of elements, but I don't believe they will be of physical elements as we are comprised of in this physical world.