Faith in Christ is Completely Logical

[Sonofason]

A question that has caused me to spend much time pondering the answer. What was God doing before all this kicked off. I suppose it is irrelevant and unnecessary to know but the inquisitive mind has a job to not think about it. Whilst I was a Mormon they had a theory as to what he was doing. That he reached his current glorified state by a progressive process and that He was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ Himself did.' The Father is a glorified, perfected, resurrected, exalted man who worked out his salvation by obedience to the same laws he has given to us so that we may do the same. As man is, God once was; as God is, man may be."God was once just a man! Man can become God! Is that possible. Are we on a journey that God once took. To be perfectly honest, I really do not have a clue and maybe I will never know until we leave this world. It is irrelevant to our mortal probation but it is also a niggling that will not go away.

So much we don't know. We receive but an inkling of what God is, and we construct mountains from that inkling.

 

[Sonofason]

Only when using your Humpty Dumpty version of faith.

Very thoughtful response. I will have to remember that, for sure.

 

[Sapiens]

Well, eternity is limitless, is it not?

Anyhow, I don't buy into the idea that time is relative to matter and/or velocity. We are led to believe that if nothing existed in the universe, that time itself would cease to exist as well. I'm not so convinced. We are told that as we approach the speed of light, time slows down. I'm not convinced of that either. I don't believe Einstein was 100% accurate.

Yeah, he only hit the mark 87%.

It is all part of the ''adam''

I think the word "rational" rather than "rationale" was in the specification.

I personally don't see anything wrong with losing appendages. It's what happens to the body sometimes when it is subjected to conditions that the bodily appendages aren't capable of sustaining. There is nothing wrong with that. It is not some mistreatment by God. It's how God made you. I'd be thankful you were made at all.

So your god plays no part in the accidental cutting off of a limb or it being crushed in a car-wreck or some such and then amputated? It's all good, all part of your god's plan, so there's not need to ever go back and fix it? But your god's not quite as on the ball when it comes to salamanders? Need to be able to fix errors in omnipotence there, eh?

 

[Sapiens]

So much we don't know. We receive but an inkling of what God is, and we construct mountains from that inkling.

Hey, you guys are good, you can even construct mountains out of nothing what-so-ever.

 

[icehorse]

I spent many, many years trying to disprove religion and faith. Frankly, most religions are build upon the interpretations and logic of men, who do, by nature, fall short of the glory of God, thus their doctrines are susceptible to being flawed as well. So religions are easy to disprove, and that is not just a handful, that is all of them. So when we see our coequals, on the other side of the fence, rubbing their hands together in glee, taunting us with the words that religions are slowly fading from our world, we can take solice in the fact that we are best rid of them anyway, none of have authority to act in the name of God. To disprove them is a little like using the scientific method. You have to simply be familiar with the scriptures, which give us and insight to the character and will of God, and have god knowledge of the Plan of Redemption. Like science there are set constants and laws that cannot be change. By those laws we can know what is true and what is false. If the contravene a principle or commandment then they are false.

For example, I listen to a testimony of a man who died and was revived. He gave a detailed account of what happened to him whilst he was dead. A very convincing account as well, but for one detail that exposed it as a fraud, or the source was dubious. He said that he found himself in the presence of God. Now, anyone who knows scriptures would know that it is impossible for a Spirit to be in the presence of God, pre-judgement. Anyone who is familiar with the Plan of Salvation would also know that his claim was fallacious. The Plan of Salvation is like a jig saw puzzle with every piece being unique. Many of our religions have some of the pieces, however, none of them have all the pieces. To disprove them is just a matter of looking at the pieces to see if they are all there. I have yet to find a religion that has all the pieces.

To clarify when I say religion I am referring to denominations in the Christian faith.

Now faith and our personal relationship with God is another story. It cannot be faulted in anyway or form. To be converted by the Holy Ghost, who opens the gates to the pure knowledge of the Plan of Redemption, and to receive that knowledge in all humility and faith in Christ, is to make yourself impervious to the fiery darts of Satan. So, in essence, I am throwing down the gauntlet to anyone who thinks they can disprove the logic of the Plan that was devised by God and accepted by Christ. I am looking for miss-shaped jig saw puzzle pieces that do to fit making the finished picture ugly instead of magnificent to behold. I am looking for someone to stump me on any aspect of Gods marvelous work and wonder to bring to pass the salvation and eternal life of mankind. If it cannot be done then even the disbelieved must concede that it is a rational and logical plan.

Back to the OP - First you prove that Russell's teapot doesn't exist and then I'll put some effort into your challenge.

 

[Sapiens]

I personally don't see anything wrong with losing appendages. It's what happens to the body sometimes when it is subjected to conditions that the bodily appendages aren't capable of sustaining. There is nothing wrong with that. It is not some mistreatment by God. It's how God made you. I'd be thankful you were made at all.

I think the word "rational" rather than "rationale" was in the specification.

So your god plays no part in the accidental cutting off of a limb or it being crushed in a car-wreck or some such and then amputated? It's all good, all part of your god's plan, so there's not need to ever go back and fix it? But your god's not quite as on the ball when it comes to salamanders? Need to be able to fix errors in omnipotence there, eh?

Sounds like you're really into the Black Knight syndrome ... understandable in your case.

 

[Sonofason]

Wait, you think I am arguing gods existence?

I was responding to Robert.Evans. If you think that me agreeing with you, that I might have given a false dichotomy, means that I think you are arguing gods existence, then you must be right. If not, then I don't know what it means exactly.

 

[Sonofason]

Yeah, he only hit the mark 87%.

I think the word "rational" rather than "rationale" was in the specification.
So your god plays no part in the accidental cutting off of a limb or it being crushed in a car-wreck or some such and then amputated? It's all good, all part of your god's plan, so there's not need to ever go back and fix it? But your god's not quite as on the ball when it comes to salamanders? Need to be able to fix errors in omnipotence there, eh?

We are told from scripture that the entire creation is now in a fallen state. Well, if this is true, I have no idea what God's perfect state would look like. Maybe once this earth is destroyed, and God brings us into His new creation, we will have limbs that grow back. I don't know. And from my perspective, it's hardly a matter worthy of my attention. I couldn't care less about my limbs growing back. Thankfully, for the sake of those who have lost limbs and have to deal with that most difficult situation, our all knowing God has revealed to men a means to help those who've lost their appendages. So let's help them.

 

[savagewind]

I actually think his first statement was correct. I did put forth a false dichotomy. I had said there were only two options, and of course, if we were to speculate, not having a shred of evidence to support the concept, the universe very well might have been expanding and contracting for all eternity. However, that would not be any sort of indication that God is non-existent. In fact that would solve a problem I have with "creation", which is, if God created the universe, whether it be 6,000 or 15 billion years ago, what was He doing for the previous eternity of His existence?

Thinking

 

[Sonofason]

Thinking

That is of course my first inclination. I often say that before creation God was in a state of contemplation. Same thing.

 

[Desert Snake]

If your being can self create why not the universe?

Without intent? Idk sure anything is 'possible'.

 

[Sonofason]

Look, this is all speculation, it's pointless. To even introduce the idea of 'time' in relation to a self created being is nonsensical.

I agree that all of this speculation is pointless. He said I gave a false dichotomy by only providing two possibilities when there very well could be possibilities other than those that I gave. He was right. There are other hypothetical possibilities that I did not include. Maybe our universe is the content of an experiment in a small test tube by a giant race of beings dwelling on the outside of this universe, just laughing at the results.

I believe in God. God is.

 

[Sonofason]

Hey, you guys are good, you can even construct mountains out of nothing what-so-ever.

We all do.

 

[Katzpur]

If God created everything then he could not have first been a man on earth... seeing as he created it.
Does man become a God, yes. It is a long process. But not all man becomes a God, only those reaching the highest realm. Atheists, for example, cease to be. In one form they still remain, but much like the table to the tree, not in its original form

Serenity said "an earth," not "Earth." There is a difference.

 

[Dr. Strange]

I don't think it was, though I was commenting on his ''sh'' word more than anything.

For me it is either intelligence or no intelligence; and if it is none, then it is luck and magic. The word 'eternal' actually means an ''aeon'' or ''age''. Though if we stop with the modern way of thinking, it would not be possible. I agree with some that everything complex comes from something more simple, and that is God, the development of what we think of as God. This is shown in the universe coming from the big bang; it is singular and simple compared with what is after it.
If you are saying that it is possible that the universe comes from something simple, then why would it ever bring about life? Chaos, no matter how many times you bring it about, brings about chaos. It does not bring about order. If you throw a pile of bricks out of a plane they will not at some point assemble into a house; no matter how many times you do it. We fool ourselves if we think it would; there has to be intelligence involved to have complex things. That is what we see in everything.

This is partly the reason that some like the multiverse (as I) as it improves the odds. Dawkins for example, does not seem to think that it needs to be infinite as a multiverse, only 'just enough'. The problem with an infinite universes doing an infinite amount of things is that one of them could have a God in it! Big problem. So he sticks with the slightly smaller model. And the other problem is, as God can be anywhere, he could be in this universe (as he could in any) and we see evidence of him in this one.

So the universe/multiverse cannot be expanding from something complex only something simple.

But whether many or one, why does it form into something complex that works? That makes no sense, how something that is chaos and random, becomes something that is not chaotic and is non-random. Yes chaos does in fact have patterns within it, but we have to ask, why? Again even chaos seems to want to order. why?

Everything is evolving-consciousness and works in replicative fractal patterns. This again is why we see the singularity of the big bang.
What God was doing before creation was evolving himself. What we see here is the physical side of that evolution that appears in physical terms, but is also in error. That consciousness is us, we are part of it, are it. God is the highest part of that, the highest part of us.

Even the universe itself has within it this self-organise principle. This is because it is trying to find its own Self. Once it is found, we see what we see, just a we are what we are. Without consciousness being involved, you have some form of energy that changes, and changes over and over again, and somehow, through sheer luck, turns into certain things, one of which is this universe and us. It is not logical (Mr Spock) to think that it would do that without intelligence. Why would energy (if I can call it that) change into something else incredibly diverse and complex? Consciousness developing in the mind first would make more sense, and then the ''word became flesh''.

God just IS. He has a simple side and a complex side, and this evolves from the simple. We return to this and become this, so we do the same.

Either way, it is something with or without intelligence. So it is intelligence of luck.

I will shut now eh.

p { margin-bottom: 0.1in; line-height: 120%; }a:link { }
“If you are saying that it is possible that the universe comes from something simple, then why would it ever bring about life?”

You go on to mention, “Chaos.” I have to ask, “Why is not life, as a complex existence, not be considered as a form of chaos? Life fluctuates, pulses just like the universe. Life and death. Wars and disasters.


Above all else, you ask, “why does it form into something complex that works?” Why does, what works? Do you mean to say that man's ability to think, to bring order is not chaos? What is order for Americans once is now questionable whereas politically and Christian thinking divides the American way, drawing partisan groups further apart. Government fails to get done government and, we may never again understand what order is unless structured like China or the Russia. Chaos exist because it is Creation.


Further, it is Christian. Life and death and then the resurrection of Jesus “as the Christ” (Tillich). Man's perception.


If the universe pulses, the Big Bang to collapses, the universe pulses again. Stars are born and stars die. Why is chaos not the norm.


Suffering and understanding suffering is Christian. Christianity cannot deny that is their lot. Christianity is man's perception. The Bible, man's perception.


Perception, a hope, an order. Without which, as my wife asks, “What then is our purpose?” Her answer to her question was and is, “Life is circular.” My answer is, “What man calls God, Spirit, becomes our “ultimate concern” (Tillich). Again, man's perception.

 

[Dr. Strange]

okay



I agree. God in my opinion is not simple at all, not by our standards, and not by a long shot. I do not believe in some thing called a singularity that is somehow a separate thing from God. In my estimation, if there were ever such a thing as a singularity, that would be God. It is possible that all that now exists in this universe came out of Him. But I honestly don't know much of anything. For all I know, everything is God. We are a creation of God, body and spirit. We may be in the image of a God that is also body and spirit. But it really doesn't matter. All we need to do is live and love, be honest and genuine, be giving and caring, and compassionate towards one another, and I believe God will be pleased with us. Who did Christ die for? It was not for those who do God's will. He died for those who do not. He died for sinners, no one else.




Again, I agree.



All this is like trying to study a beautiful flower in order to know everything we can possibly know about that beautiful flower. We prod it, we poke it. We subject it to horrible conditions to see how it responds, and we cut it into pieces so that we can see exactly how it works, and when we're finished, the beautiful flower is dead.



I go with intelligence, awareness, and understanding.

All that is said above is still man's perception. Not your God's. Christianity is man's perception. Jesus was a revolutionary. He was Jewish. Jesus was not Christian and if one attempts to understand the Early Church one sees that what we call Christianity is just man's perception and, not Jesus' perception. What we call the NT was written long after any of Jesus' disciples. What did Jesus teach? The OT and what they did not understand then. Man made Jesus, Christ.

 

[Dr. Strange]

Would you be surprised if there were things that God cannot do?
I believe there are likely some imaginable things that God cannot do. Furthermore, I believe that there are things that we can do that God is incapable of doing. However, this is just conjecture on my part. I certainly have no clear picture of what God is or is not capable of doing.

One has to ask, in respect to man's perception of things, if God is perfect, why would God change Creation by involving Godhood in what is evident to man a perfect Creation?

 

[dgirl1986]

I have heard many testimonies. I wouldnt say it is logical to have faith in any of them, even if they do come with a story guide.

 

[Serenity7855]

If God cras thoted everything then he could not have first been a man on earth... seeing as he created it.
Does man become a God, yes. It is a long process. But not all man becomes a God, only those reaching the highest realm. Atheists, for example, cease to be. In one form they still remain, but much like the table to the tree, not in its original form

In my thoughts atheists will be given access to the lower kingdoms of heaven where they will be prevented from progressing to godhood. Their progression will be damned. They will be in Damnation for all eternity. That is where hell will be. In damnation, a damned mansion. Jesus said, In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. What was he preparing. Was he insuring that you would be in a kingdom that meets with who you are? I don't know. I am speculating that some of those mansion will house the wicked and unbelievers where they will be in the company of those with whom they are most comfortable. I also think that it will be but a relatively small group of the Lords elite, who will recognise the saviours voice, and gain entry into the highest kingdoms of heaven where they may eventually progress to Godhood. Maybe. It is all speculation though. Just my idle thoughts of a what I think could be possible, but we will see.

 

[Dr. Strange]

Well, eternity is limitless, is it not?

Anyhow, I don't buy into the idea that time is relative to matter and/or velocity. We are led to believe that if nothing existed in the universe, that time itself would cease to exist as well. I'm not so convinced. We are told that as we approach the speed of light, time slows down. I'm not convinced of that either. I don't believe Einstein was 100% accurate.

Well, science knows that Einstein was not 100% accurate. But then, that is what science is all about. New truths come with every moment of Creation. Life and death. Does time end for you when your death finalizes your life, your spirit? If not, does your spirit, life cease to exist temporally or/and before time and space? What you may refer to as God. Is time, as experienced by you where you live the same time for someone half way around the world? Or is time relevant to each, differently? With Creation, time begins. Before Creation, time did not exist.

Time, although not in any sense of the definition, is not matter. But time helps to define matter and energy. Force, is an interaction between two objects. The force between two objects is what matter is all about. The Big Bang, hypothesized as a result of two random particles coming from or, out of nothing. That moment is the beginning of time. How many times has the clock been started?