God clearly wants us confused

[Kenny]

So ask anything of the Father in my name and it will be done for you doesn't mean ask anything in my name and it will be done for you. See why I'm confused!?!

I don't understand why God wishes to play these games. I want to do His will and obey him in all things and he chooses to hide from me and not speak clearly. What good does that do?

I'm trying not to doubt. I'm trying to give God the faith he asks. I pray every day that I do God's will. His word says He will give me the grace. It's kind of hard to have no doubt when repeatedly God's Word turns out false and unreliable!

He isn't playing games.

If one pulls a scripture at the expense of everything else, it will get confusing. For an example: If one just takes Job's "The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away" at the expense of what he said after "Surely I spoke of things I did not understand" then you will have an erroneous understanding of the first statement.

So... ask yourself a question. "Did Jesus ask for anything? Or did He only ask for that which was in His Father's will" for he only did what He saw His Father doing and only did His will. Thus, the Last New Will and Testament is our guiding legal document for what His will is.

Or, if you want a well rounded understanding, John explained it further:

1 John 5:
14 This is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us.
15 And if we know that he hears us—whatever we ask—we know that we have what we asked of him.

Since he was with Jesus, I'm sure his understanding was better than ours. It certainly works for me.

Incidentally, faith is a muscle. You increase your faith by hearing and hearing ad-continuum Romans 10:17. If you want more faith, hear/read/meditate more on the word of Gdo.

 

[QuestioningMind]

Here is an example:

6 Jesus replied, “You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you, for he wrote, ‘These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.
7Their worship is a farce, for they teach man-made ideas as commands from God.’
8For you ignore God’s law and substitute your own tradition.”

People have a knack of substituting truth for that which is man-made. God is a great communicator but there is a lot of fake news given "on behalf of God" and making it their religion.

Sorry, but anyone who decides the best way to spread a vital message that's essential to the well being of all human beings is by whispering it into the ears of ancient shepherds in one tiny corner of the world so that they could eventually be written down in a language that would be unknown to anyone a couple thousand years later is a TERRIBLE communicator. Anyone who's ever played the game 'telephone' knows that the message would NEVER remain in tact. Add to that the fact that God surely understood that his creations would twist and change his message to suit their own personal agendas over the centuries and you can only conclude that this creator God wanted to make His message as confusing and unintelligible as possible.

 

[Kenny]

Sorry, but anyone who decides the best way to spread a vital message that's essential to the well being of all human beings is by whispering it into the ears of ancient shepherds in one tiny corner of the world so that they could eventually be written down in a language that would be unknown to anyone a couple thousand years later is a TERRIBLE communicator. Anyone who's ever played the game 'telephone' knows that the message would NEVER remain in tact. Add to that the fact that God surely understood that his creations would twist and change his message to suit their own personal agendas over the centuries and you can only conclude that this creator God wanted to make His message as confusing and unintelligible as possible.

I'm not sure that is applicable.

Dr. Luke, who is great at taking notes, did his research first.

The reproduction of Hebrew texts were meticulously copied with methods to assure there was no error.

Ears were not a part of it.

 

[Willamena]

Clearly you just have to look at the history of Religion and it is obvious people are divided and confused. Without interfering with free-will, God could easily solve that problem. What do you think his reason is for wanting us confused?

You can say He doesn't want us confused, but I know better. If he didn't want us confused, he would speak up and answer our questions. For one person, the truth is Judaism. For another person the truth is Atheism. For another person the truth is Christianity. For another, the truth is Islam. For another, Mormonism, for another the truth is Polytheism. And the list goes on and on.

God clearly wants us confused or he would speak up to us and let us know the truth. There is a small percentage of people that God wills have enlightenment and understanding.

Those aren't truth, though, they are investments in ideas: that I am atheist is the truth of being an atheist, but its objectivity abstracts from being an atheist.

 

[kjw47]

Hmmm. Since we're going to start attacking specific denominations, I personally think he does a lot of great work through the JWs, too.

Jesus brought truth---Catholicism added false teachings at their councils--they were never corrected until the JW teachers corrected them. I don't attack--I speak--FACT. If the world cannot face--FACT--they do not belong here.

 

[QuestioningMind]

I'm not sure that is applicable.

Dr. Luke, who is great at taking notes, did his research first.

The reproduction of Hebrew texts were meticulously copied with methods to assure there was no error.

Ears were not a part of it.

Virtually everyone agrees that the original Hebrew texts were handed down from an ORAL tradition, that is the spoken word, which means that whomever first started repeating the Word had it SPOKEN to them in the first place... or whispered into their ears so to speak. By definition ears had to have been a part of an oral tradition.

 

[Blackdog22]

Virtually everyone agrees that the original Hebrew texts were handed down from an ORAL tradition, that is the spoken word, which means that whomever first started repeating the Word had it SPOKEN to them in the first place... or whispered into their ears so to speak. By definition ears had to have been a part of an oral tradition.

This is correct. There were very few people who could write during that time and most of what was written was done after the fact. There wasn't some guy following all of these accounts jotting them down in his notepad as he followed the Jews out of Egypt while wondering around for 40 years for example. I am not even certain how anyone can believe the validity of these accounts once understanding how far down the line they were actually written, were talking 100s to 1000s of years in some cases, by people who could of in no way been there. Lets just take the story of Noah and the Ark for example. Noah was not the kind of person who would of had the ability to write, he was a loner, even a kind of outcast. The account of Matthew may of been the earliest relating to Jesus and even then there is debate from a decade to a century after the fact. Of course, what does Jesus even mean without all the prophecies from the Old Testament that no one could possibly verify if they wanted too. I certainly dont know.

 

[Kenny]

Virtually everyone agrees that the original Hebrew texts were handed down from an ORAL tradition, that is the spoken word, which means that whomever first started repeating the Word had it SPOKEN to them in the first place... or whispered into their ears so to speak. By definition ears had to have been a part of an oral tradition.

Yes... many do.

Many also believe, as Moses was a prophet and spoke to God face to face, that he simply penned what was given to him.

What we do know, is that the Jewish people accepted it as fact and that after Moses it ceased being oral

 

[viole]

Yeah...I'd probably be secular but I've experienced too many signs and coincidence in my life and experienced God enough that I couldn't be an atheist if I tried.

I'm still confused though.

Maybe His will is to get us confused.

If He exists, it cannot be otherwise. For, I cannot imagine a God,worth His title, whose will is not enforced.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Kenny]

Maybe His will is to get us confused.

If He exists, it cannot be otherwise. For, I cannot imagine a God,worth His title, whose will is not enforced.

Ciao

- viole

There is a time for that. In the interim, He is wants people to love Him from a free will position and not an "enforced" - YOU WILL LOVE ME! whether you like it or not.

 

[Luciferi Baphomet]

We find more liberty in following rules

Honestly I really doubt that.

 

[QuestioningMind]

Yes... many do.

Many also believe, as Moses was a prophet and spoke to God face to face, that he simply penned what was given to him.

What we do know, is that the Jewish people accepted it as fact and that after Moses it ceased being oral

Gee, if Moses spoke to God and penned what he was told then I guess he's the ancient shepherd whose ear God whispered into, huh? Kind of sounds like ears WERE involved after all.

 

[Kenny]

Honestly I really doubt that.

In that I did serve Jesus until 28, I can vouch that I have much more liberty and life with Him than without Him.

It just set me free!

 

[Kenny]

Gee, if Moses spoke to God and penned what he was told then I guess he's the ancient shepherd whose ear God whispered into, huh? Kind of sounds like ears WERE involved after all.

I suppose if you want to imagine something, any story would fit.

 

[QuestioningMind]

I suppose if you want to imagine something, any story would fit.

I'm just going by your imaginings that "...Moses was a prophet and spoke to God face to face, that he simply penned what was given to him." That means that after Moses spoke with God that he penned the words that he'd heard God speak. In your imaginings did Moses use some other organ aside from his ears to hear what God spoke?

But of course none of that really addresses my main assertion, that being that telling one individual thousands of years ago what your message is and expecting it to survive in tact over the centuries is a terribly ineffective means of communicating your message, if you actually want your message to be understood by future generations.

 

[Kenny]

Honestly I really doubt that.

It is your right to doubt. But I don't have to convince myself. Nor do I feel pressed to convince you.

 

[Kenny]

I'm just going by your imaginings that "...Moses was a prophet and spoke to God face to face, that he simply penned what was given to him." That means that after Moses spoke with God that he penned the words that he'd heard God speak. In your imaginings did Moses use some other organ aside from his ears to hear what God spoke?

But of course none of that really addresses my main assertion, that being that telling one individual thousands of years ago what your message is and expecting it to survive in tact over the centuries is a terribly ineffective means of communicating your message, if you actually want your message to be understood by future generations.

That supposes that ears are the only way to communicate. We know that people that cannot speak still communicate through the hands and eyes. It was also noted by Jesus that many time he knew the thoughts of those around him--thus another form of communication.

The problem is that you are viewing it within the context of what you know--but are their other forms? When I spoke to a Rabbi, he mentioned that when God speaks your brain can hear it as a voice and yet your ears were not used.

As far as "ineffective means"--it seems like the Jewish nation had no problem for thousands of years nor do Christians. I think the bigger problem is that so many time people can even speak and yet the hearer interprets it the way they want to. I find that Jesus explained it well when he related the following:

They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
30 And he said, Nay,father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Jesus had no problem that what was written by the prophets was from God. He also qualified that people will not be persuaded no matter what means are used, if they don't want to believe.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I found the instruction booklet has many contradictions. It has a lot of good instructions too. According to that instruction booklet, I'll receive whatever I ask for in the name of Jesus.

unfortunately it contradicts itself and doesn't prove to be trustworthy. As I said, it says I will receive what I ask for.

What good is the instruction booklet if I don't know how to interpret it??

I want to remain in His word, but if he says I'll receive what I ask for and I'm not even receiving understanding, im not given much basis for trusting in His word.

I want to do God's will. May I do God's will, in Jesus name. Now according to God's word, I will do his will now. You think so?

I want to see if I can help you out with interpretation. In my honest opinion, the Bible is easy to read and understand (since not everyone knows Greek, Hebrew, and studies the original language) in English.

What are the contradictions, probably three at a time at most; and, why are you confused over each one? Maybe I can give you some insight but at the end, it's what you interpret scripture to be.

 

[Luciferi Baphomet]

It is your right to doubt. But I don't have to convince myself. Nor do I feel pressed to convince you.

We are even then.

 

[QuestioningMind]

That supposes that ears are the only way to communicate. We know that people that cannot speak still communicate through the hands and eyes. It was also noted by Jesus that many time he knew the thoughts of those around him--thus another form of communication.

The problem is that you are viewing it within the context of what you know--but are their other forms? When I spoke to a Rabbi, he mentioned that when God speaks your brain can hear it as a voice and yet your ears were not used.

As far as "ineffective means"--it seems like the Jewish nation had no problem for thousands of years nor do Christians. I think the bigger problem is that so many time people can even speak and yet the hearer interprets it the way they want to. I find that Jesus explained it well when he related the following:

They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
30 And he said, Nay,father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Jesus had no problem that what was written by the prophets was from God. He also qualified that people will not be persuaded no matter what means are used, if they don't want to believe.

As I've tried to point out on several occasions now my use of the term 'whispered into the ears' was used more to support my analogy of the children's game telephone than to insist that the message was received via ears. It really doesn't matter if God literally spoke the Word or magically transmitted it directly into someone's brain, my point is that providing this information to an ancient shepherd in one small corner of the world is an extremely ineffective means of communicating that message in tact. If it WAS an effective method we wouldn't literally have thousands of different religions in the world, all providing equally verifiable evidence for their legitimacy. Furthermore you wouldn't have thousands of different interpretations of God's Word within a single religion.