Of course. I'm smart enough not to take the Bible figuratively either.
_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How much does the Christian God really love us?
- Thread starter Enoughie
- Start date
Of course. I'm smart enough not to take the Bible figuratively either.
_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma
The bible was not written before Abraham was. So all past human history prior to Abraham can only be given via the revelation by the prophets after Abraham was.
Thus, the history of creation was not witnessed first hand, but rather given to us as a story so that we may know to whom credit is due.
So anything said or read has to be taken in faith that what transpired was true.
To a child, a good story is made simple that a child can get the jest of the story, may be real or fiction, the point being that the subject matter, the plot can be understood.
As the child matures in knowledge, the stories may be questioned in the process of better understanding.
Such is the case with many of you who may have been raised in a religious environment, and then later, questioned those beliefs to the point where you are now.
I believe that the proof in the putting is in what ticks inside of us, meaning what relationship we make with the creator, if at all.
Blessing, AJ
Thus, the history of creation was not witnessed first hand, but rather given to us as a story so that we may know to whom credit is due.
So anything said or read has to be taken in faith that what transpired was true.
To a child, a good story is made simple that a child can get the jest of the story, may be real or fiction, the point being that the subject matter, the plot can be understood.
As the child matures in knowledge, the stories may be questioned in the process of better understanding.
Such is the case with many of you who may have been raised in a religious environment, and then later, questioned those beliefs to the point where you are now.
I believe that the proof in the putting is in what ticks inside of us, meaning what relationship we make with the creator, if at all.
Blessing, AJ
Rainbow Mage
Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
The Christian god is just like all other gods. He loves to the extent that his nature allows. That is to say, to me gods are very much beings with emotions like we have, albiet on a higher scale and level of existence. If the Christian god thought something was more beneficial to itself, love suddenly goes out the window.
First, we developed great scientific tools (in geology, archeology, etc.) to study the past, and these reveal a much more accurate picture of the world than the Biblical accounts. If we can develop a better understanding of the world without being given this understanding through "revelation" then clearly there was no fundamental need for such revelation in the first place.
The Biblical accounts are not just "simplistic" stories that "even a child can understand." They are erroneous representations of history that one has to accept on faith, because we have historic evidence that contradict these stories.
The only thing the Biblical accounts really show is human nature in trying to understand the world and our place in it. Unlike other animals, humans have a section in their brain that is responsible for "hypothesis formation." This area is nicknamed the "Interpreter." We need to be able to explain to ourselves why things are the way they are - even if the explanation is utterly wrong. And that's why every culture has its own myths about its own origin, and how it's related to the universe.
The Abrahamic religions are no different in that regard. They all put themselves (ie. humanity) in the center, and purpose of a universe that was created by an all-powerful God.
I find the psychology behind this much more interesting than the myths themselves.
Source: The Interpreter Within: The Glue of Conscious Experience - Dana FoundationThe answer appears to be that we have a specialized left-hemisphere system that my colleagues and I call the “interpreter.” This Interpreter is a device (or system or mechanism) that seeks explanations for why events occur. The advantage of having such a system is obvious. By going beyond simply observing contiguous events to asking why they happened, a brain can cope with such events more effectively should they happen again.
We revealed the Interpreter in an experiment using a “simultaneous concept test.” The split-brain patient is shown two pictures, one presented exclusively to his left hemisphere, one exclusively to his right. He is then asked to choose from an array of pictures the ones he associates with the pictures that were presented (or “lateralized”to his left brain and his right brain. In one example of this, a picture of a chicken claw was flashed to the left hemisphere and a picture of a snow scene to the right. Of the array of pictures then placed in front of the subject, the obviously correct association was a chicken for the chicken claw and a shovel for the snow scene. Split-brain subject Case One did respond by choosing the shovel with his left hand and the chicken with his right. Thus each hemisphere picked the correct answer. Now the experimenter asked the left-speaking hemisphere why those objects were picked. (Remember, it would only know why the left hemisphere had picked the shovel; it would not know why the disconnected right brain had picked the shovel.) His left hemisphere replied, “Oh, that’s simple. The chicken claw goes with the chicken, and you need a shovel to clean out the chicken shed.” In other words, the left brain, observing the left hand’s response, interprets the response in a context consistent with its own sphere of knowledge—one that does not include information about the snow scene presented to the other side of the brain.
_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma
Last edited:
However the interpretation, the individual is solely responsible for them.
The coming together on any of them and having a civil discourse, and genuine love one for another in spite of our differences, is the key to understanding.
In my case, belief in the God of Abraham, and the knowledge of, gives me my understanding, as love being the key.
If you get the same understanding outside that, then you and I can have a similar understanding about the works of love. Be it the view of it being Godly or not.
Love, defined either way is still love, yet one definition of real love is the willingness to give one's life for an unworthy person.
Blessings, AJ
The coming together on any of them and having a civil discourse, and genuine love one for another in spite of our differences, is the key to understanding.
In my case, belief in the God of Abraham, and the knowledge of, gives me my understanding, as love being the key.
If you get the same understanding outside that, then you and I can have a similar understanding about the works of love. Be it the view of it being Godly or not.
Love, defined either way is still love, yet one definition of real love is the willingness to give one's life for an unworthy person.
Blessings, AJ
I also think coming to an understanding, love, and having respect for differences in lifestyle is extremely important.
But I also think there is value in iconoclasm. We give too much power to notions, "values," and ideas that drive us apart, and are harmful to humanity and to the world. Many of these notions and values are based in religion. That is why I think it is important to challenge these notions and values, so we can truly reach a better understanding of each other, and of life.
_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
The Christian God loves us as much as we love ourselves.
@ look3467
By the way, you did not respond yet to this post about the Spirit:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2287415-post54.html
_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma
By the way, you did not respond yet to this post about the Spirit:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2287415-post54.html
_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma
Yes! The flesh (Body) the soul (Who you are) and spirit (What allows you to tick).
You exist because of your spirit, but your spirit is dead spiritually (Not physically) as relating to God.
To get back to God, your dead spirit must be renewed, born again, this time of the spirit of God, having access to eternal life after this one dies.
The new theology is one in which God pays the price for your salvation, not you.
Jesus came to the Jewish people who lived by the laws of Moses as given by God to them only.
For someone else to come with a new theology would only be met with rejection and subject to death.
Jesus, by the Father instructions "cuts them off" from their relationship with the Father by making this statement to them: " I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me".
They in turn........cut Him off!
But to those who believed in Him, to them where given access to eternal life.
And to those who didn't, this life would hold them until they die, and at that point, Jesus would be revealed to them and become converted.
So, it is to an advantage to began eternal life asap, if one wants to partake of its blessings.
Spiritually speaking, your essence is already dead and in need of a rebirth.
To question God is not a sin to condemnation, but rather a step towards understanding who He really is.
Many have doubted the existence of God, but when the time came, whatever the reason was, they cried out in anger to something like this: "If you are who they claim you are, then deliver me".
And they were delivered to their amazement, gratitude forth coming in faith towards Him.
Simple truth? Faith is the only prescription to accessing eternal life!
Faith in that what Jesus said: "Joh 10:38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him".
Joh 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Though you have not seen Him or God, but you know God by Him, faith in Him gives you eternal life.
Yes, and it is your responsibility to seek out the truth for yourself and not for anybody else.
The point where I am willing to give my life up for God, then at that point is when life really begins.
Were are incomplete! Inferior, less than perfect and unless God redeems us, were are doomed.
When we can come to an understanding of that, then shall we realize we need God's help.
I hope I have answered your post with some positive hope, and not one in which excludes you from any of God's benefits.
Blessings, AJ
But you didn't answer my post at all. You merely confused the hypothetical with your own theology.
You believe there is a Body, a Soul, and a Spirit. Three separate dimensions to your existence.
You believe that only by accepting Jesus can your Spirit be born.
My hypothetical was this: what if a person, who claims to be the Father God, came to you and other people and said that there is a fourth dimension to you: the Essence. And at the moment it is dead.
So now you have a Body, Soul, Spirit, and Essence. The only way your Essence can be born is if you believe in this person.
If you believe in him your Spirit will go to heaven, and your Essence will become a God after you die.
He then sacrifices himself for the salvation of humanity.
Now, you can only understand this new theology once your Essence is born (by believing in this person/Father God). If you do not believe in this person/Father God then he claims you cannot understand this truth (because your Essence, this fourth dimension, is dead)
How can you accept or deny the truth of this hypothetical claim?
_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma
OK, I think I understand what you are trying to convey to me.
What Jesus did is tell us that He is the way the truth and the life, died for our sins and enables us to go to heaven by accepting His sacrifice for our sins.
You are giving an example of the same story, but adding what you term fourth dimension to the story and coming to the same ends as the story of Jesus.
If you want to think of it that way, I don't believe Jesus would mind based on the fact that He came to give life, and that was to anyone who would want it.
But should one not want to believe in the Jesus story, that is all right to, because the ability to choose is God given.
Regardless of the choice, Jesus still; paid the price.
Blessings, AJ
What Jesus did is tell us that He is the way the truth and the life, died for our sins and enables us to go to heaven by accepting His sacrifice for our sins.
You are giving an example of the same story, but adding what you term fourth dimension to the story and coming to the same ends as the story of Jesus.
If you want to think of it that way, I don't believe Jesus would mind based on the fact that He came to give life, and that was to anyone who would want it.
But should one not want to believe in the Jesus story, that is all right to, because the ability to choose is God given.
Regardless of the choice, Jesus still; paid the price.
Blessings, AJ
Well, then your view is entirely inconsistent with the New Testament. Because:
[a] Jesus says "no one comes to the father except through me" (John 14:6). Which means that if you choose to believe in this new theology, and first believe in this "Father God" then you would be violating Jesus' command, and not get eternal life.
Except of course, that the claim of this "Father God" is that once you believe in him, then there's no contradiction between his theology and that of the N.T. - but there is an evident contradiction if you do not accept this new view. So either this Father God" is a true God or he isn't. If you choose to believe in him and he isn't a true God, then you're violating the N.T., but if he is a true God then your life is incomplete. The question is how do you make a sound choice?
The second reason why your view is inconsistent with the N.T. is that the N.T. says that whoever does not believe in Jesus and follows his commands: "their place will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur" (Revelation 21:8). So you have the choice to either accept it or not. But if you don't there are supposed consequences of damnation.
_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma
Rainbow Mage
Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
Well I have a unique view of Enoughie, so I would argue very much that the god the New Testament teaches about is love. I will not expound on this too much unless you'd like me to.
Well, what's the sense of saying you disagree with me if you don't explain yourself..
_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma
Rainbow Mage
Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
Well let me explain one thing first before I continue. I am not a Christian. My views about Jesus and God come from a non-Christian perspective. That being said, I will address the statement "no man comes to the Father, but by me." Some would look at that statement and believe Jesus is speaking of himself, however, he isn't. He is speaking of the Christ, the mystic consciousness within all. I do not believe Jesus was the first avatar, I also believe Krishna was, and many others. Let me be clear I do not believe that is speaking about Jesus, and I think the NT puts forth a very mystic view, but literalism gets in the way.
To fully appreciate the purpose of that statement one first has to have a working knowledge of the works of God.
That statement was a designed flaw to the Jews by which in their rejection of Jesus, they, in accordance with their laws, as given to them by God through Moses, and for the fulfillment of the prophecies, as prophecies about the coming Messiah came to fruition.
After that completion, the statement takes on a different form, and that being that Jesus now is the inheriter of the whole earth and all it's contents.
That is why I say, in order to get the right meaning of that statement, one needs to have a working knowledge of the works of God, otherwise, that statement can be interpreted any any ones liking.
The following verse is in reference to Jesus as the Father asks the question:
Ref: Psa 2:8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
You recall reading a similar verse to that same effect?
Ref: Mat 4:8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
Mat 4:9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.
Mat 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
Jesus inherited all the kingdoms, the heathen and the earth anyways, so why the difference between God saying it and the devil saying it?
There are deeper truths in the reasons why, and to have an understanding of them is to have an understanding of the works of God, and the love of God.
Blessings, AJ
One thing that the Christian religion does that not any other religious belief can do, or has done, and that is for it's founder to take the penalty of death for the whole of humanity.
Though Christians have a lack of understanding, as the non believers as well, about the entire scope of the works of God in behalf of all humanity.
That is evident by the fact that the differences cause difficulty in relationships between the various beliefs.
Your views as stated are also covered with respect to the price paid by Jesus.
Option? Believe it or not, is a God given choice.
Blessings, AJ
But here you're using again a verse that supports what I said!
How can the verse: "Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve," be consistent with worshiping the "Father God" from my example? It cannot.
_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma
There are two distinct creations 1. The Fathers creation and 2. the Son's creation.
The Father, meaning as originator, as one from whom all things are created the flesh in Adam and Eve.
That is the story found in Genesis that God wanted to convey to us.
God also wanted to save that which He created, so in the form of the first created man, God became like one of us in His full power as God.
That is as a Son of God and in His new creation.
The new creation is not a physical one but rather a spiritual one.
If then the Father created life in the physical, and the Son created new life in the spiritual, we can conclude that all life then really begins with the Son.
Thus the verse in question addresses the Son's creation as if were the Fathers.
Difficulty arises when the two are made separate from each other and understanding wanting.
Blessings, AJ
You're again not addressing my question. The verse you gave suggests that Jesus said that ONLY God should be worshiped and served. How can that be consistent with the example I gave you, if people were to worship this new person who claims to be God?
If that person is indeed God then they wouldn't be violating Jesus' command (and that of the O.T. Ten Commandments). But if he isn't God then they are worshiping someone who is not God, which violates Jesus' command.
So I ask you again. How can you decide whether to worship this person (and his new theology) or not?
_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma