Audie
Veteran Member
"God is love" doesn't even make sense
-
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!
If all world people turn atheists.
- Thread starter chinu
- Start date
Audie
Veteran Member
Winner frubal
Hey @PureX
Not sure how you feel about our chat here, but I do think it's been interesting. And respectful, which isn't always a given around here, so sincerely thanks.
Not sure how you go with video, but if interested, take a look at the attached.
I'm not really a fan of either Jordan Peterson or Sam Harris, but I do think they both make interesting and challenging points at times.
In this video, Peterson puts forward a version of God which seems to approach your idea of the mystery, and I'd say he does it in a pretty decent manner.
And Harris pushes back not on the conception of this God, but some combination of the term's common usage versus Peterson's, plus how this can make it hard to establish positions on more impactful human religious dogma.
I don't much care what you think about the debate, but Peterson's conception of God here sounded like yours. Harris' arguments against it seem somewhat like mine. Would you agree?
Again...no interest in working out a 'winner'. That seems juvenile and unrequired. But I am trying to double check my understanding.
Not sure how you feel about our chat here, but I do think it's been interesting. And respectful, which isn't always a given around here, so sincerely thanks.
Not sure how you go with video, but if interested, take a look at the attached.
I'm not really a fan of either Jordan Peterson or Sam Harris, but I do think they both make interesting and challenging points at times.
In this video, Peterson puts forward a version of God which seems to approach your idea of the mystery, and I'd say he does it in a pretty decent manner.
And Harris pushes back not on the conception of this God, but some combination of the term's common usage versus Peterson's, plus how this can make it hard to establish positions on more impactful human religious dogma.
I don't much care what you think about the debate, but Peterson's conception of God here sounded like yours. Harris' arguments against it seem somewhat like mine. Would you agree?
Again...no interest in working out a 'winner'. That seems juvenile and unrequired. But I am trying to double check my understanding.
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
What is senseless to one person, is perfect clarity to another. Life's all about perceptions.
Perhaps it is down to the human timeline, and as regarding all other species on earth, as to why might God interfere in our timeline so as to provide love for the one species (ours) and not for the rest - given that there is not much love between the various species unless about how they taste. But if one can't accept even evolution, and the timeline, this might be simplified - as per the words of a special book. Doesn't make sense to many of us though. And not much love shown for those not fitting into many religious scenarios.
PureX
Veteran Member
Especially a ctitical thnker. Unless he's one of those critical thinkers that is only critical of other people's thinking, but never his own. That kind of "critical thinker" is locked into the presumed righteousness of his own thinking, and cannot therefor choose to change it.
I could have bet money that you would have to belittle the effect of faith in people's lives by claiming it's just for "comfort". That response has become SOOOO predictable. But the whole point of engaging in acts of faith is to keep moving forward when we do not have sufficient inforation to predict the outcomes. And we all do it, because we are all coming up far short of having sufficient information to predict life's outcomes. The only real question is; does acting on one's faith in the idea of God result in positive outcomes for them, and for those around them. And of course the answer is yes, it does, for most people. But it does depend on the idea of God that one is choosing to act in faith, on.
No one here is "discerning truth". We humans wouldn't know the truth if it fell on us. And we wouldn't care that it's true even if it did. Do you really think these "critical thinkers" that are constitutionally incapable of critiquing their own thinking are seeking truth? Not hardly! None of us has any idea what the truth it. We wouldn't know it if we stumbled on it. We're all just muddling through and trying to figure out what works for us and what doesn't. You included.
So why ask?
"Knowing" isn't the point. The point is finding out what works for us.
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
I think the difference in understanding might have more to do with personal experience, both of love and of God; and with what those words mean to us as individuals.
PureX
Veteran Member
I tend to be motivated by a respect and appreciation for the infinite complexity that characterizes existence. Including our own. I can use generalities as well as anyone, and they have their use, but it's important to remember that they aren't "the truth". They're just one way of looking at things.
Looking at so many religions, I will believe it when I see it.
Audie
Veteran Member
What was perceived was that the sun goes
around the earth.
Possibly most still do.
What real doesn't change with how one
perceives it.
Tho I realize how theist, with no basis
for belief except blind faith might confuse
themselves into thinking as you do.
To say, "God is love" makes zero sense
logically. If a person likes to get misty mystical
and feel in his heart it makes sense, well,
they can.
No valid claim that it makes sense, clarity, tho,
unless it can be explained.
So go ahead, show it makes sense.
Messianic Israelite
Active Member
If all world people turn atheists, then what fantastic in this world will happen ?
Atheists please shed some light upon.........
............................................................................"THIS"
Good afternoon Chinu. Ever heard of the term "ung-dly"? If people think that a world of atheism would reduce war, misery, violence etc, they are sadly mistaken. They would be many more differences of opinion on how to rule. How many people on this earth are trying to live upright and righteous lives because of the Bible? Yahshua compared His people to being the salt of the earth in Matthew 5:13 and the light of the world in Matthew 5:14. This earth would be in terrible darkness if it were not for the righteous few who are keeping the commandments and following Yahshua the Messiah.
Isaiah 1:9 says:
"Except Yahweh of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant, we should have been as Sodom, we should have been like unto Gomorrah."
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
One cannot hope to apprehend either God or love, through the application of logic and reason. These are things which must be felt, with that part of the self which has little to do with the intellect. There are many things in life which cannot be explained; this is not to say they cannot be communicated, but how to communicate the taste of water to someone who has only ever drunk tea?
Audie
Veteran Member
So you know ("sadly mistaken") how it would be.
And for proof, quote from a book that agrees
with what you choose to think about people you don't
know.
Audie
Veteran Member
It works like that for things that make no sense.
No facts or logic involved.
I was assured of clarity.
That water has a taste needs no mumbo jumbo.
The mechanism is known. An egg can record the
the brains response.
But " water is love / taste / emotional respose"
makes no sense. Water is not those things.
If one says " I believe I experience God via
an emotional response", fine, that does
make sense.
" god is love" doesnt
PureX
Veteran Member
As always, the theist is talking about theism, while the atheist is talking (complaining) about religion. The theist is trying to express his appreciation for what is a great and profound mystery, and how he sees this mystery actively impacting his (and all our) lives. While the atheist recognizes that he can't debate or disparage theism at this kind of philosophical level (because he is fundamentally a scientist), so he instead turns to religion, and specifically to the practice of using religious artifice as a means of conceptualizing "God", to justify his anti-God position.
We see this happening all the time on these threads, and in these kinds of debates, everywhere. And as likely as not the theist will be drown out and lost among the never-ending 'cage match' between the religious minded and the anti-religious minded. Because neither one of them is willing to look PAST THE ARTIFICIAL RELIGIOUS REPRESENTATIONS OF GOD TO THE ACTUAL METAPHYSICAL PHENOMENA being referred to as "God" by philosophical theists.
Peterson did try to at least give a tentative list of the ways we can see the metaphysical phenomenon being referred to as "God" manifesting in our experience of existence, but it was pretty clear this was not what the atheist was interested in discussing. Probably because what Peterson was listing was what could be considered "reasonable evidence" for the existence of this metaphysical phenomenon called "God". And that wasn't something refutable. It IS reasonable evidence. (Not proof, but evidence.)
I'm not going to go through the exact propositions Peterson outlined, but they seem to boil down to the idea that the (long term) course of our existence as human beings has been creating an ongoing awareness of God, within in us. And I would add that it is (very slowly) creating an expression of God through us, as well (in terms of that divine spirit of love, forgiveness, compassion, generosity, wisdom, etc.). And the reason I label it a "divine" spirit is because it transcends the needs of physical existence. We do not need these attributes to survive. In fact, we would survive "better" if we did not exhibit them. Functionally speaking, it would be far better to see ourseves and to act as highly intelligent predators among a world full of prey. But we did not develop in this way. It seem that intelligence evolves toward a higher calling than mere survival.
Last edited:
I don't think I belittled anything, but yes, you can bet money that I will call choosing to believe something because it's comfortable to believe and uncomfortable to live without that belief comforting oneself. If your god belief were challenged by events, it would be very disorienting and troubling to you. I'm comfortable without a god belief, and so I'm an atheist.
No, we don't all do it. I don't do it. I don't believe anything by faith. And I am quite comfortable acting with incomplete information. No faith is required. No unjustified beliefs are involved. I have the evidence of experiencing which ideas produced desired outcomes, and I am fully aware that beliefs are all tentative and possibly will fail me. I believe my car will start the next time I test it, but I know that it might not. There's no faith (unjustified belief) involved in turning the key.
Your definition of truth probably isn't mine. I'm quite content that the body of knowledge I've accumulated accurately maps some of reality such that I can use those ideas to effect desired outcomes.
That's a description of preferring comfort to knowledge. Why does that idea seem to offend you?
For me, knowing is what leads to comfort - knowing what brings lasting satisfaction and how to get and maintain that. Knowing that there may be no gods or afterlife and nobody watching over or commanding us has been liberating.
But it's YOU continually carping about atheists as you are again now. You don't like a thing about any of us and you love to let us know.
Last edited:
Messianic Israelite
Active Member
Hi Audie. Good afternoon. Let's consider what the Bible's purpose is. The Bible's purpose is to give direction in the way that we should go. It provides a lighted path so we can traverse this life without ending up in pitfalls (Proverbs 6:23). If the Bible were completely thrown out the window, as what is happening in our day and age, we would not know which way is the right way. We would be like that described in Isaiah 59:10. What is going on today is that the Bible is being thrown out as irrelevant in our modern day society and we are adopting ideas which are causing people to stumble. Sodom and Gomorrah had rejected the Law of Yahweh and they had become a wicked people in Yahweh's sight, so much so that Yahweh had to send angels to investigate to find out how wicked these cities were for themselves. Genesis 18:20 says "And Yahweh said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous". There was a cry in Sodom and Gomorrah, just as they'll be a cry in those cities which have rejected the Law of Yahweh, regardless where that city is located.
They are numerous paths in the darkness, but only one path in the light. Or more accurately, Yahshua said that there were just two paths, one broad path and one narrow path. That's why I said there would be multiple differences of opinion in a world of atheists. The path of unrighteousness is very broad. They are many different ways to do unrighteousness but ultimately all of them will lead to destruction.
Atheists tend to reject the Law of Yahweh. They may keep some Laws, those Laws which they themselves agree with, but not all of them. This attitude is made even more tenuous when their lives are in jeopardy and they choose to forsake any morality in order to save themselves alive.
I'm not going to pretend I understand atheism. I don't. All I can say is that from viewing the Bible, a world of atheists would not be beneficial in the least. Why not look to the Kingdom of Yahweh, when all will be keeping the Laws of Yahweh and when Yahweh and Yahshua will not be able to be denied as Yahshua will be on this earth ruling with His saints. That's the sort of world that I look forward to.
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
You weren't assured of clarity. In fact I explicitly stated that what is clear to one person is often obscure to another.
However, I see you have offered an explanation for the words 'God is love', which presumably makes sense to you; so it seems you have found the clarity by yourself.
Audie
Veteran Member
Clarity talk but no clarity walk.
Have you counted the number of wars of religion and deaths in the name of a particular god or gods and compared it to wars of atheism?
The number of religious sects of Christianity alone who differ from other sects counts in the tens of thousands.
And how many are trying to live upright lives without the bible?
Doubtful because it is such a few it would make little difference