If God Wanted Us to Believe...

[Mock Turtle]

That's fine. God should understand a lack of belief then.
Perhaps God will jump out from behind the curtain and yell "Surprise!" and we'll all have a laugh about it.
I'd imagine a God would have an outstanding ability to fool us. Probably not much effort at all.
So no real fault on our part playing a fool to God's games.

I'm not expecting such though - even as to death.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

I'm not saying God didn't. Just if God hadn't we humans would have more reason to believe in a divine creator.

There is plenty of reason to believe if someone wants to already.

And many do.

I don’t have the numbers but with all the religions added up how many believers do you think there are?

3/4 maybe?

 

[Nakosis]

There is plenty of reason to believe if someone wants to already.

And many do.

I don’t have the numbers but with all the religions added up how many believers do you think there are?

3/4 maybe?

Whatever the number, certainly more if there were less reasons about to believe otherwise.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

Whatever the number, certainly more if there were less reasons about to believe otherwise.

But remember that most people rejected Christ when they were actually witnessing Him doing miracles.

 

[Nakosis]

But remember that most people rejected Christ when they were actually witnessing Him doing miracles.

Well first of all miracles were not considered reliable evidence of the Messiah.
Matthew 24:24 For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.

 

[Quintessence]

Yeah agree but I think Genesis' and the bible has so much weight to carry, that it loses some punch.

For me personally, it's mythological stories aren't told anywhere near as well, to stories like King Arthur, Lord Of the Rings and some of the SciFi/Fantasy classics

That happens for a few different reasons, probably. Storytelling is supposed to be oral not written, acted out on a stage or in ritual not flat on a piece of paper, and change over time to stay contemporary and relevant. Plus, folks have different tastes and it's remarkable that material from several centuries ago feels at all relevant to anyone in the modern era. That it is might be a testament (pun intended) to the appeal of that mythology.. even if I personally don't really get it. That I don't get it is probably on me.

The mythos imo kept us in the Dark Ages longer than necessary. It actually kept us from seeking answers to existence which we are only lately beginning to discover. If as you say people incorrectly understand the mythos, why allow it to exist as an impediment to our understanding. Either leave us to our own discovery or spell out the mechanics of the universe in plain language.

I think you're making some assumptions here about the role of mythos historically and in the present era that don't quite hold up, but this is a popular mythos many folks hold in this era so... meh.

Also, "plain language" is boring and fails to inspire more often than not. There's good reason why the arts exist.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It's threads like this that make me wish the recent trend of mythological literalism would die in fire. This such a total non-issue if one understands mythos is mythos and logos is logos.

Edited to add:

Mythos and Logos

Creation: Week 1 Mythos and Logos Monday, February 12, 2018 The Judeo-Christian creation story is told in the form of a cosmic poem (Genesis 1). The realm

cac.org

James Ussher, John Lightfoot, and Johannes Kepler all just came in. Sounds like they disagree with you calling literalism a "recent trend."

Hang on - the Venerable Bede is joining them. He's agreeing with them, but calling the others "upstarts."

Wait... who's this? Yose ben Halafta has entered the chat. He's calling everyone "whippersnappers."

 

[Nakosis]

I think you're making some assumptions here about the role of mythos historically and in the present era that don't quite hold up, but this is a popular mythos many folks hold in this era so... meh.

Also, "plain language" is boring and fails to inspire more often than not. There's good reason why the arts exist.

I suppose if the idea is to get people to think creatively instead of accurately.

 

[Balthazzar]

Clues? What clues? The ones that give us reasons not to believe?

Not believe in what? Are you suggesting the universe isn't where we originated? There's plenty of evidence to verify this much. Why would you suggest there isn't any evidence verifying the universe as our source and origin of life? Delusional thinking and/or refusal to acknowledge a few facts, or maybe it's simple comprehension difficulty. It's ok, the average IQ is under 90 I think, so comprehension ability is nothing to be all that ashamed of.

If you can comprehend that the universe is "God" and God is simply a term once used to define the qualities of the universe, and science becoming the method of putting the "clues" together in order to form a coherent understanding of how life began and how it is sustained, then you may be able to better understand my position.

To articulate the thought differently, the universe left clues that enables us to develop a deeper understanding of our place in it, and how life developed within the universe itself as the substance of our formation. Some people call this "God." I do also ... Sometimes.

How old are you, if you don't mind me asking?

 

[Tomef]

Why did God leave evidence of evolution?
From a few moments after the "Big Bang" we have an explanation of how the universe formed into its current state without the need of any intelligence behind it.
We have evidence of several types of humanoids that lived prior to and even along side of homo sapiens.

If God created everything then we ought not be able to come up with an alternate explanation. There should be no evidence of evolution. There should exist only one possible explanation of our existence. That God created us.

Why create us and then leave this evidence laying around that the universe after the Big Bang could have formed on its own?

Why leave evidence of the evolution of life?

God is all like mysterious and ****. If he was just some sciency guy who told people how things work, the religious would invent another god to fill the ineffable void in their souls and tell them what to think.

 

[Balthazzar]

Machines working hard
to keep emotions at bay
in the human realm

 

[Nakosis]

God is all like mysterious and ****. If he was just some sciency guy who told people how things work, the religious would invent another god to fill the ineffable void in their souls and tell them what to think.

I'd hope not but can't really say you are wrong.

 

[Trailblazer]

Why did God leave evidence of evolution?
From a few moments after the "Big Bang" we have an explanation of how the universe formed into its current state without the need of any intelligence behind it.
We have evidence of several types of humanoids that lived prior to and even along side of homo sapiens.

If God created everything then we ought not be able to come up with an alternate explanation. There should be no evidence of evolution. There should exist only one possible explanation of our existence. That God created us.

Why create us and then leave this evidence laying around that the universe after the Big Bang could have formed on its own?

Why leave evidence of the evolution of life?

If God wanted us to believe what?
I guess you mean if God wanted us to believe the creation story as it is presented in the Bible?

I don't think that God wants us to believe that everything on earth was literally created by God in six days, because it is not literally true.
Maybe God wanted an ancient people to believe that, I don't know, but we are living in the modern age of science so we know better now, at least I think we should know better.

Not all Christians are creationists, and Baha'is hold the view that believe that humans evolved.
There is evidence of evolution because evolution is reality. Why would God want to hide reality? God wants people to believe the truth and that is increasingly becoming the case as more and more people accept science rather than ancient mythology.

More Catholics believe that humans evolved but God guided the process (45%) than believe in the creationist viewpoint (37%). Creationism is still the view that half of Protestants and other Christians (50%) hold, but it is not dominant, with 39% saying humans essentially evolved with God's guidance. May 22, 2017

In U.S., Belief in Creationist View of Humans at New Low

 

[Trailblazer]

Which God is needed to explain the universe we exist in?

No God is needed to explain it.

 

[Nakosis]

Not believe in what? Are you suggesting the universe isn't where we originated? There's plenty of evidence to verify this much. Why would you suggest there isn't any evidence verifying the universe as our source and origin of life? Delusional thinking and/or refusal to acknowledge a few facts, or maybe it's simple comprehension difficulty. It's ok, the average IQ is under 90 I think, so comprehension ability is nothing to be all that ashamed of.

If you can comprehend that the universe is "God" and God is simply a term once used to define the qualities of the universe, and science becoming the method of putting the "clues" together in order to form a coherent understanding of how life began and how it is sustained, then you may be able to better understand my position.

To articulate the thought differently, the universe left clues that enables us to develop a deeper understanding of our place in it, and how life developed within the universe itself as the substance of our formation. Some people call this "God." I do also ... Sometimes.

How old are you, if you don't mind me asking?

To not believe in a God creator.

 

[Nakosis]

No God is needed to explain it.

Yes, that is the point of the OP.
So you agree? One can't be blamed for thinking a God isn't needed.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes, that is the point of the OP.
So you agree? One can't be blamed for thinking a God isn't needed.

God might be needed for other things, but not to explain creation, because there are other possible explanations.

 

[Balthazzar]

To not believe in a God creator.

Yeah, I get that part of the equation, but I stated something specific in relation to "God" reality, namely that God equates to the universe. You made a statement that suggested you failed to comprehend that very specific point, so I replied accordingly.

 

[Nakosis]

Yeah, I get that part of the equation, but I stated something specific in relation to "God" reality, namely that God equates to the universe. You made a statement that suggested you failed to comprehend that very specific point, so I replied accordingly.

Of course, you can call the universe whatever you want.
I just call it the universe without a need to call it anything else.

 

[Nakosis]

God might be needed for other things, but not to explain creation, because there are other possible explanations.

Maybe someday you can tell me about these other things.