Legitimate reasons not to believe in God

[muhammad_isa]

You decide these texts are true because you have other, non-rational motives..

I was raised as a Christian, and have always believed in the concept of God. In my late teens, I believed in God, but not in any particular creed.
Upon discovering Islam in my 20's, I became a Muslim, and have not found since, any reason to believe that the texts are fraudulent.

Do Muslims have facts that support their beklief? Or do Muslims just accept what other Muslims around them believe, and carry on these ideas via social learning?

We are all individuals, and we all have our own spiritual journeys in life.
I do use reasoning in deciding upon creed, but ultimately trust in God to guide me.
If a person does not seek for truth, they are unlikely to find it.

So are you saying that you believe Hindus are actually beliving in the Abrahamic God, even though Hindus existed before Jews and their idea of Yahweh was formed from the Caananite polytheistic system?

I do not know the origin of all world religions, but have reason to believe that some have roots in monotheism.
Sikhism, for example, is a mix of Hinduism and Islam.
It is a modern example of how religions can evolve.

I think it more rational to interpret the Bible, Quran, Mormon Bible, the Urantia book, etc. in a symbolic way rather than literal. There is no credible arguments or reasons to interpret these books literally given they make controdictory claims, and the supernatural claims are not based in fact.

You lump them all together. Each text needs to be investigated independently and assessed.

..you offer us no factual and rational basis for what you believe..

I believe the Qur'an is a revelation from God.
You believe that Muhammad , peace be with him, was either deluded or fraudulent.

I have been exposed to religious ideas all my life, but I was willing to question these ideas because they did not resonate as true.

I also question things..

The Quran has factual erros, and makes claims not consistent with fact, so why do you assume it was not from men?

I don't think it does..

It never occurred to you that the Quran was inspired by the Bible, and repeated some of its ideas?

That is one possibility.
I have been to Macca and Medina, and it is quite amazing to see the light of belief on people from all over the world, in communal worship.

Another possibility, is that Muhammad is indeed neither a madman or a liar.

Christians and Muslim HAVE to assume their books are divine and true. If you did not, then you couldn't identify yourself as Muslim, or Christian.

We are all individuals, with varying beliefs.
Many Christians believe that the Bible is not inerrant, but Divinely inspired nevertheless.

The Qur'an claims to be from one "author". [ God ]
If one does not believe that, then faith/Islam is compromised.

The Bible is known to be a collection of scripts with different age and author .. mostly anonymous.

The subject matter is the same .. religious instruction and historical prophets sent by God.

 

[Brickjectivity]

It needs to be a formal system that can demonstrate facts about the natural numbers. It doesn't apply to just anything. It has to be a formal system which generate theorems and the set of theorems is a recursively numerable set. Godel had a simple system of arithmetic that wasn't incomplete.

Not everything can be proven, and formal systems cannot prove themselves to be complete. Yes?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Baha'is seem to try and wiggle out of this by claiming that thing about God not wanting robots

Regarding robots, here's a problem that is seldom addressed: God doesn't want to be with robots, we are told. If one argues that evil exists because man has free will, and that that is how God likes it, then I guess that there's either evil in heaven or robots programmed to do only good after all. Free will is what led to the story of rebellion in heaven and fallen angels being cast out. How long could any human being with free will go before having a cranky day and getting himself kicked out?

The word robot is used derogatorily by apologists, but robot is code for exactly what everybody wants for themselves, their children, and everybody else - to have a well-developed conscience and to consistently obey it. If we could program the rules we teach our children, we would. And ourselves as well. If we could code in 'don't lose temper,' 'be on time,' etc., and have these problems be solved for good, we would. But that's not how things work in a naturalistic world. That might be the case if there were a supernatural creator, but as always, when there are two ways things might have been if a god existed but only one of them if not, we always get the option that would be imposed on us in a godless universe - an argument I made earlier against the existence of an interventionalist deity.

Maybe you saw the analogy using flipping a coin to see if it is a fair coin or a weighted (loaded) coin. A fair coin can come up heads or tails. A coin perfectly loaded to come up tails will come up tails every time. How many times does one need to flip the coin and have it come up tails before he realizes that it is loaded? No single flip suggests that, but considered cumulatively, 1000 consecutive tails without a single heads is pretty good evidence that heads was never a possibility. This is what we see in our universe. Every time we look, we find the universe behaving as a godless one must, just like the coin. I call this argument restricted choice. When we see outcomes restricted to only one of two or more logical possibilities, there is a reason for it.

 

[F1fan]

It doesn't matter what you think, the Bible says God makes peace, causes peace, brings peace, causes well-being, makes well-being, causes well-being, brings good times, sends good times, and brings prosperity. You citing the Bible means you assign it significance and authority. You can't cite what God does that and leave out half the verse. That is unfair and unjust.

KJ21 I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I, the Lord, do all these things.
NKJV I form the light and create darkness, I make peace and create calamity; I, the Lord, do all these things.’
ASV I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I am Jehovah, that doeth all these things.
EHV I am the one who forms light and creates darkness, the one who makes peace and creates disaster. I am the Lord, the one who does all these things.
AMP The One forming light and creating darkness, Causing peace and creating disaster; I am the Lord who does all these things.
ERV I made the light and the darkness. I bring peace, and I cause trouble. I, the Lord, do all these things.
NCV I made the light and the darkness. I bring peace, and I cause troubles. I, the Lord, do all these things.
ESV I form light and create darkness; I make well-being and create calamity; I am the Lord, who does all these things.
NASB The One forming light and creating darkness, Causing well-being and creating disaster; I am the Lord who does all these things.
NIRV I cause light to shine. I also create darkness. I bring good times. I also create hard times. I do all these things. I am the Lord.
TLB I form the light and make the dark. I send good times and bad. I, Jehovah, am he who does these things.
NIV I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the Lord, do all these things.

None f this is relevant. The Bible says God created evil (and it is irrelevant that you think it was an error), and that's all there is to it.

We are natural beings living in a natural world. God is all-powerful and uses His power to rule and maintain all of existence. This does not include stepping in and changing the natural order of creation or what humans choose to do with their free will.

God isn't known to exist, so anything you claim about any God is not true or factual.

I believe because my purpose in this life is to know and worship God and obey His teachings and laws.
I do not believe so that God can rescue me from all my troubles and I have no such requirement of expectation.

A non-rational reason to believe, yet an emotional comfort motive.

God is not irrelevant, since God is responsible for ruling and maintaining the universe. Humans have free will to choose and they are responsible for what they choose. God is not responsible for what humans choose and God is not responsible to bail people out for the bad choices they make.

None of this is true and factual.

God does not stand by, humans stand by. You have turned God into a human and that is the fallacy of false equivalence since God is not a human.

A God that does nothing to help humans is irrelevant to our lives. And there are many different beliefs about what God is, and does. So it is arbitrary when anyone says "God" because it can mean anything that is the whim of the fallible mortal, like yourself.

In the natural world, children are born with genetic defects and cancers, and that's not all that happens, but it is completely illogical to expect God to change the natural order of the world that He created!

Do you have any clue why your idea of God created defects and cancers? Would you do that to people if you were God?

"Even though He can." God's omnipotence is not a legitimate reason to expect God to eliminate all suffering just because you and others don't like it. If you don't like how God operates you don't have to believe in God.

So you believe in a God that created defects and cancers, but then are stunned that decent people want God to fix these serious and fatal biological problems? How is your God useful for anything? To pray is useless. Why even have a God? What you conjure in your mind is just natural universe that requires no God.

No, but I am not God, and I do not have the power to create a world. Moreover, I don't believe I know more than an all-knowing God about how to create a world because that is logically impossible since no human can be more than all-knowing.

But you think yourself capable of creating an image of God in your mind, and adding all sorts of attributes to it. You admit that you wouldn't create this world as it is, but accept the idea that your God did? And you are OK with your God having lower standards than you?

You are projecting what you believe about God onto me. God is not guilty in my view, God is guilty in your view.
I did disagree, when I cited my post that explained why God is not responsible for intervening. #747

You write posts that show you have little respect for your God, but then defend it like an abused wife does her husband.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

We are natural beings living in a natural world. God is all-powerful and uses His power to rule and maintain all of existence. This does not include stepping in and changing the natural order of creation or what humans choose to do with their free will.

Living in a natural world means living in a world without supernaturalism. A natural world needs no god. It assembles and runs itself without intelligent oversight. This is the world we find ourselves living in. The first wave of scientists showed us that we live in a clockwork universe. Sprits were not needed to move the sun through the sky or to fashion and throw lightning bolts. With this, the builder-ruler god lost a hat and became the builder only, and deism became a tenable position. Then a second wave of scientists showed us how a universe of galaxies of solar systems made of the elements and arranged as a giant net of filaments and nodes came to assemble itself without intelligent oversight, and how a tree of life could evolve from a single ancestral population, making atheism and naturalism tenable.

I believe because my purpose in this life is to know and worship God and obey His teachings and laws. I do not believe so that God can rescue me from all my troubles and I have no such requirement of expectation.

You expect nothing from your god, which is realistic. I also expect nothing from gods, but as an atheist, I get a bonus. My purpose in life is determined by me. Is there a god that created me to praise it for eternity? That certainly isn't my purpose for myself, and it would be a nightmare to discover that it was true.

God is not responsible for what humans choose and God is not responsible to bail people out for the bad choices they make.

You're pretty much forced to take that position, aren't you? Perhaps you've noticed that no humanist agrees with you, meaning that nobody who isn't afraid of gods is afraid to say that with omni skills comes omni-responsibility. Believers must either deny that responsibility, which is a meaningless assertion to others, or attempt to justify the apparent indifference to man's plight with linguistic gymnastics, explaining how gratuitous suffering is actually a good thing. Both of these are unenviable positions. Don't forget the Christian's read on the human condition, which is that it is a punishment exacted by a just god for disobedience. God doesn't merely sit back and watch man suffer. He adds to their suffering deliberately as punishment as with the garden, flood, tower of Babel, Sodom, and plagues.

Life is much more reasonable when one dispenses with the supernaturalism.

it is completely illogical to expect God to change the natural order of the world that He created!

Not at all. That's something I might do were I a universe builder. They say that idle hands are the devil's playground. Isn't your deity an artist and an engineer?

It's also something most of your fellow Abrahamics would disagree with. Their god has intervened frequently in history (see list above) and is expected to return to do more of the same (fiery apocalypse), and maybe do a few miracles and answer a few prayer requests along the way or send a messenger or two to speak for it. Or maybe you don't consider changing a messenger's mental state changing the natural order of the world. I would.

I expect your response to be that I am unqualified to decide what is logical for a god, that what I would do is irrelevant to what a god would do. But I disagree, and reject all such answers, as when others tell me that their god is a good god as they also tell me that I'm not qualified to judge what is and what is not good. I guess that they don't see the special pleading there.

By the same token, you can't expect anybody to accept your judgment of what is logical for a god as you reject their opinions because they are mere human beings.

God does not stand by, humans stand by. You have turned God into a human and that is the fallacy of false equivalence since God is not a human.

You have turned God into nothing. You say this god runs the world, but then note that the world is naturalistic and that no gods can be expected to intervene in it. You say that this deity doesn't stand by, then describe standing by (doing nothing). You expect no more from your god than I do. Yet you feel like you have a duty to obey what you've been told it wants from you.

 

[muhammad_isa]

God doesn't merely sit back and watch man suffer. He adds to their suffering deliberately as punishment as with the garden, flood, tower of Babel, Sodom, and plagues.

Life is much more reasonable when one dispenses with the supernaturalism..

It might appear to be, but nothing really changes.
Reality is still reality, whatever we might believe about how or why things happen.

If there is no author to reality, and it has no cosmic significance, then it makes even less sense.
Trying to put God into a box that satisfies what we think He should be or act like, results in disbelief, that provides no alternative explanation.

 

[Trailblazer]

None of this is relevant. The Bible says God created evil (and it is irrelevant that you think it was an error), and that's all there is to it.

What you choose to ignore is also relevant.
The Bible says God makes peace, causes peace, brings peace, causes well-being, makes well-being, causes well-being, brings good times, sends good times, and brings prosperity and that's all there is to it.

A God that does nothing to help humans is irrelevant to our lives.

What God does to help human is send Messengers, Messengers who get rejected by most humans, at least at first. Those Messengers reveal the teachings and laws that humans need to lead a happy and moral life, and they also reveal a message from God that is pertinent to the time in which it was revealed.

God does not 'show up' on earth because God is spirit, not a material being who can show up on earth. Because God cannot show up, God sends Messengers who act as Representatives on His behalf. This is as logical as the day is long. The fact that you do not recognize those Messengers does not change that.

Do you have any clue why your idea of God created defects and cancers?

My idea of God did not create defects and cancers, those evolved through the process of evolution.

So you believe in a God that created defects and cancers...

No, I do not believe God did that. YOU are the one who believes that and you are projecting your God beliefs onto me.

But you think yourself capable of creating an image of God in your mind, and adding all sorts of attributes to it.

I do not create an image of God in my mind. I get my beliefs about God from scriptures revealed by the Messengers of God.

You admit that you wouldn't create this world as it is, but accept the idea that your God did? And you are OK with your God having lower standards than you?

No, I am okay with God having the highest possible standards, since God is the Higher than any human being.

Moreover, God is All-knowing and All-wise. I cannot know more than God or be wiser than God about how to create a world, or about anything else, since no human can be more than All-knowing or more than All-wise.

 

[CG Didymus]

If we could program the rules we teach our children, we would. And ourselves as well.

Yes, they say God doesn't want robots, but then they expect the followers to program themselves to follow the laws and moral codes of the religion without question... to subordinate their will to do God's will. Like programmed machines... or robots.

 

[Trailblazer]

Living in a natural world means living in a world without supernaturalism. A natural world needs no god.

It does need a God since God maintains the world, like a maintenance man.

'what does a maintenance man do?'

Inspects and identifies equipment or machines in need of repair. Troubleshoots issues to determine necessary repairs. Plans repair work using buildings blueprints or equipment manual as needed. Performs general repairs that do not require a specialized technician..

General Maintenance Worker - Job Descriptions - SHRM

The fact that you cannot SEE God maintaining the world does not mean God is not doing so. You believe He isn't, I believe He is. Both are only beliefs and neither can be proven so there is no point arguing about it.

You expect nothing from your god, which is realistic. I also expect nothing from gods, but as an atheist, I get a bonus. My purpose in life is determined by me.

That would not be a bonus for me, since I know that I cannot know what my purpose is without God.
I expect nothing from God except what He has promised, to send a Messenger in every age.
Whatever else I get from God is by the bounty and grace of God, and I accept that.

Is there a god that created me to praise it for eternity? That certainly isn't my purpose for myself, and it would be a nightmare to discover that it was true.

I do not believe that God wants us to praise Him for eternity, that is not the purpose for which we were created.
The nightmare would be for you to discover after you die that the purpose of life was to know and worship God, and instead you defined your own purpose which was not really your purpose at all.

I expect your response to be that I am unqualified to decide what is logical for a god, that what I would do is irrelevant to what a god would do.

Think again. I might have responded that way in the past but the beauty of free will is that we can change and respond differently. Thus I don't have to keep covering the same old tired ground. I just pick out the highlights and what I can respond to and make a new point.

You have turned God into nothing. You say this god runs the world, but then note that the world is naturalistic and that no gods can be expected to intervene in it. You say that this deity doesn't stand by, then describe standing by (doing nothing). You expect no more from your god than I do. Yet you feel like you have a duty to obey what you've been told it wants from you.

God does not stand by. God can and does intervene in this world, but only when He feels like it, not when He is ordered to do so. God is not a short order cook. Everything that we get or don't get from God is according to God's Will. That is God 101 stuff.

“God witnesseth that there is no God but Him, the Gracious, the Best-Beloved. All grace and bounty are His. To whomsoever He will He giveth whatsoever is His wish. He, verily, is the All-Powerful, the Almighty, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting.” Gleanings, p. 73

“Say: O people! Let not this life and its deceits deceive you, for the world and all that is therein is held firmly in the grasp of His Will. He bestoweth His favor on whom He willeth, and from whom He willeth He taketh it away. He doth whatsoever He chooseth.” Gleanings, p. 209

“No God is there but Him. All creation and its empire are His. He bestoweth His gifts on whom He will, and from whom He will He withholdeth them. He is the Great Giver, the Most Generous, the Benevolent.” Gleanings, p. 278

“Say: He ordaineth as He pleaseth, by virtue of His sovereignty, and doeth whatsoever He willeth at His own behest. He shall not be asked of the things it pleaseth Him to ordain. He, in truth, is the Unrestrained, the All-Powerful, the All-Wise.” Gleanings, p, 284

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes, they say God doesn't want robots, but then they expect the followers to program themselves to follow the laws and moral codes of the religion without question... to subordinate their will to do God's will. Like programmed machines... or robots.

No, we do not expect followers to program themselves to follow the laws and moral codes of the religion without question. We expect them to use their free will to choose to follow the laws and moral codes of the religion, once we have investigated that religion and we believe it is a true religion from God.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

It might appear to be, but nothing really changes. Reality is still reality, whatever we might believe about how or why things happen.

Things changed for me when I left Christianity. The world made more sense. I realize that you are not Christian, but here are some of the benefits of leaving that religion:

[1] Hope for man and the world. When I was a Christian, I thought we were all goners. It was always the end times, and we were all praying for Jesus to come again and destroy the earth. But now, I know that it is possible that man can go on until he evolves into something better, and then again.

[2] Freedom from fear of damnation. Freedom from fear of hell. Freedom from fear of Satan. Freedom from fear of demons and devils. Freedom from fear of my own thoughts.

[3] Freedom from the illusion of being constantly watched by an angry, judgmental, authoritarian, overlord.

[4] When a cute little doe-eyed girl dies of leukemia sometime later today (and one will somewhere), you'll have the comfort of knowing that it was just rotten luck, and not something caused by or allowed to happen by someone who could have helped but didn't.

[5] Respect for mankind, life, earth and the universe. Christianity teaches that animals are soulless meat bags to be exploited as man sees fit, and man a constitutionally diseased creature. Then it teaches that the whole material world including earth is made of a base substance - matter - which is only transitory. Christianity demeans mankind enough to make the phrase "the flesh" derogatory, and the material world enough to make the word "worldly" an insult.

[6] Freedom from an intellectual system that demeans science and reason.

[7] Freedom from an ethic that defines love in terms of torture and crucifixion, or a pardon from eternal torment, or that teaches that faith, obedience, worship, and piety are virtues. They are not.

[8] Hundreds of thousands in tithes saved, much of which went to travel and art, and much went to savings to permit early retirement and improve financial security. And what I do give is spent on making lives better rather than promoting religion, which does not.

[9] Thousands of hours not spent in churches, praying, and reading the bible. I have learned much more reading unknown numbers of better books than that one. What's that worth?

That's just what leaving Christianity did for me as an individual. The Enlightenment gifted mankind with science and the modern liberal, democratic state with guaranteed personal rights and freedoms.

If there is no author to reality, and it has no cosmic significance, then it makes even less sense.

As I just outlined, the world makes more sense if one just drops the god concept from his ontology. I comment on that frequently, including on this thread. The flaws in holy books make sense. The failure of prayer to modify anything but psychological states makes sense. Man's conflicted mind makes sense. Predation in the animal kingdom makes sense. Infectious diseases and cancer make sense.

It does need a God since God maintains the world, like a maintenance man.

Science has shown that that is not the case. The universe needs no intelligent oversight. There is nothing being maintained. Electrons know where to go in a circuit without anybody pushing or pulling them. Planets stay in orbits without anybody guiding them.

The nightmare would be for you to discover after you die that the purpose of life was to know and worship God, and instead you defined your own purpose which was not really your purpose at all.

Agreed. That's consistent with what I said.

I do not believe that God wants us to praise Him for eternity, that is not the purpose for which we were created.

Whatever you believe that purpose is, if it's not my purpose it doesn't matter to me. I can't identify with the attitude that my purpose isn't actually mine, but somebody else's. In fact, to be thought of that way by anybody is irrelevant. If I take a job, my employer's purpose in hiring me is not my purpose for being there. If I buy a house, the seller's purpose for selling it to me is not my purpose for buying it.

God is not a short order cook.

I used to say something similar when people would come into my medical practice and order an EKG, for example. This isn't a 7-ELEVEN. You don't shop here. Besides, according to you, God is a maintenance man.

 

[samtonga43]

Yes, I think it is, because God created a world which is a Storehouse of Suffering.
Since God created the conditions in which humans suffer, that means that means it must be God's will that people suffer.

It means nothing of the sort, Tb. It's time you enrolled in a course on basic logic. You really believe that God wants people to suffer? You have been a Baha’i for many years and this is what you believe about God? Unbelievable. You cast a slur on the faith you profess.

As a Christian, I believe it is God’s will that people choose. After all, non-literal Eve chose to eat a non-literal apple from a non-literal tree. The alternative to choosing is a race of robots.

If you have children or grandchildren, try to imagine what your relationships would be like if there was no choice about feelings for each other.

Ugh!

 

[muhammad_isa]

As I just outlined, the world makes more sense if one just drops the god concept from his ontology.

On a "worldly" level, it might appear to .. but it does not answer any question about why we exist .. I cannot just ignore that question.

If you have an alternative hypothesis, other than "who cares why" or "maybe an alien from outer-space is responsible", I would be interested.

 

[Trailblazer]

That's just what leaving Christianity did for me as an individual. The Enlightenment gifted mankind with science and the modern liberal, democratic state with guaranteed personal rights and freedoms.

As I just outlined, the world makes more sense if one just drops the god concept from his ontology.

What you just outlined is the Christian concept of God and religion. The world would make NO SENSE to me if I believed that mumbo jumbo. It would be enough to turn me into an atheist in short order!

It's sure a good thing none of that is consistent with the God that really exists.
If I am going to believe in God and a religion, it would only be the Baha'i Faith, since that's the only reason I ever believed in God in the first place.

the world makes more sense if one just drops the god concept from his ontology.
The flaws in holy books make sense. The failure of prayer to modify anything but psychological states makes sense. Man's conflicted mind makes sense. Predation in the animal kingdom makes sense. Infectious diseases and cancer make sense.

The flaws in holy books, the failure of prayer to modify everything, man's conflicted mind, predation in the animal kingdom, and infectious diseases and cancer all make sense if there is no God. They also makes sense if there is a God, because it is easily explained why each and every one of those exist in the presence of a God.

Science has shown that that is not the case. The universe needs no intelligent oversight. There is nothing being maintained. Electrons know where to go in a circuit without anybody pushing or pulling them. Planets stay in orbits without anybody guiding them.

You do not know any of that, you only believe it. You do not know that the universe needs no intelligent oversight, that there is nothing being maintained, that electrons know where to go in a circuit without anybody pushing or pulling them, or that planets stay in orbits without anybody guiding them.

Science cannot prove that the universe needs no intelligent oversight because science cannot prove that God does not exist. Regarding HOW the universe is maintained and WHO is responsible for the maintenance, all you have is a personal pinion, a belief that it runs all by itself. That is all I have, a belief that God is maintaining it, but at least I am honest enough to admit it.

Agreed. That's consistent with what I said.

No, regarding what would be a nightmare, what I said is not exactly consistent with what you said.
You said that it would be a nightmare to discover that there a god that created you to praise it for eternity.
I said it would be a nightmare for you to discover after you die that the purpose of life was to know and worship God.

Are you saying that if you died and discovered that 'the purpose you had made for yourself' was not what the purpose you were created for, you would not regret not having known that in this life? In other words, if you died and found out there is a God who had another purpose for you than the one you made for yourself, you would not regret not having known that in this life?

Whatever you believe that purpose is, if it's not my purpose it doesn't matter to me. I can't identify with the attitude that my purpose isn't actually mine, but somebody else's.

This is not a matter of what I believe, it is a matter of what actually is. If there is a God and God created you (and everyone else) for a particular purpose, that would be 'the purpose for which you were created' whether you liked that purpose or not.

I used to say something similar when people would come into my medical practice and order an EKG, for example. This isn't a 7-ELEVEN. You don't shop here. Besides, according to you, God is a maintenance man.

That's right, God is a maintenance man, not a short order cook who takes orders, and God is not Superman, who rescues everyone from all their troubles. If atheists could just grasp these two simple concepts that would be progress.

 

[muhammad_isa]

..You really believe that God wants people to suffer?
...
As a Christian, I believe it is God’s will that people choose.

..but that is too simplistic.
Do you not believe that God punished Pharaoh and his army by drowning them?
Do you not believe that some of us will end up in hell for a time?

I'm not suggesting that God wants us to sin, and have to suffer .. but it does seem part of reality.

May God forgive us .. we are sinners.

 

[samtonga43]

[5] I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:
[6] That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.
[7] I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
[8] Drop down, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies pour down righteousness: let the earth open, and let them bring forth salvation, and let righteousness spring up together; I the LORD have created it.
[9] Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?

No, Tb. Biblical context is much more than copy/pasting a few verses surrounding the verse in question.

Understanding context involves looking at the literal meaning and the historical setting.

It involves asking yourself some questions. For example;
To whom is it addressed?
How was it understood at the time when it was written?
Synthesis is also involved, together with a focus on the outline and structure of the book, the chapter and then the paragraph.
***
(I expect that all these eths and ests and hasts and potsherds are the first barrier to understanding context).

 

[samtonga43]

What you just outlined is the Christian concept of God and religion.

Your logical fallacy in this instance is rash generalization. Try to work out why.

 

[Trailblazer]

It means nothing of the sort, Tb. It's time you enrolled in a course on basic logic. You really believe that God wants people to suffer? You have been a Baha’i for many years and this is what you believe about God? Unbelievable. You cast a slur on the faith you profess.

That is what the Baha'i Faith teaches, that tests are as a gift from God. If they are a gift from God that means God wants people to suffer. That is basic logic.

“Thou hast written concerning the tests that have come upon thee. To the sincere ones, tests are as a gift from God, the Exalted, for a heroic person hasteneth, with the utmost joy and gladness, to the tests of a violent battlefield, but the coward is afraid and trembles and utters moaning and lamentation. Likewise, an expert student prepareth and memorizeth his lessons and exercises with the utmost effort, and in the day of examination he appeareth with infinite joy before the master. Likewise, the pure gold shineth radiantly in the fire of test. Consequently, it is made clear that for holy souls, trials are as the gift of God, the Exalted; but for weak souls they are an unexpected calamity. This test is just as thou hast written: it removeth the rust of egotism from the mirror of the heart until the Sun of Truth may shine therein. For, no veil is greater than egotism and no matter how thin that covering may be, yet it will finally veil man entirely and prevent him from receiving a portion from the eternal bounty.”
Bahá’í World Faith, pp. 371-372

God sends tests that cause suffering in order to distinguish His servants from each other. Some believers fall under the pressure. I know more than one Christian from other forums who have lost their faith in God as the result of the loss of a child.

“Meditate profoundly, that the secret of things unseen may be revealed unto you, that you may inhale the sweetness of a spiritual and imperishable fragrance, and that you may acknowledge the truth that from time immemorial even unto eternity the Almighty hath tried, and will continue to try, His servants, so that light may be distinguished from darkness, truth from falsehood, right from wrong, guidance from error, happiness from misery, and roses from thorns. Even as He hath revealed: “Do men think when they say ‘We believe’ they shall be let alone and not be put to proof?” 5
Bahá’u’lláh, The Kitáb-i-Íqán, pp. 8-9

As a Christian, I believe it is God’s will that people choose. After all, non-literal Eve chose to eat a non-literal apple from a non-literal tree. The alternative to choosing is a race of robots.

I agree that we can choose, but we can only choose what we are able to choose, the rest is in God's Hands and it is our fate. Do you think people choose to lose a loved one, a child or a spouse? Do people choose to get cancer? Do people choose to get raped or murdered? All these cause suffering or death and the one who suffers or dies did not choose to suffer or die. It was their fate for which God alone is responsible.

 

[Trailblazer]

No, Tb. Biblical context is much more than copy/pasting a few verses surrounding the verse in question.

Understanding context involves looking at the literal meaning and the historical setting.

It involves asking yourself some questions. For example;
To whom is it addressed?
How was it understood at the time when it was written?
Synthesis is also involved, together with a focus on the outline and structure of the book, the chapter and then the paragraph.

You asked for the context of a particular verse and that is exactly what I gave you.

Isaiah 45:7
Verse 7 of 25
< Prev 1 ← 5 6 7 8 9 → 25 Next > View in Context
7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

You did not ask for the historical setting, to whom it as addressed, or how was it understood at the time when it was written, or the outline and structure of the book, the chapter and then the paragraph..

You get what you ask for.

 

[Trailblazer]

Your logical fallacy in this instance is rash generalization. Try to work out why.

I said: What you just outlined is the Christian concept of God and religion.
I did not say: What you just outlined is the only Christian concept of God and religion.

More correctly I could have said:
What you just outlined is one Christian concept of God and religion.
There I fixed it.