Non Christians: if the Christian God is real...

[Hermit Philosopher]

I would pray to Him and meditate on Him. I would follow the guidelines of the Bible.

That sounds good, I think.
May I ask why you wrote the word “Bible” in cursive? Just curious.

I do believe that you could be embarking on a very exciting and life-changing, personal phase @Xavier Graham.

All I would say - considering your medical diagnosis - is that you stay off recreational drugs (they are not needed in order to transcend) and always ask yourself: “Does this conclusion that I’m arriving at (about x spiritual aspect) contribute with sufferings to myself and/or to my fellow beings?” If yes, do not act upon your understanding; instead, ask for further spiritual comprehension from God.

In this life, there are two worldly “buckets”: one is filled with sufferings, the other with serenity. By your actions and interactions, contribute as little as possible to that of sufferings and help that of serenity grow.


Humbly
Hermit



Humbly
Hermit

 

[an anarchist]

May I ask why you wrote the word “Bible” in cursive? Just curious.

I italicized it because I think that’s the proper way of writing book names, in lieu of quotations.

All I would say - considering your medical diagnosis - is that you stay off recreational drugs (they are not needed in order to transcend)

Very wise advice. As with the rest of it.

 

[Kfox]

I’m asking non Christians this hypothetical. If the Christian God was undoubtedly real, would you become a Christian? Let’s say the Christian God proved Himself to you, He does whatever He has to to make you believe.

Hypothetically speaking, if the Christian God were proven to be real, I would do everything possible to find out what he wants, and expects. I would be reluctant to take anyone’s word for it I would prefer going to the source. If he is as many Christians describe and is the type to provide eternal torture for those who don’t bow down to him, I would bow down, become Christian, or whatever it takes to keep him from torturing me because I don’t want to be tortured.

 

[Kfox]

If we're taking all of Christianity as a package deal, then one implication of the Garden of Eden story is that humanity has knowledge of good and evil "as God," and our moral sense can't be defective.

That assumes what is written in the Bible is an accurate discription of the Christian God; doesn't it? If flawed humans wrote the Bible, there is a pretty good chance that those who wrote it got a few things wrong; perhaps even the Garden of Eden story.

 

[viole]

Atheists have a huge reservoir of what? Ignorant arguments.


There were some morally repulsive events recorded in the Bible.
There were written as examples and warnings... that we do not follow bad examples. - 1 Corinthians 10:6-11

There is nothing embarrassing about reading about violent acts in the Bible.
Only people who think men do not act violently, or wickedly, would be embarrassed.


No. It's clearly the truth, which you obviously aren't willing to admit

The book promotes it?
Promote - support or actively encourage (a cause, venture, etc.); further the progress of.

No. The verse you quoted does not support or actively encourage the dashing of kids against walls. In the same way it does not support or actively encourage idol worship, rape, theft, etc, although those things are recorded in the Bible.

The Bible is largely historical, and prophetic.
What history is, is a record of events - both good and bad. That's what history is.

Prophecy is relating what would occur in the future - both good and bad..
The fact that the Bible contains prophecy of events that would occur, does not mean it encourages those actions.

You now have me thinking the next thing I will hear an Atheist say is that the Bible promotes nailing people to the cross, and people becoming drunk.


Defend what... a strawman set up by someone desperately clutching at straws? The strawman was burnt.
Maybe build another one. Then try hiding behind that too.

What's sad to me, is that an Atheist so desperate to win their argument, though it's a failed strawman, would try to play off as being correct in their baseless assertion about the verse they cherry picked.

How much more desperate can one be.
For the record... for those who haven't stopped up their ears and going, 'La la la la.'...
The verse prophetically relates how tyrannical Babylon would suffer at the hands of their victorious enemy - Persia.
It gives a graphic detail on the treatment the Babylonians would suffer.

It is no different to when the Bible prophesied that Israelite parents would eat their children while under seige. (Deuteronomy 28:52-57)

It's no different to when the Bible prophesied the destruction of the Jewish temple, by Roman armies, and the woes that would befall pregnant and nursing women.
(Luke 21:20-24)

That's simply prophesying events. Not promoting anything.

Now that your distraction failed, can we get back to the post you didn't address?
Can you answer the question, or would that compromise your position?

I don't know what you mean. The Bible is riddled with orders from God to kill women and children. If that is not promoting, I wonder how you call it. For sure He is not a moral role model.

Ciao

- viole

 

[nPeace]

I don't know what you mean. The Bible is riddled with orders from God to kill women and children. If that is not promoting, I wonder how you call it. For sure He is not a moral role model.

Ciao

- viole

The justice system orders killing of women and children. So what? You have something against killing women and children? What? They are not men?
What makes them special? Gender and age? Isn't that called sexism, and favoritism.

True justice is neither.
The Bible says God doesn't accept bribes... unlike unrighteous humans.
You prefer unrighteousness?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That assumes what is written in the Bible is an accurate discription of the Christian God; doesn't it?

The OP asks us to assume (for the sake of discussion) the existence of the Christian God. I was just trying to clarify how much of the rest of Christianity we should be assuming as part of the exercise.

If flawed humans wrote the Bible, there is a pretty good chance that those who wrote it got a few things wrong; perhaps even the Garden of Eden story.

Or perhaps even the mere existence of God.

But again: in this thread, we're asked to assume certain things for the sake of discussion.

 

[viole]

You have something against killing women and children?

Yes. You don't? Well, that would explain why you like the Bible so much.

True justice is neither.
The Bible says God doesn't accept bribes... unlike unrighteous humans.
You prefer unrighteousness?

Do you think a three month old baby can possibly be unrighteous?

The only good excuse I can find for your God, for killing so many innocents the way He did, is that He does not exist.

Ciao

- viole

 

[blü 2]

I’m asking non Christians this hypothetical. If the Christian God was undoubtedly real, would you become a Christian?

No, but I'd be fascinated to know about God's origins, evolution, metabolism, needs, appetites, reproductive methods and requirements, childhood, education, morality, self-image, agenda, life goals, political views and so on.

And should it be the case that God has extraordinary powers, then the understanding of the nature and employment of those powers would have a very high priority, and potentially there'd be a serious defense aspect.

 

[JustGeorge]

Yeah, I know that about Brahman, but I thought it was Brahmin, I get confused.

Yeah, that can be confusing, and confused me a little at first, too. And then you throw Brahma into the mix...

But basically, Brahman is 'The All'(for lack of a better term), a brahmin is a person in the priestly caste, and Brahma is the creator deity.

 

[Truthseeker]

Where was Israel at that time and where was Judah? Can you pinpoint geographically?

Israel was the northern kingdom, and Judah was the Southern kingdom. Israel was conquered first and the people there dispersed, and are considered the 10 lost tribes. Though I don't know why you asked this question. The location of the two exactly seems very irrelevant.

 

[Truthseeker]

If indeed the bible depicts this god accurately then no, I would not worship or follow such a horrendous being.

I don't believe there's any reason to think that the Old Testament in particular depicts Him accurately, and in the New Testament also there are some things said that I don't consider accurate or are misinterpreted.

 

[firedragon]

Israel was the northern kingdom, and Judah was the Southern kingdom. Israel was conquered first and the people there dispersed, and are considered the 10 lost tribes. Though I don't know why you asked this question. The location of the two exactly seems very irrelevant.

So which writer with which name of God came from Israel and which name came from Judah?

 

[Truthseeker]

Since no Gods are known to exist there isn't anything anyone can claim to know about one, or more. We can know what people believe Gods are, but that is a different thing. What believers believe is not knowledge.

To me knowledge is imparted by Messengers of God, which we learn from, or not. Ideally, we investigate these Messengers and come to a decision ourselves independent of everyone else whether they really are Messengers of God. If they are, they impart this knowledge to us which we also understand for ourselves.

 

[F1fan]

To me knowledge is imparted by Messengers of God, which we learn from, or not.

Well there is no factual or rational reason to believe any Messengers of God are authentic or reliable. Believe at your own risk.

And you aren't really learning anything except dogma from a few folks. That is dogma, not knowledge.

Ideally, we investigate these Messengers and come to a decision ourselves independent of everyone else whether they really are Messengers of God. If they are, they impart this knowledge to us which we also understand for ourselves.

If you notice objective thinkers who have no assigned or invested meaning in Bahai'a don't find the writings credible or believable. This has more credibility as an opinion than true believers. True believers of any religion are notable in their bias towards the ideas they believe true, and their lack of objectivity in assessing these concepts.

If you are an authentic truth seeker, there is some hard truth for you to absorb.

 

[Truthseeker]

I was surprised by that a bit. Is the Bahai faith a pantheistic faith?

Not really, though some Baha'is see it as Panentheistic. Panentheistic is the belief that God is imminent in the Universe and also transcends the Universe.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I’m asking non Christians this hypothetical. If the Christian God was undoubtedly real, would you become a Christian?

Probably.

I can't imagine worse news - the existence of an entity that has that kind of knowledge of me and power over me such that it would and could keep me conscious just to gratuitously torture me forever to the benefit of nobody but other sadists. Can you imagine being born into a more dangerous and hostile universe? I guess if the deity sent everybody to hell rather than just the 90+ percent that died unsaved, that would be 10% worse. What's the best one can hope for? To spend eternity praising a black hole of need? And that's the jackpot, the pie in the sky, the reward promised. Is this what the Christian God wants of me? :

If the Christian God were really God, I would put him at the top of my list of souls to Help. Clearly, the Christian God has many problems. I would guide that god to a Higher Level and Greater Intelligence. I would know I would have that god at least headed in the right direction when he stopped frying his kids. Still, there is much he could learn beyond that.

I think like this, too, but one should expect to be rebuked by believers, who consider it blasphemy to just the deity' intellect and moral fiber. I'm sure the universe would like somebody with my values better than that god. I don't need praise, and I would be there to help, not to looking for anything in return from my creation. I would program people to be good people, which would make them happy people. This biblical god is a monster, setting those kids up for failure in the garden and drowning the world over it's own error and inability to live with it or correct it without killing, and then punishing the kids and their progeny. Who does that to people they love? The Christian god apparently, according to Christians, who call that love. I sure hope they aren't applying that kind of "love" to their children at home.

I consider Brahman a alternate definition of the same one God. We Baha'is also consider what we call as also formless, save that He is not what exists, but all that exists is a manifestation of Him.

How about just abandoning the idea of calling that a god? I'm a humanist, and also have a sense that reality is worthy of my awe, affection, and respect, but I don't personify that. Brahman as described in this thread is closer to my intuition, and seems to be less of a person, which is more to my liking.

Regarding that intuition, I invented a godless "religion" for myself using the language of the bayou song Aiko, a bayou favorite that I came to know listening to the Grateful Dead. It's kind of a tongue-in-cheek expression of my experience of reality. Here it is for those interested. I think the dharmics here might identify.

Spoiler

AIKO – a belief system

This is a personal belief system called AIKO*, which is meant to represent the gratitude that (this) one feels to be included in existence. The creation, FEENO, is a stunning and awesome thing, remarkable not only for its beauty, complexity and potential for beneficence, but remarkable just that it can and does exist and is apparent to us.

That anything at all exists is itself the most fundamental and awe-inspiring mystery (AYE-NA-NAY), one which is a continual source of awe (FIYO), and for which we are deeply grateful (FEE-NA-NAY). That existence should be as rich and robust as we find it is infinitely more remarkable. That we were included in it as conscious beings to experience it even more so, and that that conscious experience includes a faint intuition of divinity that is accompanied by an experience of mystery, of awe and of graitude.

To experience FEENO is the greatest gift. My gratitude that all of this is so is called AIKO, and it is expressed as an affinity for the creation FEENO, and by implication, its source JOCKOMO, whether that be person-like, purposeless and accidental forces, or any other ontogenic entity or entities.

Nothing can be said or known about the creative source of FEENO, an entity termed JOCKOMO. All that can be ascertained about the reality of JOCKOMO is that which is faintly intuited by the mystery faculty called SPYBOY (the faculty of the brain that intuitively produces the experience of mystery or divinity to us), and whatever little bit that the reasoning faculty can add to that.

JOCKOMO may be existent, may have been formerly existent, or something else altogether. It may be substantial (material) or transcendent. It may be plural or singular, finite or immortal, conscious or insentient; we cannot know. Whatever the case, we love it and identify with it through its creation, FEENO by which we intuit JOCKOMO faintly and indirectly.

We do not know if JOCKOMO knows us or can know us. It is not necessary. We are astounded and grateful nevertheless. We are indebted to JOCKOMO for being included in the creation FEENO and being blessed with the faculty of conscious mind, including SPYBOY that generates our intuition of the mysterious and divine, called AYE-NAH-NAY. The awe we feel is called FIYO, and the gratitude that results naturally from these is FEE-NAH-NAY.

AIKO – a belief system
FEENO – the creation
JOCKOMO – the source of the creation FEENO
SPYBOY – the faculty that reveals the mystery and awesomeness of the creation FEENO
AYE-NA-NAY – the intuition of the mysterious and divine
FEE-NA-NAY – the gratitude experienced for being included in the creation
FIYO – the experience of awe

Now listen to a little of the song:

There were two different writers in Genesis, I understand, one from Israel, one from Judah who had different accounts and different names of God who were combined later into one story.

Isn't that a red flag? Those are the fingerprints of man, not a god.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Would you mind my asking, why don't you like the Biblical God

Great question. Others have answered in way that I would agree with. Let me add this from a recent post discussing why what Christianity considers love is not that:

The relationship described is closer to an abusive partner than a loving god. Needing constant praise and making one feel guilty for being human is part of that, as are the severe anger and jealousy issues, allows bad things to happen to you to teach you a lesson, instills fear in you, claims credit for all of your successes and blames you for all the failures, threatens you with torture if you leave him, tells you how much you need him and are dependent on him, gives you credit for nothing, harps an how inadequate you are, and though he is often not there for you requires your unwavering devotion. It's basically, "Don't make me hurt you."

I'm reminded of a Carlin routine:

• "Religion has actually convinced people that there’s an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever ’til the end of time! But He loves you."

You are not appreciative of someone taking you out of a crisis... because they want to, out of the goodness of their heart, and because they love you?

A crisis of this deity's making. I didn't have a crisis until I found myself born into a universe a universe in which I was told that I am unacceptable and will be punished if I don't toe the line. Did you see the abusive boyfriend piece above? He thinks you should be a little more grateful to him as well for all he does for you.

View attachment 63298

I was like that you know. I realized I had a selfish pride. I wanted to be independent and deal with my own problems, by myself, without anyone's help. I changed... to some degree. Still have a ways to go.

What would you say to somebody who left Christianity, assumed that role for himself, and rather than finding it to be selfish or prideful, took responsibility for making decisions in his life, and found that degree of independence essential to making good choices? You offer a story like this, presumably as evidence that we should all just submit to the cross, but that would have been a bad idea for me. I learned that from my Army experience, where people who thought badly had too much control over my life. It's why I knew that I wanted to be self-employed and not under the thumb of mediocrity in some corporate hierarchy of indifference, inefficiency, and incompetence. It worked out well there, too, as I read about others describing their jobs where they are underappreciated, underpaid, overworked, and treated as capital rather than people, something that came to the forefront recently with so many opting out after losing their jobs and realizing that they never wanted to go back.

Christians routinely disapprove of such an attitude, which they call making oneself God, or rebellion, or an escape from accountability. I'm a former Christian. What it was was an escape from the tethers of faith, which were never in my interest anyway.

I understand that this kind of independence would be a disaster for some, and they benefit from structure and clear instructions on what to do. Those are the people that stayed in the military, for example, where life is charted for you. But for others, that's suffocation and an impediment to their own ability to run their own lives in the pursuit of happiness as they understand it, not Wal-Mart.

We have the quality of justice, and the potential to exercise it correctly. That's why for example, if someone murders our family, or one member, we want justice - for the person to pay with their own life. However, so that justice is served, there are laws put in place to make sure that the alleged murderer is not executed wrongly.

Are you referring to justice as seen in the Christian Bible? That's not what I call justice. Man can do better with justice by abandoning Christian principles of justice and replacing them with the output of rational ethics.

The same is true for moral values. We can do better than those in the book. We have.

Adam was created a mortal. His living forever was dependent on obedience to God - It was conditional.

Then it was never in the cards. Eternity is a long time (Woody Allen adds, "especially toward the end"). If disobedience is possible, and one has an eternity for it to manifest, it's inevitable that it will.

Atheists have a huge reservoir of what? Ignorant arguments.

No, they are arguments regarding the inconsistencies in the Bible, including internal contradictions, moral failures attributed to a perfect deity, and errors of science and history.

 

[Truthseeker]

So which writer with which name of God came from Israel and which name came from Judah?

Scholars don't know any of that. They are anonymous. I'm just reporting the scholarly consensus as i know it.

 

[firedragon]

Not really, though some Baha'is see it as Panentheistic. Panentheistic is the belief that God is imminent in the Universe and also transcends the Universe.

Okay. Bahai's believe God is a panentheistic God.

If you could, please give me reference to Bahaullahs books on it. Because I cant remember reading something like that in Al Akdhas or Ikan. But I would like to know where actually its shown. Thanks in advance.