A mortal God?

[felix]

AlexBC,

I was in your position several years ago and looking for a miracle or a sign that I can believe that is "truly" supernatural. So, I went to the Bible to find the places where other pagan worshipers acknowledged God's miracle and power that they cannot do or explain. I was basically preparing myself to face "anyone" including "angel", if happen to appear I must be in a position to "test" and "discern" if he is truly from God and validate the miracle or wonder or sign.

I found in two places:

1. (Exod 8:19) Then the magicians said to Pharaoh, "This [is] the finger of God." But Pharaoh's heart grew hard, and he did not heed them, just as the LORD had said.
2. (Dan 2:47) The king answered Daniel, and said, "Truly your God [is] the God of gods, the Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets, since you could reveal this secret."

I can't expect #1 to happen because I have no need for it and not in a position where I except God to do that for me. If I expect that may be I will be like what Satan was trying to make Jesus do during the temptation. So, I had the next choice which explains, not even the devil will know what is in our hearts.

As in 1Cor 2:11, only man and God knows what is within a man's heart. I have till now, got answers for every "true" prayer in my heart. When a preacher who prophecy prays, I speak to God in my heart and the answer comes from the preacher's mouth while he has no idea why he said that. It is not only a test if the preacher is truly prophesying but confirms that there is a God who listens and answers. There are several things which God did that can't be easily explained here.

Don't except worldly miracles that can be easily explained or deceived and only an evil generation will expect a sign or a wonder as in Matt 12:39.

But expect something Science can't explain but only God can. Pray to God to help you in your unbelief and reveal Himself to you. Seek and you will find. He will reveal in a way that you might have never even imagined.

I am a Christian not because I was born Christian, not because I read the Bible, not because I go to Church, but because, I had an encounter with God which turned me 180 degree from atheist to a "true" Christian who wants to live holy and please God.

Without this "encounter" is not possible for some to truly come to Christ just like Paul. Once this "encounter" happens, you will have a "true" solid foundation on Christ and everything in Scriptures begins to give meaning.

Hence, my only suggestion to you is:

• Don't stop seeking the truth and you will find it.
• Pray to God to help you in your unbelief
• Ask God to reveal Himself to you, as a son wants to see His Father.

 

[Danus]

I'd actually like to know what is meant by

"Love is a transcendent emotion".

What definition of "transcendent" is being applied here.

I've heard that time and time again in Church but aside from a little purple prose never had it actually explained.

As far as I know, the biological grounds for love are quite well understood, the evolutionary basis is understood but I have yet to see any tested examples of its "transcendence" whatever that means.

And i'm sorry, but a case could actually be made that love is just as destructive a force as hate. Look what has been done in the name of love.

Why are you apologizing?

Well AlexBC, the word "transcendent" is defined as; beyond or above the range of normal or merely physical human experience: "a transcendent level of knowledge". Surpassing the ordinary; exceptional. That is the definition being applied here, and you can make a case for whatever you like.

The Love you, and some others are speaking of, is not actually love, but something people have simply used the word Love to define. Your describing biological attraction, or pleasure, approval, or happiness over someone or something. Just a biological response.

If you are good with that weak description then stick with that. However, that definition of love will not get you through this life. That definition of love will leave you hopeless in relationships with others. That definition will have you chassing only what pleases you and you will miss God's blessings for your life. You will be sorely disappointed in this life, if your not already, because you will be chassing nothing but the ordinary.

However if you want to know real Love that transcends; if you want to know and understand the exceptional; that which is above the range of normal, or merely physical, then you will have to open your eyes, ears and mind to the word of God and be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Otherwise you are left in your own will, your own feelings, and you can not know more about it because of your willful unwillingness to know. So which is it for you? Just an emotion; A physical reaction for you? or do you want to know more than that?

If you are nothing but a physical being then just be that. In the end you die and your life is switched off like a light, "click". What's it to you?

 

[AlexBC]

The problem I have is people keep telling me

"oh, you have to have an encounter...let Jesus show himself to you...."

Is there like a spotters guide for this kind of thing? How exactly do I recognize an "encounter". I've been half asleep and heard voices like Kermit in Rainbow Connection which sounded very real. Was THAT God?

Jumping back into the Bible and pouring over passages just seems like it's leading to a self fulfilling prophecy.

If I were to change my position on my recent doubts I would need an encounter that does not involve that kind of...um....self-hypnosis? Self-confirmation bias (is that even a term?!)

 

[Grazer]

The problem I have is people keep telling me

"oh, you have to have an encounter...let Jesus show himself to you...."

Is there like a spotters guide for this kind of thing? How exactly do I recognize an "encounter". I've been half asleep and heard voices like Kermit in Rainbow Connection which sounded very real. Was THAT God?

Jumping back into the Bible and pouring over passages just seems like it's leading to a self fulfilling prophecy.

If I were to change my position on my recent doubts I would need an encounter that does not involve that kind of...um....self-hypnosis? Self-confirmation bias (is that even a term?!)

I agree that kind of message doesn't help anyone if your questions lie elsewhere. I had many doubts but came through them which then helped me come to Christ. I'm not saying that means the same will happen for you. I guess I'm just saying you're not alone in having doubts and if I can help with answers then please let me know.

 

[Danus]

The problem I have is people keep telling me

"oh, you have to have an encounter...let Jesus show himself to you...."

Is there like a spotters guide for this kind of thing? How exactly do I recognize an "encounter". I've been half asleep and heard voices like Kermit in Rainbow Connection which sounded very real. Was THAT God?

Jumping back into the Bible and pouring over passages just seems like it's leading to a self fulfilling prophecy.

If I were to change my position on my recent doubts I would need an encounter that does not involve that kind of...um....self-hypnosis? Self-confirmation bias (is that even a term?!)

Your assuming it's some sort of hypnosis or self-fulfilling thing . You don't see or hear God because you don't want to. You want him to just magically do it all for you, or someone to else to explain it all.

Not everyone is saved from God. You can read about the unsaved in the bible. You can read that some say he does not exist and could care less about him. Since that's your truth then you should be able to relate to that part.

Would you like me to offer you some verses that speak about the unsaved, the lost and ones who do not accept the crazy notion of Christ? Might be comforting to you to know that your not alone in your unwillingness. Be something you can relate to.

 

[Drew]

Love is an emotion.

I suspect that very few people over the age of 30, who have actually engaged life and not withdrawn into their own isolated world, would agree with this. Furthermore, I suspect that most non-Christians (over 30), in particular, would disagree with your assertion.

I suggest that love is generally understood - by those of us who enough life experience to know - as primarily a commitment to furthering the well-being of the beloved. Sure, there is an emotional dimension, but I suggest that is really a side-effect of what is primarily a decision to act toward the beloved in a particular way.

 

[Drew]

The problem I have is people keep telling me

"oh, you have to have an encounter...let Jesus show himself to you...."

Here, I may well incite the ire of at least some of my fellow believers: I think that people who make such statements are fundamentally mistaken (although there may be a grain of truth in what they are saying). I suggest, rather, that the "true" Biblical model of how God is at work in the world has been co-opted by the "self-help it's-all-about-me" pop psyschology movement.

I believe that the Biblical model of how Christian living plays out is basically the following: If you are in Christ, you are a member of a new family and you have a new job. That family is comprised of your fellow Christians and the job is to shape this world according to the Kingdom of God principles that Jesus spent so much time expounding. Yes, you have been "changed" as a person - you have been given the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit.

But, and this is really important, I suggest that this Spirit is not in the business of making you "feel" the presence of God (at least not primarily), but is more focused on shaping you into the kind of person who manifests a Christlike character.

I can get into this more deeply, but I will conclude by asserting that the right way to understand the Christian life is to think in terms of being transformed personally and changing the world for the better, and not in terms of "experiencing" Jesus.

I would not entirely deny the reality of the "experiential" dimension, but I believe it is fundamentally a peripheral aspect of the Christian life.

 

[for_his_glory]

The point being made is that God does not allow people to starve, we do. If we are going to complain to God about people starving, and evil in the world, then we need to be prepared for His question to us. What are you doing about it? Why are you allowing it?

OR....if there is no God, and we want to say it's because of the evil in the world, then the question remains. Why bring God into it if we are willing to leave him out of it?

Exactly what I meant

 

[for_his_glory]

This. This is the kind of thinking that sickens me. God allows people to starve because they havn't accepted him yet!?

That's like a protection racket. That is not a loving god. That is a sick twisted narcicist.

God is our protection and the one who supplies all our needs if you would read Psalms 91 and Philippians 4:19. It's others lack of knowledge that separates them from God as God has called all unto Salvation, but many refuse His calling and would rather blame him instead of helping themselves or helping others. What have you done to help others lately?

 

[Danus]

I suggest that this Spirit is not in the business of making you "feel" the presence of God (at least not primarily), but is more focused on shaping you into the kind of person who manifests a Christlike character.

I can get into this more deeply, but I will conclude by asserting that the right way to understand the Christian life is to think in terms of being transformed personally and changing the world for the better, and not in terms of "experiencing" Jesus.

I would not entirely deny the reality of the "experiential" dimension, but I believe it is fundamentally a peripheral aspect of the Christian life.

I think this is a more correct view to the Christian life then a lot of what's being propagated on the surface of mainstream communication to those seeking Christ.

On a personal note, I have come to terms with the fact that not all are saved, and that it is not of my knowing who is, who's not, or who will, or who won't be. And, while this has changed my own approach to evangelism, I owe no less to the unsaved as I do to the saved. If anything I owe them more. I may not like it, but the unsaved don't have to like it either. That's not my problem. Our reward is in letting Christ work through us, not bringing in a bunch of people who don't want any part of it. So, in that sense I personally work to view evangelism as a privilege more so that a duty.

I honestly feel that this will be more the attitude we'll have to have as we approach the coming age, and see Christianity de-institutionalized in the world.

But, anyway. I like what you said here

 

[Drew]

I am a Christian not because I was born Christian, not because I read the Bible, not because I go to Church, but because, I had an encounter with God which turned me 180 degree from atheist to a "true" Christian who wants to live holy and please God.

Without this "encounter" is not possible for some to truly come to Christ just like Paul.

Of course, I would not presume to deny that you had such an experience.

However, what you write could be read as saying "unless and until one has some 'felt experience' of God's presence, one cannot be a Christian".

Such an assertion is something I would definitely challenge.

 

[stovebolts]

I am noping about you think I must control things, and am afriad of uncontrol.

Ha, you don't like the fact that God allows suffering. You would change it if you could, but you can't. So instead, you try to control who God is by denying his existence.

I am perfectly fine with me being controlless, as this world suggests, but if there is a God, and he is the one you describe, he wouldn't give innocents illnesses, and pain, and suffering.

But he does allow those things. He allowed his own Son to be born in a dingy manger and he died a horrible sinners death. He was beaten and spat upon, and a crown of thorns was pressed into his scull. He was humiliated, and he had nails driven into his hands and feet, and suffered a horrible, and excruciating death. Jesus suffered much, and Jesus was innocent. Yet God allowed that.

What you fail to see, is the benefit of suffering. As I said earlier, it's a reminder of our fallen state as well as how fragile this whole life we live really is. But suffering is much, much more than that...

Love is an emotion that makes us attracted to a mate, and want to be with them, never do anything on purpose that hurts the mate he/she is in love with.

Yet people that love one another hurt each other all the time, and cause much suffering toward one another.

But I think love is more than that. I love my wife, yes that is true. But I also love my Mom and Dad, and I'd hardly call either of them my mate. And to think of my own children, or grand children as a mate is just.. well.. kinda sick if you know what I mean. So I think that Love is a little more than you've described.

I like how the Bible describes love

1 Corinthians 13:4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

That is my def, take what you want from it.

Anytime.

2 Thanks for being welcoming, but until I get banned, I won't leave. I am not breaking the rules being here.

Oh I'm not saying you should be banned. I just think that there is going to come a point where your just going to realize that this isn't a place for you. In the long run one of two things is going to happen. Your either going come to the Lord, or your going to leave frustrated with a chip on your shoulder and against us. I'd simply rather not have you go through the latter.

Good- anything that benefits the wellbeing of the recipient. That action is good. I base people's actions and judge them accordingly to the good verses the bad.

There is strength in weakness... I hope you are able to see this.

 

[Atothetheist]

Ha, you don't like the fact that God allows suffering. You would change it if you could, but you can't. So instead, you try to control who God is by denying his existence.


But he does allow those things. He allowed his own Son to be born in a dingy manger and he died a horrible sinners death. He was beaten and spat upon, and a crown of thorns was pressed into his scull. He was humiliated, and he had nails driven into his hands and feet, and suffered a horrible, and excruciating death. Jesus suffered much, and Jesus was innocent. Yet God allowed that.

What you fail to see, is the benefit of suffering. As I said earlier, it's a reminder of our fallen state as well as how fragile this whole life we live really is. But suffering is much, much more than that...



Yet people that love one another hurt each other all the time, and cause much suffering toward one another.

But I think love is more than that. I love my wife, yes that is true. But I also love my Mom and Dad, and I'd hardly call either of them my mate. And to think of my own children, or grand children as a mate is just.. well.. kinda sick if you know what I mean. So I think that Love is a little more than you've described.

I like how the Bible describes love

1 Corinthians 13:4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.


Anytime.



Oh I'm not saying you should be banned. I just think that there is going to come a point where your just going to realize that this isn't a place for you. In the long run one of two things is going to happen. Your either going come to the Lord, or your going to leave frustrated with a chip on your shoulder and against us. I'd simply rather not have you go through the latter.



There is strength in weakness... I hope you are able to see this.

Sorry, I was focusing on the " Love" one has for the same, or opposite gender of which they want to be with eachother, would you like another definition of the love you desribe?

There is no denying the Bible says quite good things, I am not stupid enough to deny that, nor should you deny that the Bible has things in there that are quite horriific, and tyranical, and capricious.

I am sure you have heard the Dawkin's quote on the OT God?

 

[stovebolts]

Sorry, I was focusing on the " Love" one has for the same, or opposite gender of which they want to be with eachother, would you like another definition of the love you desribe?

There is no denying the Bible says quite good things, I am not stupid enough to deny that, nor should you deny that the Bible has things in there that are quite horriific, and tyranical, and capricious.

I am sure you have heard the Dawkin's quote on the OT God?

Unfortunatly, yes I am familiar with some of Dawkins quotes.

Yes, the bible is full of horrible things. It doesn't sugar coat life at all and even exposes its weakness. That's one thing I like about the bible... and some of it resonates with my life.

 

[Atothetheist]

Unfortunatly, yes I am familiar with some of Dawkins quotes.

Yes, the bible is full of horrible things. It doesn't sugar coat life at all and even exposes its weakness. That's one thing I like about the bible... and some of it resonates with my life.

Alright.

 

[Drew]

There is no denying the Bible says quite good things, I am not stupid enough to deny that, nor should you deny that the Bible has things in there that are quite horriific, and tyranical, and capricious.

I would indeed deny that the Bible really says that God has done anything "horrific, tyrannical, and capricious".

As I have argued in previous posts, it is at least plausible that many of the seemingly "horrific" things that God is described as having done - for example, ordering genocides - are things that God had to do in order to achieve some greater goal.

And, if you are interested, I have some ideas about why God might have had to do those things.

I bring up the chemotherapy analogy again: this cancer therapy could be described as "horrific". Is the doctor a bad person? No, s/he isn't - the doctor is acting in the best interests of the patient.

 

[Atothetheist]

I would indeed deny that the Bible really says that God has done anything "horrific, tyrannical, and capricious".

As I have argued in previous posts, it is at least plausible that many of the seemingly "horrific" things that God is described as having done - for example, ordering genocides - are things that God had to do in order to achieve some greater goal.

And, if you are interested, I have some ideas about why God might have had to do those things.

I bring up the chemotherapy analogy again: this cancer therapy could be described as "horrific". Is the doctor a bad person? No, s/he isn't - the doctor is acting in the best interests of the patient.

Do you believe in a ALL-POWERFUL God?

If you do, then stop saying "had" because, to him, there are ALWAYS other ways to handle it.

You can PM me, and present your case.

 

[Drew]

Do you believe in a ALL-POWERFUL God?

Please do not patronize me. If you think I am being impolite, please try to understand that I would really need to be really quite mentally incompetent to not understand that if God were really all-powerful, my last post would contradict such a belief.

Since I have at least some level of mental competence I, of course, do not believe that God is "all-powerful" in the sense I am sure you mean.

Besides, I have already clearly asserted that I do not believe in a God that is all-powerful in the sense I am quite confident you are talking about.

You can PM me, and present your case.

I would rather present the case "in public", and I hope to do so.

 

[Drew]

What case do I have that God is not "all-powerful" in the sense people usually mean?

1. I believe that this notion of a God who can do anything He wants, as if by magic, is a non-Biblical idea, bequeathed to us from our 'general' culture;

2. I believe that the Bible teaches that God "delegates" some of His power to human beings, as per the first few chapters of Genesis. This is a binding commitment - a door that God has opened and cannot then close. God also makes an equally binding commitment that He will give mankind the responsibility to govern creation. This, too, is a binding commitment.

3. This "experiment" in delegation goes south - mankind abuses his role as embodying some of the power that God has given up. The result - creation is badly damaged.

4. God now has a problem. He has to work within the constraints of His binding commitments - if creation is to be rescued, it must be by human agency.

5. To make a long story very short, God chooses to use the nation of Israel to be the human agency to solve the problem.

This is only part of the story, but to keep things short, I will stop here for now. To give credit where credit is due, and to add some credibility to what I am posting, these ideas are basically borrowed from respected theologian NT Wright.

So its not wacky Drew "cooking up a tale". Yes, the ideas are a little strange, but I suggest they make a lot of sense out of the Biblical texts.

Please note: I am talking specifically about the God that is described in the Bible, not the 'bearded old man in sky looking down scornfully on the earth and achieving his purposes by means of miracles' version of God.

They are not the same at all.

 

[Atothetheist]

Please do not patronize me. If you think I am being impolite, please try to understand that I would really need to be really quite mentally incompetent to not understand that if God were really all-powerful, my last post would contradict such a belief.

Since I have at least some level of mental competence I, of course, do not believe that God is "all-powerful" in the sense I am sure you mean.

Besides, I have already clearly asserted that I do not believe in a God that is all-powerful in the sense I am quite confident you are talking about.


I would rather present the case "in public", and I hope to do so.

Well, if you don't believe so (and you are better than some theists) then you have esstially won the argument. We do not know how much power God has, so you, by the knowledge we do have ( Almost none) of the scope of God's power, can put forth any case, and it becomes a plausible case. The only fault would be you are assuming, that God is real, and your case isn't valid, unless he is there.

You have founded your argument on a assumption, which, as of now, hasn't been proven.

And because you base yourself on TWO assumptions ( one is very reasonable, though) that there is a God, and he is not all powerful, Your case is a fallicious one.

An example would be:

Wizards can do magic, but not all magic is avaliable to Wizards.

The basis, is an assumption that Wizards exist, and then the third assumption is that ALL magic are not aviable to them

If thething you are attributing the things to, is a being in which you have to assume, you can't put up a very good case.

If the premise is unfounded, no matter how good the logic is, the things you attribute to them are also unfounded, and suspect.