"Faith" . . . Being held to a standard that is alien to god. Why?

[Deavonreye]

I would like to have a discussion on "faith", specifically . . . how can god hold us to a standard [believing by faith in what is unprovable] when he could never experience such a state?

"Faith" is an illusion. What it means to one person or belief system, . . . it means something else to another. It is supposed to be so powerful, but "faith" in something wrong is one of the biggest follies of mankind, and there have been many of them. The thing is, a person can have "faith" in something, and have it SO strongly, that it causes them an inability to see the actual truth, and they change their life to this fiction. Sometimes to the harm of others. One need only see the aftermath of a suicide bomber with a strong "faith" in Allah.

"Faith is fickle". As for christianity, why hold it as THE standard? If you are the deity of a said religion, why make it as the absolute of acts. . . . when that same deity would be completely unable to know what it is like? Unable to put itself in our shoes, with all the thousands of other "faith beliefs" jockying for position? Especially when this same "faith" is found in equally depraved humans as those without it.

 

[jasoncran]

I would like to have a discussion on "faith", specifically . . . how can god hold us to a standard [believing by faith in what is unprovable] when he could never experience such a state?

"Faith" is an illusion. What it means to one person or belief system, . . . it means something else to another. It is supposed to be so powerful, but "faith" in something wrong is one of the biggest follies of mankind, and there have been many of them. The thing is, a person can have "faith" in something, and have it SO strongly, that it causes them an inability to see the actual truth, and they change their life to this fiction. Sometimes to the harm of others. One need only see the aftermath of a suicide bomber with a strong "faith" in Allah.

"Faith is fickle". As for christianity, why hold it as THE standard? If you are the deity of a said religion, why make it as the absolute of acts. . . . when that same deity would be completely unable to know what it is like? Unable to put itself in our shoes, with all the thousands of other "faith beliefs" jockying for position? Especially when this same "faith" is found in equally depraved humans as those without it.

one's wife requires the same. if i love here alone is that selfish love?i cant love her and another woman at the same time.

 

[Alabaster]

God says that faith is a substance and an evidence. It's a sure thing. It certainly is not alien to God. He gives it because we need it.

Hebrews 11:1 NKJV
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.



Faith is a gift, and we believers have been given a measure of it.

Romans 12:3 NKJV
For I say, through the grace given to me, to everyone who is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think soberly, as God has dealt to each one a measure of faith.

Belief comes as a result of revelation by God. Until one has a revelation, then one is still blind spiritually and cannot comprehend these things.

 

[Deavonreye]

"Hope" is not a form of evidence. Neither is the "unseen", when you're talking about spiritual matters. Nothing that is considered "faith in god" can be tested as a viable evidence, so no, . . . . what WE have to do is something that this god could never understand. Please try to look at what "faith" is instead of relying only on what indoctrination has given to it as "a definition".

This "faith" isn't the "trust in a person" or the "faith in one's ability". This is the "faith" of that which isn't based upon proof. There is no proof, thus "faith" because of [perhaps] a "trust" in what others have said is actually the truth. That isn't evidence either. There's a big difference.

 

[jasoncran]

"Hope" is not a form of evidence. Neither is the "unseen", when you're talking about spiritual matters. Nothing that is considered "faith in god" can be tested as a viable evidence, so no, . . . . what WE have to do is something that this god could never understand. Please try to look at what "faith" is instead of relying only on what indoctrination has given to it as "a definition".

This "faith" isn't the "trust in a person" or the "faith in one's ability". This is the "faith" of that which isn't based upon proof. There is no proof, thus "faith" because of [perhaps] a "trust" in what others have said is actually the truth. That isn't evidence either. There's a big difference.

would you actually serve God if you could see him and had the same requirements?

 

[Alabaster]

"Hope" is not a form of evidence. Neither is the "unseen", when you're talking about spiritual matters. Nothing that is considered "faith in god" can be tested as a viable evidence, so no, . . . . what WE have to do is something that this god could never understand. Please try to look at what "faith" is instead of relying only on what indoctrination has given to it as "a definition".

When God gives me faith to believe for something, I declare it. When it happens I rejoice in the faith and praise the God that brought it to pass. Evidence that faith works.

Maybe your diminutive 'god' doesn't understand it, but my God, who is the 'author and finisher' of my faith---does.

This "faith" isn't the "trust in a person" or the "faith in one's ability". This is the "faith" of that which isn't based upon proof. There is no proof, thus "faith" because of [perhaps] a "trust" in what others have said is actually the truth. That isn't evidence either. There's a big difference.

Yes it really is, as I have said above.

 

[jasoncran]

this adulterous generations asketh for a sign given and none shall be given save that the son of man shall be in the belly of the earth for three days.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Garbage in - Garbage out

how can god hold us to a standard [believing by faith in what is unprovable] when he could never experience such a state?

Ignoring the rest of the diatribe, and focusing on the multiple fallacies in the first sentence:

"Faith" IS NOT a "Standard" of any sort.

Belief in something "unprovable" (that there's no evidence for) isn't "Faith" at all.

Whether or NOT God has "Faith" (I think the Word amply demonstrates that HE does) is unrelated to the issue.

Faith IS:

Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Faith COMES:

Rom 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Abraham's case:

Gen 15:4 And, behold, the word of the LORD came unto him (Abraham), saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.
5 And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.
6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

That's the "Mechanism of FAITH" - it's NOT built on NOTHING - but is simply your DECISION to BELIEVE what God has told you.

When HE shows you the depths of YOUR SIN in terms YOU can understand - you can believe HIM and ask for forgiveness through the Blood of Christ and start living in faith. OR you can give Him the "one finger salute", and walk away back into your darkness. Your decision.

 

[gideon3213]

I would like to have a discussion on "faith", specifically . . . how can god hold us to a standard [believing by faith in what is unprovable] when he could never experience such a state?

"Faith" is an illusion. What it means to one person or belief system, . . . it means something else to another. It is supposed to be so powerful, but "faith" in something wrong is one of the biggest follies of mankind, and there have been many of them. The thing is, a person can have "faith" in something, and have it SO strongly, that it causes them an inability to see the actual truth, and they change their life to this fiction. Sometimes to the harm of others. One need only see the aftermath of a suicide bomber with a strong "faith" in Allah.

"Faith is fickle". As for christianity, why hold it as THE standard? If you are the deity of a said religion, why make it as the absolute of acts. . . . when that same deity would be completely unable to know what it is like? Unable to put itself in our shoes, with all the thousands of other "faith beliefs" jockying for position? Especially when this same "faith" is found in equally depraved humans as those without it.

God operated on pure faith when he spoke the worlds into existance. For before he did that there was nothing! Thus being that there was nothing He had to have faith that what he would speak would indeed happen, and that things that did not prviously exist would come into existance. But despite all of that. What God reqires us to do is not dependant upon what God has or has not experienced! for example, God has never commited adultery; yet he requires us to abstain from it, and turn from it if we are doing it. God has never stolen anything; yet he requires us to refrain from stealing! Just because God has never experienced any of these things, does not mean that he is wrong for requiring us to not do those things!

have a great day

 

[Deavonreye]

would you actually serve God if you could see him and had the same requirements?

This question is one that is kind of one sided. I don't believe that a true god needs to be "served". That would signify a lack that needs to be filled. But I would be more able to understand things if I saw him and had a face to face conversation.

 

[jasoncran]

This question is one that is kind of one sided. I don't believe that a true god needs to be "served". That would signify a lack that needs to be filled. But I would be more able to understand things if I saw him and had a face to face conversation.

you as a child did chores for you parents did you not?
are we not his children?

so what you want is something like a diestic God.

has kids leaves them as a bastards. some God.

 

[Deavonreye]

Re: Garbage in - Garbage out

That's the "Mechanism of FAITH" - it's NOT built on NOTHING - but is simply your DECISION to BELIEVE what God has told you.

When HE shows you the depths of YOUR SIN in terms YOU can understand - you can believe HIM and ask for forgiveness through the Blood of Christ and start living in faith. OR you can give Him the "one finger salute", and walk away back into your darkness. Your decision.

God hasn't "told me" anything. Writings in a book, and followers are not "god telling me something". And as for the crass "one fingered salute", that is your own words, not mine!! And it isn't a TRUE decision until I actually KNOW both sides. Anyone who says different is simply wrong.

 

[Deavonreye]

God operated on pure faith when he spoke the worlds into existance. For before he did that there was nothing! Thus being that there was nothing He had to have faith that what he would speak would indeed happen, and that things that did not prviously exist would come into existance. But despite all of that. What God reqires us to do is not dependant upon what God has or has not experienced! for example, God has never commited adultery; yet he requires us to abstain from it, and turn from it if we are doing it. God has never stolen anything; yet he requires us to refrain from stealing! Just because God has never experienced any of these things, does not mean that he is wrong for requiring us to not do those things!

have a great day

For sake of argument, the "six day creation account, roughly 6,000 years ago", . . . NO, it wouldn't have been "faith" for god when he created becaue he would have forseen it. As for your other conditionals, this is yet another aspect to the question. Holding us to standards that he will never have issues with. We who strive to do good . . . are better than one who can only do good. For example, I am not suddenly better for "not having sex with someone of the same sex". Someone who IS attracted to the opposite sex, and chooses to refrain is better than me. Self control is useless when the object is undesireable.

 

[Deavonreye]

you as a child did chores for you parents did you not?
are we not his children?

so what you want is something like a diestic God.

has kids leaves them as a bastards. some God.

Not at all. Rather, someone like my own dad. Loves me regardless of my actions, and actually makes attempts at spending quality time with me, and sometimes does good things for me. He would be disappointed if I do something wrong, but wouldn't stop caring and helping me through it. THAT is the love of a true father.

 

[Alabaster]

For sake of argument, the "six day creation account, roughly 6,000 years ago", . . . NO, it wouldn't have been "faith" for god when he created becaue he would have forseen it. As for your other conditionals, this is yet another aspect to the question. Holding us to standards that he will never have issues with.

Demanding God to be fallible like us is silly. What does God need faith for? He gives it so we can know Him. When we see Him face to face, we won't need it.

We who strive to do good . . . are better than one who can only do good. For example, I am not suddenly better for "not having sex with someone of the same sex". Someone who IS attracted to the opposite sex, and chooses to refrain is better than me. Self control is useless when the object is undesireable.

ROFL. We are all guilty of every sin before we receive Jesus.

 

[Deavonreye]

Demanding God to be fallible like us is silly. What does God need faith for? He gives it so we can know Him. When we see Him face to face, we won't need it.

You can't TRULY know someone solely on "faith". Can you know Abraham Lincoln by what was written of him? Of course not. Regardless, god demands from us ["faith"] that which he is unable to understand.

ROFL. We are all guilty of every sin before we receive Jesus.

And everytime we rise above it, we accomplish what god cannot.

 

[Deavonreye]

Hey all, can I ask that we shelf this topic until tomorrow? I have to be gone for the rest of today. Thanks!

 

[Alabaster]

[/B]

You can't TRULY know someone solely on "faith". Can you know Abraham Lincoln by what was written of him? Of course not. Regardless, god demands from us ["faith"] that which he is unable to understand.

No, you are unable to understand. You are just spouting gibberish, now.

And everytime we rise above it, we accomplish what god cannot.

Stop while you still seem intelligent. No one can rise above the addiction to sin without the blood of Jesus...which is what God has done for us.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Maybe time to ask him to -

"God hasn't "told me" anything."

Then I'd suggest that you ask Him to Reveal Himself to YOU in terms that YOU can understand. He promised to give wisdom in abundance to WHOMEVER asks for it singlemindedly.

"And it isn't a TRUE decision until I actually KNOW both sides. Anyone who says different is simply wrong."

True - but it sounds as though you're only making excuses for unbelief. If You actually DO WANT TO KNOW - then GO to the one who CAN "Turn your light on" for you -

 

[jasoncran]

Not at all. Rather, someone like my own dad. Loves me regardless of my actions, and actually makes attempts at spending quality time with me, and sometimes does good things for me. He would be disappointed if I do something wrong, but wouldn't stop caring and helping me through it. THAT is the love of a true father.

peter talked about long suffering of god that he doesnt want us to perish

so if your kid was a murder would just that day continue to talk him and not see that he is punished if you had to turn him in?

think about.
one of God's kids kills another and what is God gonna do?

he has to avenge one and comfort him the other?

wait he did that, and the if the offender repents an innocent man took his punishment.

either way the sentence was served and the offender walks because he repented.

sadly that an innocent man paid the price but that is what God had to do.