The word of God

[poopdogg]

Yes, we've established that "God" is indeed a word and that words are created by people and construct languages by which we communicate.

mm-hmm ya definitely right, even though I'm a Christian. I am not very convinced to believe that there's a GOD co'z I feel that if there's a GOD he should help you on anyway but im the only one who help's myself.

You know what I mean.

[Graham]

poopdogg have you ever seen kids that have parents that give them anything and everything they want? Usually they end up worse than the others.

[poopdogg]

poopdogg have you ever seen kids that have parents that give them anything and everything they want? Usually they end up worse than the others.

yes it's true that they are worse than others I've seen it their parents should be blame on that cause they spoil their child to much.

But that's not my point.  I won't say anything now about this topic then you should understand that I know your an open-minded person.

[Graham]

I won't say anything now about this topic then you should understand that I know your an open-minded person.

.... and who is the one putting God in a box here?

[Mangled*]

.... and who is the one putting God in a box here?

[Smegma]

I won't say anything now about this topic then you should understand that I know your an open-minded person.

.... and who is the one putting God in a box here?

Both?

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

I think on the one hand I think you'd have to be quite ignorant to interpret scripture literally if I may take for example the talking snake from Genesis who tells Eve that eating the apple from the tree will not kill her. If you were to believe literally that there was a talking snake then you're kind of ignoring the fact that snakes don't have the ability to talk and never historically could. - This isn't a great example, I know.

I personally think you'd have to be ignorant to assume that just because something is a certain way in the present, that's how it's always been.  But, aside from that, I'm actually pretty impressed at how open-minded and non-judgmental you've been in this thread.

A lot of interpretation issues of the bible come from evil people not getting their languages correct. My favorite example:

In Genesis, if you go back to some of the original hebrew texts, and literally translate it into english, it actually says PERIODS OF TIME instead of DAYS. Could be days, or could be billions of years  Therefore, all those people that think that the Earth is 6000 years old are immediately invalidated.

There are countless minor things like that in the bible that are interesting to notice.

Source? I've heard the opposite argument, that since the exact same word is used in Genesis for "days" as in other books, they should be considered literal days.  At any rate, let's assume that they're periods of time (which still could mean days, or even seconds).  Let's assume further that they're long periods of time.  Now you have minor issues where the plants on day 3 have to wait millions of years for the sun to come up on day 4, and millions of more years for the pollinating insects to come on day 6.  Clearly, those "periods of time" can't be referring to millions of years.


But, moving on.  How do I feel about God? It's hard to say.  I'm a Christian, but I'm far from a devout one.  I'd like to be, but little things keep popping up that at the time are more interesting than God.  That's a shame too, because I'd really like to know God better.

What is God? Well, he is the epitome of all that is good and all that is holy.  Everything God wills is good; everything God does is good.  Acting according to his plan is doing good.  Acting opposite to his plan is doing evil.  Because God defines good, he can never do something evil, as those actions would become good by means of being from him.

How can a God love people, the insignificant bits of matter that are essentially like dust to him? It's because he created us in his image.  There's a shadow of what God represents in all of us, and that binds us to him.  Unfortunately, because we're not God and because we haven't seen God for who he truly is, we are often prone to evil.

Now, there's a minor problem.  Being that God is all that is holy and good, he cannot have anything that's not holy in his presences.  That's not a choice he explicitly made; that's just the nature of being the epitome of holiness.  So, unfortunately, every human is disqualified from being in his presence even by sinning once.  Luckily, Jesus was willing to take that sin from us, go to hell as a punishment, and defeat Satan there.

But because I'm not trying to preach, I'll move on.  God cannot directly interact with us as sinners, but he has other methods of reaching us.  This is where the Holy Spirit comes in.  The Holy Spirit is our link between God and man.  The Holy Spirit is the source of believers' gifts, such as prophecy, healing, speaking in tongues, and so on.  It is also sort of a source of inspiration to become more like God.  You may hear people talking about how the Holy Spirit moved them to do this or that.  The Holy Source is the cause of unnatural peace and calmness in trying situations.  It's the thing that kills your desire for earthly things and motivates you to pursue Godly things instead.  It's what gives you joy when you're singing praise to God or listening to a powerful sermon.

Have I experienced God in my life? Well, not as much as I'd like, but that's due to my lack of efforts in trying to forge a relationship with him.  Unfortunately, as I mentioned earlier, worldly things have a way of being more appealing than studying the Bible.  However, I have noticed that when I tithe, I always get reimbursed in some way.  I've noticed that when I pray (in a Godly mindset, of course), I tend to get what I request.  I know that asking God to change my mood and feelings towards things works.

Is this just my personal experience? Of course.  Are there other explanations for what I've felt and experienced? Maybe.  But this is my faith and it works for me.  Besides, there's some saying that it's better to believe in God when no God exists than to not believe in God when one does exist.  If my religion is nothing more than a get-out-of-hell-free card, I'll take that.  But if it's also capable of influencing my life and making me a better person, then I'll definitely take that too.

[KorrupT MerC]

(just based on christianity, i dont know much about other religions.)

Thats the problem with most people and religion, they believe that they can just use religion as a 'get-out-of-hell-free' card and so they call themselves christians and they dont do the work.

Sure they'll go to church, every so often you know, when they feel like it; sure they'll pray to God and most likely ask him for something, instead of giving thanks; they dont spread God's word as he intended, they keep it to themselves; all things that most people dont consider, they overlook it, most likely because its too much of an inconvience or (insert excuse here); yeah, maybe God will understand if i do things my way.

Christianity may be a big religion, but very few 'real' believers, very few who use it as more than a 'get out of hell free' card.

I dont think its truely a 'get out of hell free' card, unless you view it as more than that, like how gamer explains, someone who lives like that, according to the bible, would go to Hell. (remember, we are created in God's image, and no one likes to be taken advantage of)

Why do people call themselves 'christians' if they live like that? Now, i am being hypocritical, as i do the same exact thing as gamer explains, except that i know God doesnt give us anything, he gives us the opportunity but ultimately we have to do it. I do not claim to be christian because i do not follow God as he would like me too, according to the bible(but this isnt about me). Honestly, in the name of christianity, dont claim it unless you are doing it for more than a 'get-out-of-hell-free' card, you give the religion a bad name, and you give false hope to others who think that just calling themselves 'christians' will send them to heaven.

[Smegma]

If you take the bible metaphorically (to all those who do), where do you stop?

Do you believe that God made the world in 7 days?
If not, do you believe that God made the world at all?

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

If you take the bible metaphorically (to all those who do), where do you stop?

Do you believe that God made the world in 7 days?
If not, do you believe that God made the world at all?

And furthermore, if you doubt the authority of Genesis, why should you trust the authority of the New Testament, where it outlines the only way to get saved? Is the Bible only true when it's convenient?

[Demonic]

Are you circumsized Gamer?

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

Are you circumsized Gamer?

Yep.  But even if I wasn't, there's a difference between not doing what the Bible says and not believing what it says.

[Demonic]

You don't do what it says unless you believe it is meant to be taken literally, as the sole way to save your soul.

How about kosher foods? ( I have to admit not even expecting a 'yes' to my previous question. )

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

You don't do what it says unless you believe it is meant to be taken literally, as the sole way to save your soul.

Right, which is why I used the negative.  Doing what the Bible says implies belief in its truth, but belief in its truth doesn't mean you'll do what it says.  I'm guilty of all sorts of things that the Bible says I shouldn't do, but that's not because I believe that those things are right.

How about kosher foods? ( I have to admit not even expecting a 'yes' to my previous question. )

Why not? I was under the impression that circumcision was a pretty common practice these days.

At any rate, I do not eat only kosher foods, just as I don't sacrifice sheep every time I sin.  The New Testament brought a whole new set of rules that invalidated many of the Old Testament practices.  But it's worth noting that a change in rules is not the same as a change in history.

The Old Testament rules were undeniably true for their time period.  However, they only applied to that time period.  Creation, on the other hand, is an event, not a rule.  Events cannot be valid at one time and invalid at another.  There's no way that creation as an event, if it is true, can be falsified so that it's not true.

Consider the Prohibition era.  At one point in time it was illegal to buy, sell, and consume alcohol.  Now it's not.  However, the fact that Prohibition happened can never be altered, even if the rules that applied to that time were changed.  And it can also never be altered that the rules were true and applicable during that time period, regardless of what they are today.

[Demonic]

My apoligies: here, in conservative Yurop, mostly only jews or muslims are circumsized ( and some gay people ). The western it gets, the more common it is, and it may have it's medical benefits, but I'll take daily showers over cutting The Admiral.

A jewish friend of mine who holds some speeches at their annual religious camp put kosher eating and circumsision ( and for the sake of fun, pubic hair trimming ) as a cultural habit: as time passes, this must be sorted to see which part of it is actual culture and which is nothing more than a once beneficial practice that had overgrown it's use, becoming more of a burden.

The Prohibition era is a pretty peg-legged example: at that rate, we're in another prohibition era right now, added up with a global anti-drug war against petty smokers and an ever-growing black market. Those rules and these rules are not practical, benefical or for the sake of a greater good in any way, but rather serve lobbies and tight groups - but 'tis off-topic.

Let me put another point. Taken an omnipotent being, which would make more sense? Creating everything in six days, building it up piece by piece, or making it so that things will sort themselfes out within billions of years, like a self-extracting pack? Putting imagination to the test, which is more hardcore? Also, which is absolutely scientifically unsound ( and has been for the last couple of hundred years ) and which is more acceptable?

Literal understanding of the Bible is like a getaway for those with box-closed minds.

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

Let me put another point. Taken an omnipotent being, which would make more sense? Creating everything in six days, building it up piece by piece, or making it so that things will sort themselfes out within billions of years, like a self-extracting pack? Putting imagination to the test, which is more hardcore? Also, which is absolutely scientifically unsound ( and has been for the last couple of hundred years ) and which is more acceptable?

If you were designing a robot, would you make thousands of self-assembling nanobots and see what happened, or would you just build the robot the way you wanted to?

And why should God, who can see the past, present, and future simultaneously, bother with evolution? If he does have feelings, then the thrill of creation would be in the act of creating, not in watching organisms take excessively round-about ways to get to the design that he had already planned.  Seems to me like the best course of action is to make animals the way you want to, then give them the ability to adapt to the environment that you know will change over time.

God's motivations aside, the concept of evolution is completely incompatible with the Bible.  Why should God associate with humans if evolution is true? They're just animals like everything else, only they happened to evolve intelligence.  I know there are people who will jump on me for saying this, but evolution is essentially chance, and God would have no reason to associate with humans just because they happened to be evolutionarily lucky.  Also, humans wouldn't have souls and spirits any more than animals would, meaning that either every living thing would go to heaven or hell, or dying is final.  It gets more complicated than it's worth to argue that God arbitrarily picked a point in the evolution of man to determine that they were human and worth giving a soul to, especially since the whole point of evolution is that no divine intervention is required.

If, on the other hand, God specifically created humans like the Bible says he did, then there's all the reason in the world for him to interact with us.  We're made in his image; we're more than just animals.  A conscience isn't some adherence to arbitrary social norms; it's representing true, absolute morality.  Prayer and salvation can happen because and only because we're created specifically and intentionally by God; it would make no sense any other way.

[Smegma]

If your God than why do anything? Why not?

[Keron Cyst]

Heh, that is at first unanswerable. One of the great Roman emperors (I think Justinian) declared that that was because "He wanted to"—nothing more, nothing less. The Bible doesn't actually directly say anything about that, but you must keep in mind that we are made "in His image," so His behavior is not vastly different from what a person would be if he was stripped of sin and imperfection and was pure holiness in all its majesty, and moreover was omnipotent, omniscient, immutable, and so on and so forth. Which would you or I rather do, in any situation (particularly of boredom), really—stagnate, or do something creative? I know what I'd want to do, even when momentarily assuming a non-believing standpoint!

I don't like how many religions try to find believers forcefully.

And you put forth that declaration so boldly! Every religion—no, every belief must spread, naturally; everyone spreads him-/herself. Every post here tries to convince you that it is correct. Every website in the worldwide web (well, most, anyways ) wants to persuade you that it correct in whatever issue it regards. Ultimately, nothing is "neutral"; even the stance of neutrality is a positive issue (and by that I refer to the economic definition of "positive," that it is intentionally propelling itself to the people it reaches out to). Motive, motive! But HOW these are spread—peacefully and not intrusively, or otherwise—is the question. There is nothing wrong with trying to recruit others to your cause, in the act itself (unless of course you yourself in the back of your mind consider it of no worth or value ).

By the way: there, depending on the method of spreading, can we already rule out beliefs whose doctrines are to gain followers by force.

... I can understand people passing on a religion to a person that is in some personal crises that needs that 'higher authority' to lend them a hand [technically a placebo effect in my eyes]...

That is true. That is very true. In the naturalistic sense, the psychological boost that comes from submitting to an all-powerful God and thus fearing nothing can be immense, especially in the lives of people who were not already born into believing homes or atmospheres. The problem is that you can't gain this kind of relief/comfort/energy/whatever you wish to call the Holy Spirit ( ) by simply pretending to believe in it, because with all mental veils uncovered you would know that that's not the case. You must truly believe.

Thats the problem with most people and religion, they believe that they can just use religion as a 'get-out-of-hell-free' card and so they call themselves christians and they dont do the work.

You hit it SPOT ON! It isn't like that. If you are selfishly believing just to get to heaven, or massively sinning with the idea that you'll repent in the end and be forgiven of it all ("supposedly" in alignment with Christianity's doctrine), you are not really believing since you're just manipulating it to your own desire, and so your future may not be so bright. You really must wholeheartedly abide by it constantly or it just becomes a mask, no matter how well-worn, to be ripped off at the end of all things. I even trashed Soldat on my comp. and I barely even game anymore in general, because I ultimately realized that it was detracting from the true priority that I should be holding. (Now note that in this particular example, this is just the case with me in particular—I'm not saying all Christians absolutely must abandon Soldat if they are to truly follow their beliefs, but everything I personally get involved in, I completely dedicate myself into to the point of losing sight of the real priority. So I needed to kick it out.)

... I don't think there's anything wrong with me that calls for a total conversion to like, Christianity. Heck, it's the same morals and stuff I practice now, give or take a few, just repackaged under a different brand, haha.

Haha. Mmmmmmmmm... that's, yeah... that's an issue many tend to have, when it comes to something like (if you'll excuse the particular focus here! xD) Christianity. A foundation of Christianity is based on perfection—as Ravi Zacharias put it, Christ did not come to Earth "to make bad people good. He came to make dead people live." I'm sure none of us ate our victims like Jeffrey Dahmer or slaughtered millions like Hitler—their cups were definitely pure mud, haha. But would you drink a cup of water with even a sprinkle of dirt in it? Christianity's focus is on submission—then, and only then, can you strive for true greatness and peace and satisfaction and well being in the community and society around you.

If God is everywhere then he is merely a concept.

This may be nitpicking but I think the original sentence should have been worded "God's presence is everywhere." God cannot be found in all beliefs (such as Buddhism, which completely ignores God).

Even within one religion, if God is self-interpreted then that means there are millions of different people with a different interpretation of what God is and isn't... How could their 'Gods' possibly all be the same one?...

They aren't. Beliefs are easily contradictory, and we're hopefully in the process of taking down one of the clearly incorrect ones (Scientology, namely ). Everyone strives for the whole, objective truth, and ultimately not every group is correct when it comes to the crux of the matter. (I think I might be missing Smegma's point, though.)

[Smegma]

So if we are created in his image, the world was made in seven days, and all other things should be taken literally?

If God is present everywhere, then he must be present in all beliefs.

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

If God is present everywhere, then he must be present in all beliefs.

And he is.  Any religion that worships any sort of deity or deities is trying to pin down who or what God is.  Any religion that has no god but is built on compassion and good works has God in it by nature of their godly actions (even if it's not intentional).  Even religions that discard the notion of any God at all or are devoted to the devil and evil are still often built on some sort of search for truth, and it's God's will that people seek the truth.  That's the nature of humanity: By being created in God's image, everything we do must have some minor aspect of God in it.  Otherwise we'd be no better than Satan and demons, who are beyond redemption.