Conversations with god

MooseJam

I was in the book store last night and I spotted this Conversations with God: An Uncommon Dialogue

This guy Neale Donald Walsch claims he wrote a letter to god and he got a reply, the whole book is a transcription of his conversation, like literally a whole new book with the words of god, what do you make of it ? personally I'd consider him a charlatan , but if you are a very open minded christian is this a book that must be read ?

PDN

MooseJam wrote: »

I was in the book store last night and I spotted this Conversations with God: An Uncommon Dialogue

This guy Neale Donald Walsch claims he wrote a letter to god and he got a reply, the whole book is a transcription of his conversation, like literally a whole new book with the words of god, what do you make of it ? personally I'd consider him a charlatan , but if you are a very open minded christian is this a book that must be read ?

If you are an open-minded non-Christian, and don't mind wasting a few euro, then you may well want to buy this book.

I can't see any Christian, open-minded or otherwise, wanting to spend money on a book that contradicts the Christian faith and the Bible on the basis of what some guy claims is a letter from God.

JimiTime

PDN wrote: »

If you are an open-minded non-Christian, and don't mind wasting a few euro, then you may well want to buy this book.

I can't see any Christian, open-minded or otherwise, wanting to spend money on a book that contradicts the Christian faith and the Bible on the basis of what some guy claims is a letter from God.

How inconsistant of you;):)

Dave!

Isn't Jesus supposed to be coming back to earth at some point in the future? Maybe this is a prelude to it.

Out of interest, why do Christians write off chaps like this almost immediately? What's wrong with this book?

PDN

JimiTime wrote: »

How inconsistant of you;):)

I know. I believe in something that Robin and Wicknight reject, so therefore I must be inconsistent if I try to assess anything else in a rational way.

PDN

Dave! wrote: »

Isn't Jesus supposed to be coming back to earth at some point in the future? Maybe this is a prelude to it.

Out of interest, why do Christians write off chaps like this almost immediately? What's wrong with this book?

Christians believe in the Bible. This book contradicts the Bible and is based on a lot of stuff from non-Christian religions.

BrianCalgary

Thanks for the warning PDN.

What claims are made that contradict the Bible?

robindch

PDN wrote: »

Christians believe in the Bible.

Small point -- christianity requires you to believe the bible rather than believing in the bible. Concrete vs abstract reality and all of that. It's subtle point, but an important one.

Zombrex

JimiTime wrote: »

How inconsistant of you;):)

Not really.

If PDN had said something like

Nonsense, it is highly implausible that God wouldn't reveal himself to this author. Think about it

then yeah, that would be rather inconsistent, considering the New Testament is a revealed book that contradicted the teachings of the original religion it was build upon.

To dismiss one while accepting another would be rather silly. This book is as plausible as the New Testament (or most religious books). But he is certainly free to decide which one be believes. Which is why Jewish aren't Christians.

Pompey Magnus

PDN wrote: »

Christians believe in the Bible. This book contradicts the Bible and is based on a lot of stuff from non-Christian religions.

If the book did not contradict the Bible and was based on orthodox Christian teachings would you be happy to believe that God really did send a letter back to the author?

JimiTime

Wicknight wrote: »

Not really.

If PDN had said something like

Nonsense, it is highly implausible that God wouldn't reveal himself to this author. Think about it

then yeah, that would be rather inconsistent, considering the New Testament is a revealed book that contradicted the teachings of the original religion it was build upon.

To dismiss one while accepting another would be rather silly. This book is as plausible as the New Testament (or most religious books). But he is certainly free to decide which one be believes. Which is why Jewish aren't Christians.

LOL. Ok WN. Lessons been learnt from other thread, so I wont waste ur time with a meaningful response.

kelly1

MooseJam wrote: »

I was in the book store last night and I spotted this Conversations with God: An Uncommon Dialogue

This guy Neale Donald Walsch claims he wrote a letter to god and he got a reply, the whole book is a transcription of his conversation, like literally a whole new book with the words of god, what do you make of it ? personally I'd consider him a charlatan , but if you are a very open minded christian is this a book that must be read ?

Hello MJ, I haven't read this one but I'll bet it doesn't have a whole lot to say about the enormity of sin and the consequences thereof? I'd bet the reality of Hell is nowhere to be found in this book. I'd be fairly sure too that the book says or implies that all religions lead to God. I would imagine too that it doesn't mention the fact the Jesus is the only way to Heaven and to God.

There's no shortage of false prophets around these days.

Galvasean

I preferred Father Ted's take on what happens when you write to God.

AAAAAAARRRRGGGGGHHHH!!!! He didn't write back. Feck it anyway!

jaffa20

Interesting. i was reading reviews on amazon and it sounds good. i might give it a read and make up my own mind though. I'd advise some of the others to take their head out of the bible and do some critical thinking of their own too. After all, we were blessed with that weren't we?

JimiTime

jaffa20 wrote: »

I'd advise some of the others to take their head out of the bible and do some critical thinking of their own too. After all, we were blessed with that weren't we?

You believe that belief in God equates to a lack of critical thinking?

jaffa20

JimiTime wrote: »

You believe that belief in God equates to a lack of critical thinking?

No, i believe that believing and following the bible equates to a lack of critical thinking. Anyone can believe in a God. He may not be the same as yours though.

JimiTime

jaffa20 wrote: »

No, i believe that believing and following the bible equates to a lack of critical thinking.

Why is that then? And could you define critical thinking?

Zombrex

JimiTime wrote: »

LOL. Ok WN. Lessons been learnt from other thread, so I wont waste ur time with a meaningful response.

You will instead waste my time with a non-meaningful response ... ?

If you are not interested in debate Jimi would it not be easier simply not to post?

Constantly posting to inform me about how you aren't interested in debating with me is rather silly and just looks like an attempt at point scoring (your points are wrong WK but I'm far far too busy to say why)

:rolleyes: (just for you cause I know you luv them)

JimiTime

Wicknight wrote: »

You will instead waste my time with a non-meaningful response ... ?

Yes.

If you are not interested in debate Jimi would it not be easier simply not to post?

Yes.

Constantly posting to inform me about how you aren't interested in debating with me is rather silly and just looks like an attempt at point scoring (your points are wrong WK but I'm far far too busy to say why)

I'm really not interested in getting into this with you WN:pac:

I think I'm 4-2 up in case your counting. First to 10?

Zombrex

theres the real Jimi I know and love .. you just have just been having a bad day yesterday ... all if forgiven :pac:

JimiTime

Wicknight wrote: »

theres the real Jimi I know and love

I never knew you cared. Especially that much:)

.. you just have just been having a bad day yesterday ...

Not at all. Just got a bit frustrated that PDN's point was strawmanned and attacked. What started as a simple correction (Which is what I was trying to do), turned into a debate about a claim that wasn't made in the first place. I think you all misunderstood what was being said. I clarified what I had to, and left it there, thinking that it was just going to be a simple clarification of the point. When I seen it was turning into more than that, I decided to opt out. My point had been made. Then come the sarcy eyes, and the rest is history:)

Anyhoo.......

amz5

I bought it out of curiosity when I was stuck at the airport for 7 hours last week... I would be slow to write off something of a religious nature just in case, but this was a pile of rubbish. I read a few chapters and gave up. I'm sorry, but I don't know how anyone could read it and make any sense of it.

PDN

BrianCalgary wrote: »

Thanks for the warning PDN.

What claims are made that contradict the Bible?

1. It exalts feelings and experience above God's Word when it comes to deciding what is good.

“if you want to know what’s true for you about something, look at how you’re feeling about it . . . hidden in your deepest feelings is your highest truth.”

“In addition to feelings and thoughts, I also use the vehicle of experience as a grand communicator. And finally, when feelings and thoughts, and experience all fail, I use words.”

“the supreme irony here is that you have all placed so much importance on the Word of God, and so little on experience ... In fact, you place so little value on experience that when what you experience of God differs from what you’ve heard of God, you automatically discard the experience and own the words, when it should be just the other way around.”

So, if your feelings and experiences suggest that retaliation against your enemies is better than turning the other cheek - just scrap the words of Jesus.

If your spouse is injured and deformed in a car accident, and it just 'feels so right' to dump her for the young blond thing next door - hey, just follow your heart instead of all that faithfulness or "till death us do part" junk.

2. It contradicts the biblical teaching on Satan and hell.

And so you have created in your mythology the being you call ‘devil.’

“You have come here to work out an individual plan for your own salvation. Yet salvation does not mean saving yourself from the snares of the devil. There is no such thing as the devil, and hell does not exist.”

“Of course, a real devil does not exist – but I reply to the idiom you choose.”

3. It denies the existence of sin.

“If there were such a thing as sin, this would be it: to allow yourself to become what you are because of the experience of others. This is the ‘sin’ you have committed. All of you.” “You accept that you were born in ‘sin.’ This alleged state of imperfection in which you are said to have come into this world is what your religionists have the gall to call original sin. And it is original sin – but not yours. It is the first sin to be perpetrated upon you by a world which knows nothing of God if it thinks that God would – or could – create anything imperfect. Yet, in order to justify the idea of a punitive God, your religions needed to create something for Me to be angry about. So that even those people who lead exemplary lives need to be saved.”

4. It teaches reincarnation.

“This is a big task, taking many lifetimes, for you are wont to rush to judgment, to call a thing ‘wrong’ or ‘bad’ or ‘not enough,’ rather than to bless what you do not choose.”

“You have had exactly 647 past lives, since you insist on being exact. This is your 648th. You were everything in them. A king, a queen, a serf. A teacher, a student, a master. A male, a female. A warrior, a pacifist. A hero, a coward. A killer, a savior. A sage, a fool. You have been all of it.

5. It denies the primacy of Jesus Christ and reduces Him to the level of another master or guru.

“This is what Jesus did. It is the path of the Buddha, the way of Krishna, the walk of every Master who has appeared on the planet. And every Master has likewise the same message: What I am, you are. What I can do, you can do. These things, and more, shall you also do. You say it is difficult to walk the path of Christ, to follow the teachings of the Buddha, to hold the light of Krishna, to be a Master.”

6. It teaches that we ourselves are God. (probably useful since the author is passing his own thoughts off as a letter from God)

“My purpose in creating you, My spiritual offspring, was for Me to know Myself as God. I have no way save through you. Thus it can be said that My purpose for you is that you should know yourself as Me.”

“You are, have always been, and will always be a divine part of the divine whole, a member of the body. That is why the act of rejoining the whole, of returning to God, is called remembrance. Your job on Earth, therefore, is not to learn, but to re-member Who You Are.”

“Do you want your life to truly ‘take off’? Then change your idea about it. About you. Think, speak, and act as the God You Are.”

7. It denies that there is any objective truth in the spiritual realm. Instead, all roads lead to God.

“Allow each soul to walk its path.” “Yet know this: there is no such thing as an incorrect path - for on this journey you cannot ‘not get’ where you are going.”

8. Since there is no objective truth, nothing is actually right or wrong.

“There are no ‘shoulds’ or ‘shouldn’ts’ in God’s world. Do what you want to do. Do what reflects you, what re-presents you as a grander version of your Self.”

“I have never set down a ‘right’ or ‘wrong,’ a ‘do’ or a ‘don’t.’ To do so would be to strip you completely of your greatest gift – the opportunity to do as you please, and experience the results of that; the chance to create yourself anew in the image and likeness of Who You Are.”

So, for Christians, this book has little or nothing to offer.

Of course if someone is a non-Christian, they may well agree with much of the stuff in the book, particularly if they are the kind of people who watch Oprah and think inane psychobabble is profound.

PDN

jaffa20 wrote: »

Interesting. i was reading reviews on amazon and it sounds good. i might give it a read and make up my own mind though. I'd advise some of the others to take their head out of the bible and do some critical thinking of their own too. After all, we were blessed with that weren't we?

Hmm, here we go again. It really is lazy and dishonest to accuse other people of failing to engage in critical thinking because you don't like their conclusions and beliefs.

An essential part of critical thinking is to assess information by meaningful criteria. Many of us as Christians have examined the claims of the Bible and, by using critical thinking, have concluded that the Bible is a good guide for determining spiritual truth. Therefore, applying critical thinking to someone who claims to have a letter from God will mean measuring his claims against our criteria of the Bible.

Uncritical thinking, if it can be called 'thinking' at all, would be to simply take this guy's new age literary diarrhea at face value.

MrPudding

JimiTime wrote: »

Why is that then? And could you define critical thinking?

Good article about it on wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking

I think it is fairly safe to say someone with beliefs like yourself is not well endowed with critical thinking abilities. Think about it.

MrP

jaffa20

PDN wrote: »

Uncritical thinking, if it can be called 'thinking' at all, would be to simply take this guy's new age literary diarrhea at face value.

Which is what many people raised as christians do, no? A large percentage haven't even opened a bible. By critical thinking, i mean reading a wide array of litterature. Eg Candide by Voltaire, Pensees by Pascal. Both examples touch on ideas of spirituality and religion. Would it not be better to read these and assess the bible once again with a new frame of mind rather than avoiding them and "critically" reading the bible.

PDN

jaffa20 wrote: »

Which is what many people raised as christians do, no? A large percentage haven't even opened a bible. By critical thinking, i mean reading a wide array of litterature. Eg Candide by Voltaire, Pensees by Pascal. Both examples touch on ideas of spirituality and religion. Would it not be better to read these and assess the bible once again with a new frame of mind rather than avoiding them and "critically" reading the bible.

People 'raised as Christians' are simply baptized heathens. This forum is for the discussion of Christian beliefs and issues. Plenty of us engage in critical thinking and believe the Bible to be a useful guide in assessing spiritual truth.

BTW, I read both the works you mention many years ago, so maybe it would be better to forget your stereotypes and stop trying to teach your granny how to suck eggs.

PDN

MrPudding wrote: »

Good article about it on wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking

I think it is fairly safe to say someone with beliefs like yourself is not well endowed with critical thinking abilities. Think about it.

MrP

The more he thinks about it, the more he will realise what a bigoted statement you have just made. You are welcome to discuss issues on this forum. Try to do so rather than just being insulting.

MrPudding

PDN wrote: »

The more he thinks about it, the more he will realise what a bigoted statement you have just made. You are welcome to discuss issues on this forum. Try to do so rather than just being insulting.

Perhaps I could have worded my post better. I will try again. I think it is fairly safe to say that someone who chooses to believe what you do, whilst possibly endowed with a phenomenal ability for critical thinking, chooses not to think critically about your own beliefs. That is not to say you do not use critical thinking in other areas of your life, when debating the religious beliefs of a non Christian, for example.

I hope that is less offensive.

MrP

PDN

MrPudding wrote: »

Perhaps I could have worded my post better. I will try again. I think it is fairly safe to say that someone who chooses to believe what you do, whilst possibly endowed with a phenomenal ability for critical thinking, chooses not to think critically about your own beliefs. That is not to say you do not use critical thinking in other areas of your life, when debating the religious beliefs of a non Christian, for example.

I hope that is less offensive.

MrP

Less offensive, but still wrong.

MrPudding

PDN wrote: »

Less offensive, but still wrong.

In your opinion.

MrP

PDN

MrPudding wrote: »

In your opinion.

We,, in the end everything that gets posted on boards.ie is opinion, so that comment is rather redundant.

I quickly lose respect for any debater who uses the cheap tactic of pretending that their opinion is so clearly right that any disagreement must be due to stupidity, or a lack of critical thinking etc.

In fact I'm probably a bit more aware of it than usual today since last night I was reading an article by William Dembski promoting the concept of Intelligent Design. One of the things that really irritated me was how he accused his opponents of refusing to critically evaluate Darwinism - thereby implying that their opposition to his views was irrational and therefore more easily dismissed or shrugged off. I thought to myself, "Why can't he just address their points? If you want to be taken seriously then at least give credit to the notion that others can think critically about the subject at hand and can come to a different conclusion to you." In fact, I didn't even finish reading his article after that.

Then I come on here and find you and jaffa20 doing exactly the same thing. Accusing those who value the Bible of being unable to think critically, then of being selectively blind in their critical thinking, and advising us to read books (as if this is some great revelation) which I would expect any competent first year undergraduate to have read if they were studying the Philosophy of Religion.

I was not brought up as a Christian. I hold my beliefs on spiritual and religious matters because I have thought critically about these issues, and have reached the conclusions I have because they make more sense to me. Now, you are free to think about the same issues and come to different conclusions to me. If so, then I will happily debate the issues with you and I will show you the courtesy of assuming that you are capable of thinking critically about those matters. If you are unable to return the courtesy then stay out of the forum.

robindch

PDN wrote: »

I quickly lose respect for any debater who uses the cheap tactic of pretending that their opinion is so clearly right that any disagreement must be due to stupidity, or a lack of critical thinking etc.

With enormous respect for your considerable abilities, I feel that I should point out as politely as I can, that you've used this tactic yourself many times.

MrPudding

PDN wrote: »

We,, in the end everything that gets posted on boards.ie is opinion, so that comment is rather redundant.

Very good point.

PDN wrote: »

I quickly lose respect for any debater who uses the cheap tactic of pretending that their opinion is so clearly right that any disagreement must be due to stupidity, or a lack of critical thinking etc.

Fair enough. I was not using it as a cheap tactic, but hey.

PDN wrote: »

Then I come on here and find you and jaffa20 doing exactly the same thing. Accusing those who value the Bible of being unable to think critically, then of being selectively blind in their critical thinking, and advising us to read books (as if this is some great revelation) which I would expect any competent first year undergraduate to have read if they were studying the Philosophy of Religion.

In my defence, I did reword my post. I did not mean to accuse anyone of not being able to think critically, your fine example of dismissing Islam is a masterclass of thinking critically, simply that a lot of christians don’t seem to think critically about their own beliefs. I did not suggest any books to anyone, but I might point out that I think it is unlikely that the majority of christians may not have studied the philosophy of religion and may not be aware of the books.

PDN wrote: »

I was not brought up as a Christian. I hold my beliefs on spiritual and religious matters because I have thought critically about these issues, and have reached the conclusions I have because they make more sense to me.

Super. I am glad that worked out for you. It does not take away form the fact that some posters have not had the same road to belief as you and seem unable to question anything about belief.

PDN wrote: »

Now, you are free to think about the same issues and come to different conclusions to me.

Thank you.

PDN wrote: »

If so, then I will happily debate the issues with you and I will show you the courtesy of assuming that you are capable of thinking critically about those matters. If you are unable to return the courtesy then stay out of the forum.

I will try to bear that in mind in future.

MrP

PDN

robindch wrote: »

With enormous respect for your considerable abilities, I feel that I should point out as politely as I can, that you've used this tactic yourself many times.

I certainly have robustly (sometimes too much so) criticised the arguments or logic of individual posters. If I think a particular argument or line of reasoning is silly or ill-thought then I will say so.

However, I am unaware of ever having made any statement to the effect that everybody that holds a different view is stupid or selectively blind. To which group did I ever issue such a blanket condemnation? Atheists? Catholics? Presbyterians? Creationists?

robindch

PDN wrote: »

However, I am unaware of ever having made any statement to the effect that everybody that holds a different view is stupid or selectively blind. To which group did I ever issue such a blanket condemnation? Atheists? Catholics? Presbyterians? Creationists?

"blanket condemnations?" What hat did you pull that one out of? All I said was that you called people stupid.

Stick to the point, and you'll not be confused

jaffa20

Excuse me for not debating because everytime i debate about religion, it comes to nothing.

Tolerance is the key as everyone will never understand nor respect the beliefs of another.

I wish the moderator would understand that i was not stereotyping christians as non critical thinkers.

I was merely suggesting that christians, except from the moderator of course, should engage in works other than the bible to open their minds to new frames of mind without any disrespect of course.

I ask to be banned from this thread which seems to be going nowhere with of topic posting and quasi derogratory comments of using other people's usernames in messages to make their "point".

Fanny Cradock

jaffa20 wrote: »

I wish the moderator would understand that i was not stereotyping christians as non critical thinkers.

I was merely suggesting that christians ... should engage in works other than the bible to open their minds to new frames of mind...

You do a marvellous job of contradicting yourself in your opening lines. On one hand you say you aren't stereotyping Christians. Fair enough. Yet you then go on to undermine this position when you make the whopping assumption that Christians seek knowledge only from the Bible or are closed to 'new frames of mind'. How you don't consider your latter statement a stereotype of Christians I don't know.



Please make your mind up and we can all move on from your confused and muddled messages.

BrianCalgary

jaffa20 wrote: »

I was merely suggesting that christians, except from the moderator of course, should engage in works other than the bible to open their minds to new frames of mind without any disrespect of course.

The Christians that I know by and large have done engaged in such an exercise and found 'other' frames of mind to be wonting.

The book in question, that PDN has quoted (thanks for that BTW) talks about the importance of experience. Experiences can be learned from but should not direct one's life. It is a philosophy that is very empty and self-centred.