Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 2)

1…154155157159160…232

Comments

  • #4682
    silverharp
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,853 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    The conditions which brought about the universe such as to produce it's current state stand outside the current understanding of physics. What had and hadn't to be followed is an unknown.

    Bear in mind that the rules of physics themselves aren't absolute laws but are merely a function of the nature of the universe as we observe it to be. If the nature of the universe had been other, such as to behave predictably in other fashion then the rules of physics would be other, to reflect those observations.

    So I'm not sure how you arrive at the conclusion you arrived at earlier (evidence against a deity)

    I didnt suggest evidence against a deity but evidence against an omnipotent one or a question of in your terms, who is god's boss? because "this one" is heavily constrained by external factors





    antiskeptic wrote: »

    Convenience food vs. prepare your own meal? I know which one I'd pick.

    I recall many years ago (and long before I was a believer) standing outside having a smoke late at night and looking up into a star-filled, light un-polluted winters sky. I was disturbed by what I saw there. I'd a decent enough understanding of the scale of the universe to be rendered awestruck by what might otherwise be seen as mere pinpricks of light. The scale, the age, the complexity, the chances involved, the balance, the beauty.. that's what my understanding of physics brought about.

    The creation is cited as one of the ways in which God is demonstrated (obliquely, indirectly, for it must be that way) to man. Although there is no issue in trying to understand its workings, the ultimate destination (whether looking at the macro or the micro) is meant to be awe and humility.

    Awe and humility are opposite attitudes to the one we labour under (and have laboured under since the Fall): pride.

    God's task is to cause proud men to kneel (properly, respectfully and for their own good, not subserviently). For if that, then they can take up their proper and rightful place in his realm. If not that then they must be discarded, since that which is inappropriately proud (that is to say, that which would insist on a position that doesn't befit them) is but a rebel to be banished.

    Awestruckness is better brought about by the scale, complexity, infinitesmal chance, balance and beauty of the universe as it appears to us to be and have come into being. A ready meal wouldn't serve that purpose quite as well.

    the universe is amazing but it's perfectly in keeping with something not designed with humans in mind. If the earth for example was a flat plane the width of the universe you could at least begin to argue that it might be designed with humans in mind

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • #4683
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,550 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    silverharp wrote: »
    I didnt suggest evidence against a deity but evidence against an omnipotent

    Still doesn't compute. What evidence stands against a deity as original cause
    who is god's boss? because "this one" is heavily constrained by external factors

    Did you read my post above regarding a) the lack of known physics causing the universe to come into being b) the laws of physics not being absolute

    What then are the external factors constraining God?




    the universe is amazing but it's perfectly in keeping with something not designed with humans in mind. If the earth for example was a flat plane the width of the universe you could at least begin to argue that it might be designed with humans in mind

    I'm not expecting you to accept my argument as fact. I'm merely stating how it being as it is fits in with the stated mission of God (which I'm not asking you to believe either).

    Whether believed or not, the universe as it is does bring about that effect in man.


  • #4684
    silverharp
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,853 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    Still doesn't compute. What evidence stands against a deity as original cause

    Im not, simply that it is not evidence of an omnipotent god, the "deity" only seems capable of "flicking a switch" if the deity wanted a ham sandwich it looks he would have had to have waited 13 odd billion years for one :pac:

    antiskeptic wrote: »
    Did you read my post above regarding a) the lack of known physics causing the universe to come into being b) the laws of physics not being absolute

    What then are the external factors constraining God?

    im sure there are plenty of unknowns , the constraints are was God (any god) hindered or slowed down by being constrained, in the way say an architect is constrained by gravity hence his projects which are going to be sub optimal as a result. if you were designing buildings or cars , the less restrictions the better right? and the more restrictions the less power....
    Some theists try to argue the "fine tuning" but by doing so is an argument against an omnipotent deity and one that is forced to put a puzzle together the only way it can be

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • #4685
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,550 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    silverharp wrote: »
    im sure there are plenty of unknowns , the constraints are was God (any god) hindered or slowed down by being constrained, in the way say an architect is constrained by gravity hence his projects which are going to be sub optimal as a result. if you were designing buildings or cars , the less restrictions the better right? and the more restrictions the less power....

    I'm not sure where we're going here. You start by saying that the creation/universe is evidence of no God. I point out that you can't say this since the laws not being absolute and the unknowns both leave place for God

    Some theists try to argue the "fine tuning" but by doing so is an argument against an omnipotent deity and one that is forced to put a puzzle together the only way it can be

    The argument doesn't say this is the only way it could be put together, rather, in order to have it this particular way, a fantastically large number of infinitesimally unlikely probabilities have to occur.

    Your down to belief in the most incredible chance or a belief in God.


  • #4686
    silverharp
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,853 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    I'm not sure where we're going here. You start by saying that the creation/universe is evidence of no God. I point out that you can't say this since the laws not being absolute and the unknowns both leave place for God

    Im sure I didnt say no god, I think you have misread my posts, my point all along here was to ague that the "deity" is constrained which circles back to who is god's boss?....

    antiskeptic wrote: »

    The argument doesn't say this is the only way it could be put together, rather, in order to have it this particular way, a fantastically large number of infinitesimally unlikely probabilities have to occur.

    Your down to belief in the most incredible chance or a belief in God.

    it still demonstrates that the "deity" is constrained in the same way an architect is constrained

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Advertisement
  • #4687
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,550 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    silverharp wrote: »
    Im sure I didnt say no god, I think you have misread my posts, my point all along here was to ague that the "deity" is constrained which circles back to who is god's boss?....

    But you haven't dealt with the counter-point which says that there is patently something outside the realm of known physics. If that's new physics, yet to be discovered - then so be it. If it's God then so be it too. The latter, as determinator of known physics (by his having created the world to operate as it does) wouldn't be constrained by known physics. At least it can't be assumed so.



    it still demonstrates that the "deity" is constrained in the same way an architect is constrained

    No it doesn't. The argument for fine tuning such as to produce what we see now over millions of years doesn't exclude God being able to produce all that we see today, from nothing but himself, in an instant. There is no more matter/energy involved in the former mode of production than in the latter mode of production and it could be arranged exactly as it has been over years, in a heartbeat.

    An architect hasn't that ability.


  • #4688
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,100 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Many of the mysteries of the universe have been peeled back by science to reveal themselves to be based on rules and constants that we can now explain.

    From our original belief that the Earth is centre and the sun orbits around it, to the formation of galaxies, we are constantly learning more about the universe.

    The one big area that we cannot explain is that of the very creation of the universe. How something came from nothing. God (or some definition of him) seems like a plausible explanation.

    What I don't understand is that even if you take it that God created the universe, that in itself does not prove the existence of our God. The god that is concerned about our wellbeing, that is concerned about our beliefs, our lives, who we have sex with.

    Currently I am leaning towards spirituality, in that prayer is useful in the calmness and reassuredness that it gives the person, rather than anything actually happening. Prayer as a cleaning of the mind in a way.

    There seems too much contained within the bible that is open to interpretation. For starters, why does it, and all of Gods work, only happen in a particular area of the ME? Why did God decide to have Mary a virgin, yet still give birth and raise Jesus as normal? Most of the people being spoken to would not have known the fact of the virgin birth so why not simply land him down to earth as a man? Peter did not know before, why wait for 30 years before starting?

    We are told that the most important part of Jesus life was the resurrection, defeating death and showing the path to everlasting life through him. Yet, it appears that after he resurrected himself, he pretty much stayed out of the limelight. Surely this was the time to walk straight back into the temple and show everyone the truth? What could the high priests say against that? How could Rome hope to hold power when faced with such a miracle? Instead he seems to have only shown this fact to a small number of people and it is up to them to get the word out.


  • #4689
    Harika
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,594 ✭✭✭Harika


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    The one big area that we cannot explain is that of the very creation of the universe. How something came from nothing. God (or some definition of him) seems like a plausible explanation.

    This sparks the question where god came from? If you accept that he came from nothing, so why not the universe? If he was there always, why cannot the universe be there forever too? We can describe already what has happened at the beginning of the universe but we have no idea what was before the universe, it is assumed that there was nothing before the big bang, so neither space or time. But we cannot exclude that the universe already existed but in a different state. So why is it plausible for god but not the universe to have existed forever or spring out of existence from nothing?


  • #4690
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,100 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Harika wrote: »
    This sparks the question where god came from? If you accept that he came from nothing, so why not the universe? If he was there always, why cannot the universe be there forever too? We can describe already what has happened at the beginning of the universe but we have no idea what was before the universe, it is assumed that there was nothing before the big bang, so neither space or time. But we cannot exclude that the universe already existed but in a different state. So why is it plausible for god but not the universe to have existed forever or spring out of existence from nothing?

    The universe is a material thing, something can we can view and understand based on physical rules but god could be operating outside of these.

    By asking where did god come from you are attaching our understanding of the laws of the universe to him, there is the possibility that he exists outside those laws.

    It doesn't exclude the possibility that the universe was always here/different dimension etc but at the current point in our knowledge neither can we rule out something we simply do not know.


  • #4691
    ABC101
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,048 ✭✭✭ABC101


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    Many of the mysteries of the universe have been peeled back by science to reveal themselves to be based on rules and constants that we can now explain.

    From our original belief that the Earth is centre and the sun orbits around it, to the formation of galaxies, we are constantly learning more about the universe.

    The one big area that we cannot explain is that of the very creation of the universe. How something came from nothing. God (or some definition of him) seems like a plausible explanation.

    What I don't understand is that even if you take it that God created the universe, that in itself does not prove the existence of our God. The god that is concerned about our wellbeing, that is concerned about our beliefs, our lives, who we have sex with.

    Currently I am leaning towards spirituality, in that prayer is useful in the calmness and reassuredness that it gives the person, rather than anything actually happening. Prayer as a cleaning of the mind in a way.

    There seems too much contained within the bible that is open to interpretation. For starters, why does it, and all of Gods work, only happen in a particular area of the ME? Why did God decide to have Mary a virgin, yet still give birth and raise Jesus as normal? Most of the people being spoken to would not have known the fact of the virgin birth so why not simply land him down to earth as a man? Peter did not know before, why wait for 30 years before starting?

    We are told that the most important part of Jesus life was the resurrection, defeating death and showing the path to everlasting life through him. Yet, it appears that after he resurrected himself, he pretty much stayed out of the limelight. Surely this was the time to walk straight back into the temple and show everyone the truth? What could the high priests say against that? How could Rome hope to hold power when faced with such a miracle? Instead he seems to have only shown this fact to a small number of people and it is up to them to get the word out.


    There are a great many mysteries still in the Bible, many of which are not fully understood.

    What I find amazing... is that how does God .... reveal himself .... but with out revealing himself?

    How does God manage... to allow people to have the choice to believe or not to believe? I think it is very funny, and gives me a great chuckle every now and again.

    Many believers... are able to look at the universe, flora and fauna on Earth etc... and see God's creation.. and also believers can see / feel / experience God's work in their own personal lives.

    Yet if a person who chooses not to believe..... they are able to construct arguments / logical points / reasons which satisfies themselves as to why there is no God at all.

    It is quiet a trick... no mean feat... for a creator to create the universe (or create the laws of nature which allow the universe to come into existance etc).. and all that it is in it.... to have some interventions every now and again i.e. the prophets, Jesus Christ, various apparitions i.e. Medjugorge etc... and at the same time... to allow humans to reject the idea of a God or to accept the idea of a God.

    Me thinks... there is only one being who could pull this type of stunt off..... and that is God himself!!:pac::pac::pac::pac:


  • Advertisement
  • #4692
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,100 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    The core bit that I am struggling with is the area of free will. It is generally accepted (or al least that is my understanding) that God created us with free will.

    Yet time and again, when man makes decisions of free will that is not in line with God then he is cruel and punishes them. From kicking Adam & Eve out of the garden of Eden, and then punishing every person from then on for the sins of someone else, to the flood, where he not only wiped out all of humankind (save for Noah etc) regardless of what level of 'badness' they had done, but he also wiped out all the animals and plants! Seems a tad extreme.

    At the end of it all though, God will somehow punish you for not believing in him. You will not be able to get into heaven. I can almost see the logic on those people who did terrible things during their life, but simply choosing to remain sceptical, using the logical brain we are given, to question him is deemed henious. And that doesn't even begin to deal with the billions who are not borne into an area that that bible is taught.

    Did Ponious Pilot have free will to excuse Jesus? If he did, and he let him go what then for the 33+ year plan? What if the high priests had simply ignored him? It seems a lot of the story is actually based on anything but free will.


  • #4693
    ABC101
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,048 ✭✭✭ABC101


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    The core bit that I am struggling with is the area of free will. It is generally accepted (or al least that is my understanding) that God created us with free will.

    Yet time and again, when man makes decisions of free will that is not in line with God then he is cruel and punishes them. From kicking Adam & Eve out of the garden of Eden, and then punishing every person from then on for the sins of someone else, to the flood, where he not only wiped out all of humankind (save for Noah etc) regardless of what level of 'badness' they had done, but he also wiped out all the animals and plants! Seems a tad extreme.

    At the end of it all though, God will somehow punish you for not believing in him. You will not be able to get into heaven. I can almost see the logic on those people who did terrible things during their life, but simply choosing to remain sceptical, using the logical brain we are given, to question him is deemed henious. And that doesn't even begin to deal with the billions who are not borne into an area that that bible is taught.

    Did Ponious Pilot have free will to excuse Jesus? If he did, and he let him go what then for the 33+ year plan? What if the high priests had simply ignored him? It seems a lot of the story is actually based on anything but free will.

    You have mentioned a lot in your post.

    However free will only goes so far. For example... I can exercise my free will to visit you in your house.

    However... while in your home... I do not have the right to exercise my free will and drink all your alcohol in your cupboard, or treat your home as my own.

    If during the visit... I behave inappropriately... you have the right to tell me to leave your property.

    WRT Adam and Eve.... They were guests in the Garden of Eden....but they were given a rule... and that was not to eat from the tree of knowledge. It was a house rule.. which got broken.

    Generally in life... if you break a rule... there is normally some sort of consequence.

    WRT original sin... that issue was sorted out with Jesus dying on the Cross for mankind.

    As for various disasters in life, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides, tsunamis etc etc... these are just part of nature. People often ask... what did that baby do to be born with x deformity or y illness.

    The answer is that the baby did not do anything, its just in life there are always statistical anomalies which spring up, genetic mutations, malfunctions etc. Some people die in their 80's others die in their 40's. A colleague at my place of work died at 31 last month.

    Life can be a bit of Russian roulette... you just don't know what is going to happen to you next, or when.

    WRT free will..... God has given humans the choice to accept he exists, love him and try and follow various rules / guidelines.

    God has also given us the choice not to follow those guidelines / rules etc, even up to the point in choosing to believe / decide that God does not exist at all.

    Imagine if you created a robot... a robotic butler so to speak. What would you want the robot to do? Well you would probably get the robot to do everything you wanted to be done, various errands, housework, repairs to the car, going to the shops, posting letters, making phone calls on your behalf, maybe even taking your place at work, while you stay at home raking in the money.

    You made the robot, it is your property, made by your engineering skill, computer programming skill, and as it is rightfully yours...the robot is at your beck and call to carry out what you want it to do.

    However now imagine.... you decide to give the robot freedom.... it can pick and choose what it wants to do... and you will not interfere in its choice. Even if the robot lives and works down the street and completely ignores you. Never speaks to you ever again, you go your separate ways.

    It would be quiet something... to create something... and not have the use of it.

    But so it is with humanity.... mankind has the choice to accept or reject God. However there are consequences to each decision, with God ... if you reject him... you also reject him in the afterlife.

    If you have a read of the Catechism on www.vatican.va type Hell into the search box.... and Hell is described as a place outside of God.

    As the soul is made by God... it has a innate desire to be rejoined with its creator. However as it is cut off from God... it cannot be joined with God. Therefore... it is in a Hellish situation.

    It is not that God punishes you ... it is that there are consequences to you making your decision.


  • #4694
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,550 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    The core bit that I am struggling with is the area of free will. It is generally accepted (or al least that is my understanding) that God created us with free will.

    God created Adam and Eve with a type of free will. It doesn't appear they had consciences (they didn't know good and evil) but were given consequences of acting this way or that. If you do this, that will happen. And when they did what God said not to do then consequences followed as promised.

    Yet time and again, when man makes decisions of free will that is not in line with God then he is cruel and punishes them.

    There is no conflict (that I can see) with a person expressing their will and there being consequences following that expression, for good or ill. Indeed, no consequences following from expression free will would mean the will is useless. Free willingly pressing on an accelerator pedal and there being no acceleration would be a pretty pointless expresssion of will. You want to go faster, you express your will to produce that result and faster you should go.

    Similarly, if man expresses his will in a direction which brings negative consequences then negative consequences ought to follow. No?

    From kicking Adam & Eve out of the garden of Eden, and then punishing every person from then on for the sins of someone else

    Dominionship brings such things: Adam was given dominion over all creation: when he set the direction for it, that direction was followed. We're suffer the consequences of Adams decision but are punished for our own sin.
    At the end of it all though, God will somehow punish you for not believing in him.

    More accurately: he'll punish you for the sin you committed and which belongs on your account. This rightful justice occurs (or will occur) because a person refuses to avail of his attempt to save them from that justice.

    The refusal isn't so much not believing in him (why should you believe in something you have no reason to believe in?) but involves instead, resisting being brought to the point of believing in him. The former (not believing) is a consequence of the latter. The latter is the root of things thus.




    And that doesn't even begin to deal with the billions who are not borne into an area that that bible is taught.

    The Bible itself details people who were saved long before the Bible was written or Christianity existed. Salvation doesn't require a person to be a Christian (in the religious sense of the word), have heard of Christ, have heard or read the Bible. If so, then the very father of the faith, Abraham, couldn't have been saved. There's a thread around downstream entitled "How was Abraham saved" which raises this very question (and provides some answer)


  • #4695
    looksee
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,926 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    The refusal isn't so much not believing in him (why should you believe in something you have no reason to believe in?) but involves instead, resisting being brought to the point of believing in him. The former (not believing) is a consequence of the latter. The latter is the root of things thus.

    How does this work? As I said somewhere else I spent most of my teens involved with a church several times a week, I attended services and bible studies. I taught Sunday school, I was steeped - willingly - in belief opportunities, and made ongoing attempts to read and pray my way to belief. And at the end of it there was nothing. Even then I was willing to go to church and to Mass and bring my children through the various communion and confirmations (as I had been obliged to promise). There was even a time when I considered converting.

    Eventually, for a lot of reasons, mainly the sense of there being 'nothing' and also a total disillusionment in formal religion as it impinged negatively on my life, I realised I had no faith at all.

    So where does this leave me in your statement about 'resisting'? I was wide open and searching, but there was nothing. It would be foolish to say I should have had faith, faith in what?


  • #4696
    EirWatcher
    Closed Accounts Posts: 56 ✭✭EirWatcher


    looksee wrote: »
    And at the end of it there was nothing.

    Not the even the Word of God? Jesus.
    looksee wrote: »
    Eventually, for a lot of reasons, mainly the sense of there being 'nothing' [..] I realised I had no faith at all.

    Luke 6:46-49

    "Everyone who comes to me and listens to my words and acts on them-I will show you what he is like..."

    3 distinct steps there, laid out by Jesus, for faith to follow.


  • #4697
    looksee
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,926 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    EirWatcher wrote: »
    Not the even the Word of God? Jesus.

    Not clear what you mean by this.
    Luke 6:46-49

    "Everyone who comes to me and listens to my words and acts on them-I will show you what he is like..."

    3 distinct steps there, laid out by Jesus, for faith to follow.

    But that is exactly what I was saying, you can come, and listen, and act (though I am not sure what that means) but willingly listen and consider, and if there is nothing, then what? Pretend?


  • #4698
    ABC101
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,048 ✭✭✭ABC101


    looksee wrote: »
    How does this work? As I said somewhere else I spent most of my teens involved with a church several times a week, I attended services and bible studies. I taught Sunday school, I was steeped - willingly - in belief opportunities, and made ongoing attempts to read and pray my way to belief. And at the end of it there was nothing. Even then I was willing to go to church and to Mass and bring my children through the various communion and confirmations (as I had been obliged to promise). There was even a time when I considered converting.

    Eventually, for a lot of reasons, mainly the sense of there being 'nothing' and also a total disillusionment in formal religion as it impinged negatively on my life, I realised I had no faith at all.

    So where does this leave me in your statement about 'resisting'? I was wide open and searching, but there was nothing. It would be foolish to say I should have had faith, faith in what?

    Strikes me as a very sincere post!

    Sounds like you have done quiet a lot there too. Reading between the lines, I assume you are CoI and your partner is RC, would I be correct?

    Leaving aside the fact that you have put in a big effort, lots of self sacrifice there, between attending to your own spirituality, the value system you are imparting to your children, aquiscing to the spiritual value of your spouse WRT your children's religious faith etc.

    If I may dare say it...I think you are being very hard on your self there. It strikes me that you are still looking forward to something....rather than looking back and being justifiably proud of the work /sacrifice you have made to date.

    We live in a time...where one can be greatly dissillusioned about a great many things, from employment, pension growth, promises from politicians, banks, the economy and even the Religious organisations, RC Church being just one example of getting some things majorly wrong particularly with children.

    WRT your own faith...I think it would be a shame if you were to give up now.

    I would suggest exploring the issue in a slightly different direction, perhaps reading books on faith formation, faith discussions on various courses in Milltown institute for example, you cannot be the first person to have done a lot but still feel let down by lack of faith.

    While all that you have is most good, wrt your depth of faith, it could be ..if you keep approaching the issue in the same way, you will end up with the same result.

    Rather than using the same approach I would suggest a more strategic review. Move to the next level of thinking....think at the Meta Level about this issue.


  • #4699
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,550 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    looksee wrote: »
    How does this work? As I said somewhere else I spent most of my teens involved with a church several times a week, I attended services and bible studies. I taught Sunday school, I was steeped - willingly - in belief opportunities, and made ongoing attempts to read and pray my way to belief. And at the end of it there was nothing. Even then I was willing to go to church and to Mass and bring my children through the various communion and confirmations (as I had been obliged to promise). There was even a time when I considered converting.

    Eventually, for a lot of reasons, mainly the sense of there being 'nothing' and also a total disillusionment in formal religion as it impinged negatively on my life, I realised I had no faith at all.

    So where does this leave me in your statement about 'resisting'? I was wide open and searching, but there was nothing. It would be foolish to say I should have had faith, faith in what?

    I was the complete opposite to you. I can count on two hands the number of times I was in church up to the time of my confirmation (I ducked out of the pre-confirmation confession to watch a match on telly). After than I'd be there for weddings and funerals is all.

    I never gave God and his existence any thought (although I do recall the odd occasion, when I was about to do something particularly odious, thinking: "if there is a God then he won't like what I'm about to do now").

    Here's something from a post on here a while back which explains what happened to me.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79790748&postcount=11


    I've argued elsewhere on this forum that there is no need to have heard of Christ, the Bible, Christianity, go to church, be good, accept Jesus into your heart or many of the other things folk suppose are necessary to either find God or avail of his salvation. The reason I argue so is a) because of my own experience and the experience of many others I know b) because it's a biblically sound position to hold.

    If that's the case then all the church going in the world, although it may not hinder, and indeed might help, might be of no help at all.

    Since coming to know God exists and coming to know something of his grace and kindness I've had occasion to rail at him in utter anger. Things that I've prayed and prayed and prayed about, stuff I desperately want changed about me and my life, stuff that is sinful beyond belief ... silence. Nothing.

    I don't know what it takes to 'make' God show up and reveal himself to a person for the first time but in my case and in the case of so many others and in so many of the examples in the OT and NT it involved folk reaching the end of themselves in some or other way. Desperate despair, chronic unhappiness, unresolvable burden whether psychological, emotional, physical and being prepared to do as those who reach the end of the line in an AA programme do - turn to a higher power, acknowledge need and bow to the one who, if he exists, you want you to come lift you up out of depths you can't lift yourself out of.

    That seems to be a theme - end of self. Yet my wife met with God age 11 with nothing particularly on her plate except a sense of her own sinfulness - childish and embryonic though that sinfulness surely was at the time - and a sense that she needed to accept an offer God was making to resolve that issue for her.

    -

    I sympathize with your 'trying for faith' and can utterly understand not having any if possessing nothing to under gird it. Without the most convincing demonstration of his existence there isn't a hope in Hell I'd believe in God. Not through argument, not through upbringing, not through hedging bets.

    Question for you. Why did you pray for belief? Did you feel you had a deep need for God, to know he exists?


  • #4700
    EirWatcher
    Closed Accounts Posts: 56 ✭✭EirWatcher


    looksee wrote: »
    Not clear what you mean by this.

    Jesus's words, not mine. So if the meaning to you isn't clear, like all his words, the meaning is in part personal to the person hearing them, i.e. what is Jesus saying to me, as he speaks these words to me, now, as I am in my life - an example of coming to Jesus and listening to his word.
    looksee wrote: »
    But that is exactly what I was saying, you can come, and listen, and act (though I am not sure what that means) but willingly listen and consider, and if there is nothing, then what?

    Listening and considering, but perhaps not acting on his word? (you said you're not sure what act means there, unless I took you up wrongly, so perhaps that's where to focus.) Acting is easy to understand (harder to do!) Jesus's teaching could be summed up (though better studied in detail) as a call to love - love God, and love neighbour (as yourself). Even a small act of love for God and neighbour done in a day for Jesus's sake works in my experience. If you see Jesus at work though your life, benefiting both you (and the relatives, friends, and even strangers you choose to love in some way), then you might be surprised how faith follows. God rewards those who strive towards Him.
    The acts of going to mass, confession, etc. in the Church are intended as an expression love of God, and an expression of God's love for us. But, if they are meaningless to you, then there is no such expression of love of God in them, and so they will seem pointless. But there is a point to them - studying what the meaning of each of them is might be helpful.

    There's also plenty of resources available out there to help study scripture and it's contemporary/personal meaning. (Though scripture is not the only way the Holy Spirit reveals itself to us).
    looksee wrote: »
    Pretend?

    Pretending isn't Truth; that would be contrary to all Jesus stands for.

    Question is: Pretend what?
    That you don't believe in God?
    That you aren't still seeking Him?
    Or that you don't believe He is to be found?

    Everyone's journey to God is unique, but Jesus the path.

    "I am the way, the truth, and the life." John 14:6


  • #4701
    MrPudding
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,779 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    ABC101 wrote: »
    You have mentioned a lot in your post.

    However free will only goes so far. For example... I can exercise my free will to visit you in your house.

    However... while in your home... I do not have the right to exercise my free will and drink all your alcohol in your cupboard, or treat your home as my own.

    If during the visit... I behave inappropriately... you have the right to tell me to leave your property.

    WRT Adam and Eve.... They were guests in the Garden of Eden....but they were given a rule... and that was not to eat from the tree of knowledge. It was a house rule.. which got broken.

    Generally in life... if you break a rule... there is normally some sort of consequence.

    WRT original sin... that issue was sorted out with Jesus dying on the Cross for mankind.

    As for various disasters in life, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides, tsunamis etc etc... these are just part of nature. People often ask... what did that baby do to be born with x deformity or y illness.

    The answer is that the baby did not do anything, its just in life there are always statistical anomalies which spring up, genetic mutations, malfunctions etc. Some people die in their 80's others die in their 40's. A colleague at my place of work died at 31 last month.

    Life can be a bit of Russian roulette... you just don't know what is going to happen to you next, or when.

    WRT free will..... God has given humans the choice to accept he exists, love him and try and follow various rules / guidelines.

    God has also given us the choice not to follow those guidelines / rules etc, even up to the point in choosing to believe / decide that God does not exist at all.

    Imagine if you created a robot... a robotic butler so to speak. What would you want the robot to do? Well you would probably get the robot to do everything you wanted to be done, various errands, housework, repairs to the car, going to the shops, posting letters, making phone calls on your behalf, maybe even taking your place at work, while you stay at home raking in the money.

    You made the robot, it is your property, made by your engineering skill, computer programming skill, and as it is rightfully yours...the robot is at your beck and call to carry out what you want it to do.

    However now imagine.... you decide to give the robot freedom.... it can pick and choose what it wants to do... and you will not interfere in its choice. Even if the robot lives and works down the street and completely ignores you. Never speaks to you ever again, you go your separate ways.

    It would be quiet something... to create something... and not have the use of it.

    But so it is with humanity.... mankind has the choice to accept or reject God. However there are consequences to each decision, with God ... if you reject him... you also reject him in the afterlife.

    If you have a read of the Catechism on www.vatican.va type Hell into the search box.... and Hell is described as a place outside of God.

    As the soul is made by God... it has a innate desire to be rejoined with its creator. However as it is cut off from God... it cannot be joined with God. Therefore... it is in a Hellish situation.

    It is not that God punishes you ... it is that there are consequences to you making your decision.
    A little off topic, but do you have a problem with your keyboard? The extensive, and inappropriate, use of ellipsis and liberal spraying of full stops makes your posts difficult to read. I hope this isn't just me, but when I read I actually use punctuation to work out how the words flow, I can't do that with your posts. You do realise punctuation has a purpose, and rules, it isn't just for decoration?

    MrP


  • Advertisement
  • #4702
    looksee
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,926 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    ABC101 wrote: »
    Strikes me as a very sincere post!

    Sounds like you have done quiet a lot there too. Reading between the lines, I assume you are CoI and your partner is RC, would I be correct?

    Leaving aside the fact that you have put in a big effort, lots of self sacrifice there, between attending to your own spirituality, the value system you are imparting to your children, aquiscing to the spiritual value of your spouse WRT your children's religious faith etc.

    If I may dare say it...I think you are being very hard on your self there. It strikes me that you are still looking forward to something....rather than looking back and being justifiably proud of the work /sacrifice you have made to date.

    We live in a time...where one can be greatly dissillusioned about a great many things, from employment, pension growth, promises from politicians, banks, the economy and even the Religious organisations, RC Church being just one example of getting some things majorly wrong particularly with children.

    WRT your own faith...I think it would be a shame if you were to give up now.

    I would suggest exploring the issue in a slightly different direction, perhaps reading books on faith formation, faith discussions on various courses in Milltown institute for example, you cannot be the first person to have done a lot but still feel let down by lack of faith.

    While all that you have is most good, wrt your depth of faith, it could be ..if you keep approaching the issue in the same way, you will end up with the same result.

    Rather than using the same approach I would suggest a more strategic review. Move to the next level of thinking....think at the Meta Level about this issue.

    Thank you for your sympathetic analysis. You are quite right, it is sincere and truthful. I think you are slightly going off the point though. My post was in response to Antiskeptic's comment:
    The refusal isn't so much not believing in him (why should you believe in something you have no reason to believe in?) but involves instead, resisting being brought to the point of believing in him.
    And I was demonstrating that I had been through a long period of not only not resisting, but actively seeking, but nothing in terms of belief had happened. And eventually the reverse happened, my unbelief was confirmed.

    At this stage I do not wish to pursue something that I have concluded is pretty much fantasy. Certainly I have zero interest in doing it through formal religion, about which I am totally disillusioned. I would even go so far as to say that, if there is a god, formal religion is his main enemy. Any thinking person looking at the fear based, vindictive, narrow minded nonsense that is promoted by the leaders of religion (all religions) has nothing to do with a loving god. Indeed it is hard to see why a god should be loving, why not just totally pragmatic?


  • #4703
    ABC101
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,048 ✭✭✭ABC101


    MrPudding wrote: »
    A little off topic, but do you have a problem with your keyboard? The extensive, and inappropriate, use of ellipsis and liberal spraying of full stops makes your posts difficult to read. I hope this isn't just me, but when I read I actually use punctuation to work out how the words flow, I can't do that with your posts. You do realise punctuation has a purpose, and rules, it isn't just for decoration?

    MrP


    Mr P..... Welcome to the blogosphere:D


  • #4704
    MrPudding
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,779 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    ABC101 wrote: »
    Mr P..... Welcome to the blogosphere:D

    Meh. Welcome to ignore.

    MrP


  • #4705
    EirWatcher
    Closed Accounts Posts: 56 ✭✭EirWatcher


    looksee wrote: »
    Indeed it is hard to see why a god should be loving, why not just totally pragmatic?

    Why would God be anything we say he should be at all?

    If someone believes we created Him (which is the Athiest's view), then their time here will be spent wastefully debating how a nonexistent entity should behave.

    If, however, someone believes He created us, then they know their time here is better spent seeking to understand instead what He wants us to be. Christ is exactly that.


  • #4706
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,100 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    EirWatcher wrote: »
    If someone believes we created Him (which is the Athiest's view), then their time here will be spent wastefully debating how a nonexistent entity should behave.

    Athiests don't believe in god at all, they are not debating how this non-existent god should behave, they don't think he behaves at all. They talk about why those who do believe accept the widely varying ways in which he is said to behave.
    EirWatcher wrote: »
    If, however, someone believes He created us, then they know their time here is better spent seeking to understand instead what He wants us to be. Christ is exactly that.

    They Believe. You or I or the Pope do not know. Hence the word faith. They believe that acting a certain way will lead to an afterlife, one with God. But no matter what anybody says they do not know.


  • #4707
    Stealthfins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,141 ✭✭✭Stealthfins


    It is a bit nuts for someone to be debating about something they claim doesn't exist.
    I often wonder who's more deluded,the one who's calling people who believe in God deluded,or the strident Atheist


  • #4708
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,100 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Stealthfins wrote: »
    It is a bit nuts for someone to be debating about something they claim doesn't exist.
    I often wonder who's more deluded,the one who's calling people who believe in God deluded,or the strident Atheist

    Is that not the same person?

    Atheist are not debating god, or his existence, they don't believe and they don't understand given the evidence they quote, that anybody else does either.

    But fundamentally, most of them don't care what you, me or Pope believes. They are not against people believing in anything. What they are against is that those that believe, which Atheists believe is based on nothing more than fairy stories, want society to be based on that belief.

    You only have to look at the power that the RCC wielded in Ireland in the past to see the outcome of allowing this belief to have sway over society. Belief brings many great benefits, but also seems very interested in making sure that others also believe. Throughout history, religions of all hues have undertaken very questionable practices in the aim of getting people to believe.


  • #4709
    looksee
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,926 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    Stealthfins wrote: »
    It is a bit nuts for someone to be debating about something they claim doesn't exist.
    I often wonder who's more deluded,the one who's calling people who believe in God deluded,or the strident Atheist

    I think you need to re-read your second sentence! :pac:
    More accurately: he'll punish you for the sin you committed and which belongs on your account. This rightful justice occurs (or will occur) because a person refuses to avail of his attempt to save them from that justice.

    The refusal isn't so much not believing in him (why should you believe in something you have no reason to believe in?) but involves instead, resisting being brought to the point of believing in him. The former (not believing) is a consequence of the latter. The latter is the root of things thus.

    My original contribution was in response to this post. As to why I am discussing it, well, it is a discussion forum.


  • #4710
    EirWatcher
    Closed Accounts Posts: 56 ✭✭EirWatcher


    Leroy42 wrote: »
    They Believe. You or I or the Pope do not know. Hence the word faith. They believe that acting a certain way will lead to an afterlife, one with God. But no matter what anybody says they do not know.

    No one can say what someone knows.

    "Knowing" anything is, in itself, a belief - in one's own personal understanding.

    But ... I'm going off-topic into philosophy. One for another day.


  • Advertisement
  • #4711
    Harika
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,594 ✭✭✭Harika


    looksee wrote: »
    At this stage I do not wish to pursue something that I have concluded is pretty much fantasy. Certainly I have zero interest in doing it through formal religion, about which I am totally disillusioned. I would even go so far as to say that, if there is a god, formal religion is his main enemy. Any thinking person looking at the fear based, vindictive, narrow minded nonsense that is promoted by the leaders of religion (all religions) has nothing to do with a loving god. Indeed it is hard to see why a god should be loving, why not just totally pragmatic?

    For the last part, here the god from the new testament is quite an exception from all other gods like the Jewish/greek/roman gods who were all "more" human and had negative attributes like hate, temper, liked to toy around with people ... .


Advertisement