10 Sep 09
Originally posted by SuzianneRight.
Well, Hand, it is altogether good that you should seek answers. I sort of imagine this puts you in the same lifeboat as the rest of us.
In this particular case, however, I must admit that I missed the question.
Same question as always, "What is the nature of God?"
10 Sep 09
Originally posted by PalynkaThe basis of this determination is that there is only One God, the Creator (whether He be Triune or not is a subject of much debate).
And so is the bottle of water on my desk... Man can't decide what God is, but Suzianne can determine they worship the same one.
Anyway, I give up.
Countless generations have worshipped Him in many ways (even polytheistic societies claimed there was a Head Honcho God... Zeus, Jupiter, Ra, Bhagavan, Vishnu, etc.). This is a concept of the godhead, the source, whatever you want to call it. Man has spent a lot of time wondering where he came from, where he'll go when he dies, and it is this entity, this God, that returns time and again as the source and origin of everything.
Why is it so bizarre to assume that the God of the Bible, the God of Abraham, is this Creator-God? Especially since Islam has Mohammed descended from Abraham through Ishmael, whereas Judaism is based on the Hebrew lineage of Isaac, and Christianity furthers the lineage of Abraham through Isaac to David and eventually to Joseph, in whose House Jesus was born into. It's clear to me that the God of Christianity, Islam and Judaism is the same guy, regardless of what clothes you want to put on Him.
Now... that bottle of water on your desk I'm not quite so sure about.
10 Sep 09
Originally posted by Hand of HecateTo be truthful, I don't know. None of us do. I would say that the nature of God is unknowable, but this is not true either, for one day, the righteous shall know God.
Right.
Same question as always, "What is the nature of God?"
But that day is not today.
The best we can do is listen to those who would teach us, based on what we have held as tradition, and to ask Him ourselves what we can know of Him. Be prepared for no answer on this, though, since "all have sinned and come short of the Glory of God." Even the Bible, our best source for all matters Godly, has precious little to say about the nature of God except that He despises sin, and yet keeps for Himself vengeance against it.
Anyway, rather than waffle on about this, I don't have an answer for you. Most humans, even those who consider themselves close to God, spend their whole lives searching out the answer. And precious few come away with a satisfying answer.
10 Sep 09
1 edit
Originally posted by BlackampActually, I misspoke.
a better question would be 'what reasons do you have to believe this is the case?'
I meant to say "Why is it so bizarre to assume that the God of the Bible, the God of Abraham, this Creator-God, is the same God of all three faiths? Especially since..."
But to your question, call it a "leap of faith". It's not a huge leap, though.
10 Sep 09
Originally posted by SuzianneBut is it irrelevant what exactly the Creator is or did, as long as he is the Creator?
The basis of this determination is that there is only One God, the Creator (whether He be Triune or not is a subject of much debate).
Countless generations have worshipped Him in many ways (even polytheistic societies claimed there was a Head Honcho God... Zeus, Jupiter, Ra, Bhagavan, Vishnu, etc.). This is a concept of the godhead, the source, whatever ...[text shortened]... ant to put on Him.
Now... that bottle of water on your desk I'm not quite so sure about.
Suppose the Creator is actually the embodiment of "evil" ("evil" defined as the opposite moral standard that you now have) and the things depicted on the Bible are fantasies. Would you still claim you were worshipping the same God? Or worshipping another, non-existing one?
If the latter, then what people believe he is, matters! And it's not enough to say that two people worship the Creator, to conclude they worship the same thing.
10 Sep 09
Originally posted by Great Big SteesWell spotted, especially in light of the discussion so far.
Has anyone read "The Evolution of God"? If so how'd you like it? I will probably pick it up as I'm intrigued by the title. Sounds Darwinian.
I think I'll go pick this up too, it sounds very interesting.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 04
- Moves
- 186449
10 Sep 09
1 edit
Originally posted by SuzianneFrom what I've read about it it seems like the author takes a "journalistic" approach to the subject...I hope so.
Well spotted, especially in light of the discussion so far.
I think I'll go pick this up too, it sounds very interesting.
10 Sep 09
1 edit
Originally posted by PalynkaTL;DR version of what I want to say: Evil does not create, it only destroys.
But is it irrelevant what exactly the Creator is or did, as long as he is the Creator?
Suppose the Creator is actually the embodiment of "evil" ("evil" defined as the opposite moral standard that you now have) and the things depicted on the Bible are fantasies. Would you still claim you were worshipping the same God? Or worshipping another, non-existing enough to say that two people worship the Creator, to conclude they worship the same thing.
If I jump through all the hoops, have faith as a mustard seed, and end up in an afterlife where I've been tricked into serving an unspeakable evil for all eternity, well, then I guess the joke's on me, isn't it?
But right now, if the question is "Is God actually evil?", my Magic 8-ball says "Don't count on it".
But I get what you are arguing. No, really, I do. I would say that yes, the actual entity was always what he is, and that I was tricked. My perception doesn't change what he is, regardless of what that is.
But again, the way they worship the deity doesn't change what the deity is.
10 Sep 09
Originally posted by Great Big SteesFrom what I have heard of Robert Wright, he calls himself "agnostic". I think I would expect a middle of the road stance from him, more like a documentary than an infomercial.
From what I've read about it it seems like the author takes a "journalistic" approach to the subject...I hope so.
10 Sep 09
Originally posted by SuzianneBut it's not just the way they worship, is what each thinks the deity is! 😞
TL;DR version of what I want to say: Evil does not create, it only destroys.
If I jump through all the hoops, have faith as a mustard seed, and end up in an afterlife where I've been tricked into serving an unspeakable evil for all eternity, well, then I guess the joke's on me, isn't it?
But right now, if the question is "Is God actually evil?", my Ma ...[text shortened]...
But again, the way they worship the deity doesn't change what the deity is.
10 Sep 09
Originally posted by PalynkaBut see, in your example, I think the deity is all goodness and light, but it's actually tricked me and is evil as Dick Cheney. So I worship, thinking I'm on the right path, and yet I'm still worshipping at the altar of Haliburton. (Hmmmm, could this explain "righteous Republicans"?)
But it's not just the way they worship, is what each thinks the deity is! 😞
What I think matters not. It is still evil.
10 Sep 09
1 edit
Originally posted by SuzianneBut were you worshipping that evil deity? Or worshipping a good, non-existing one?
But see, in your example, I think the deity is all goodness and light, but it's actually tricked me and is evil as Dick Cheney. So I worship, thinking I'm on the right path, and yet I'm still worshipping at the altar of Haliburton. (Hmmmm, could this explain "righteous Republicans"?)
What I think matters not. It is still evil.
I find it strange that you say it's the first, rather than the latter, so I'm sorry if I'm asking you to repeat.
10 Sep 09
1 edit
Originally posted by Hand of Hecate#1. My reply was to duecer, not to "everyone else". #2. Neither he (in introducing the Calvinist slant) nor I (in dismissing parts of it out of hand) sensed any imperative to preface our remarks with a remedial lesson. #3. There are many Red Hot Pawn Public Forum thread topics for which all of us lack any adequate or meaningful frame of reference. Reasonable persons gets up to speed on their own initiative or pass on by. #4. Comparison of breathing air with posting viewpoints ignores the fact that one is involuntary while the other isn't.
Even if Dooker should have been aware of the acronym, is it reasonable to expect that everyone else is aware of it?
Even after reading up on Calvanism, it was not immediately obvious that the TULIP acronym came from the 5 tenents of Calvanism. I was left confused as well.
You spend a good bit of time breathing every day, would it be reasonabl ...[text shortened]... uld seem reasonable that everyone knows the composition of air.
Dooker, the shame, the shame.