Why doesn't God just show himself?

a book is not the same as the Bible.
our friends is not the same as "people the Holy Spirit reveals to".
what we see in nature is not "listening to voices in our heads".


All this confusion over one sentence!

I'll address BBH when I get back so halt your victory dance

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Later.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Now, I get this right that god was relevated to you through the bible and its enlightened authors, right.

So, I could say that I was emlightened by ancient babylonian scriptures. Which contain various gods. And those scriptures and contents date back severel hundred thousand years (468000 to be relatively exact) according to the authors. Now tell me, why aren´t they right?

Also, it looks like you are evading my questions again. This was just an example from my side.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

468000 years "exactly"?

That should tell you something.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I said relatively.
And the Babylonians very very big in astronomy, you know, they could calculate time.
There are also some other things accredited to ancient humans, far beyond our present ones. or better, not beyond, just different.

Anyway, the book you believe in is also dated. Why is that accurate?
Also, the scriptures that were found were only about 4000 to 5000 years old. As I said, the high priests claimed that there was a civilization and gods 468000 years ago.
And again, it says "roughly" 468000 years.

 

ok then..


is your point that because they are "older" than the writing of the New Testament therefore they must be more authentic?

 

No, I just ask why you think the bible is authentic while there are thousands of other scriptures that are just as valid as the bible or the new testament if you talk about that specifically.

 

Why do you say "just as valid"?


As I said, more specifically in another thread, the New Testament alone boasts a voluminous number of manuscripts and impeccable historical authenticity.

11 disciples, having absconded from the clutches of the Romans and the treacherous Pharisees suddenly became invigorated to proselytize even through the beatings, imprisonment, crucifixion and so on. There were eyewitness accounts to their testimonies and God, through His divine mercy and grace, has allowed the Bible to touch the hearts of many, even through treacherous means as I will quote later on in Phillipians.

I will get more into detail when I get back, meanwhile you can look at the other thread where I made a far better argument than this flimsy one

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

And yes, I know the argument is flimsy but I'm busy right now so patience!

 

Could you be more specific what thread you are talking about now?
Better yet, link it.
You have time to elaborate your argument. I´ll go to bed now. Good night.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

It's the If Jesus is a prophet to Islam thread..

 

From Wesmorris: I do not intend to "have the last word". Other people's delusions only become my problem when they start imposing them on me, and that's not really possible online I don't think. Regardless, rationally speaking we cannot assert god. IMO, to do so is to claim authority that you simply don't have and can't get - PERIOD. Feel however you feel about it - that is fine. You may personally believe in god, that's fine. It's when it's asserted as factual, or relevent to anything beside your feelings that is blatantly unreasonable.

Listen, great white father! Whereas it is right decent of you to allow me to believe in God, even though I have no "claim authority," (where did you get that fancy phrase; don't tell me you read another book!) I am tired of your innuendos.

Let me get this straight, you are telling me that it is okay for me to "feel however I feel!" Wow! What a guy! Tell me, just why is it that you find it necessary to put others down for what you believe is ignorance? You just may be the one who is "blatantly unreasonable! Who do you think you are? We are talking about God here. And all those IMO's just make your comments sound even more specious! When you write something, my friend, I assume it is your opinion.

Stop kicking before you are spurred. Any time I try to convert you, then you hollar; otherwise, I would appreciate a little respect for me and the God in whom I put my trust, for me, for you and for this world. If I am asking too much of you here, then go ahead and be a monkey's butt! You were not even funny this time!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Shame on you!

 

I wrote this to SouthStar, (among other things)

"Remember, SouthStar, Paul did not tell his fellow believers to read, he gave them his personal testemony."

HE RESPONDED: What do you mean by "Paul did not tell his fellow believers to read"?

Sorry, SS, that was not very clear at all, was it. I must have been tired. Hmm, What did I mean? I think I meant that rather than popping out scripture verses like water melon seed, perhaps telling folks what God means to you. This does not always work either, but even believers do not like someone quoting scriptures at them all the time.

I find that there is nothing better than being sincere and speaking from your heart. See, these guys, most of them, do not give a tinker's damn about God. Why they contribute to all these threads is beyond me, ....well, maybe not entirely beyond me. Anyway, maybe they, like you, believe they are called to show everyone who disagrees the error of his ways. Boy! Oh wow, now just alienated you and them. Good job, Thorne. Forget I said anything, if you like. I just hate to see you beat your head against a wall.

That is the best I can do tonight. I am pooped. >pmt

 

I don't allow you to do anything. I simply call a spade a spade. I think you're a nice, well meaning lady. I'm a well-meaning guy and I tell you what I do out of my understanding of things, just the way you do.

LOL. I'm probably one of the worst read here. I just think too much. I've read a lot of sciforums. Maybe I picked it up here eh? Maybe I just made it up.

I'm not sure what innuendo you're talking about. I mean to speak as plainly as I can.

I do what I can. Of course it's okay for you to feel what you want. I can't stop you or change what you feel, nor would I want to. That doesn't change the fact that if you say something I feel to be incorrect I will likely correct you - especially in the context here at sci, as in a discussion I bring my perspective along for the ride. I don't expect you to like it but then again I don't expect you to hold it against me either.

Can you address a specific instance? I don't "feel it necessary to put them down because they're ignorant". I "feel it necessary to corrct them" if they are unreasonable or if I find their post particularly annoying for some reason. What makes you think I'm "putting someone down"? Is it because I call your belief a delusion? Well, sorry, but it is as far as I can tell. I see nothing to compell me to think otherwise. That doesn't mean I can't respect you, or that I think you're stupid. It just means that your emotional status for whatever reason requires you to support the idea of something you made up based on someone else's suggestion and your internalized propogation of the myth in order to make yourself feel better. Hell sometimes that makes people better. I don't care though, because I see what I see and you're going to hear what I see unless you ignore me. You are free to attempt to persuade me to feel otherwise. I'll be fair about it, but from my perspective, someone who already believes in god CAN'T BE FAIR ABOUT THE SUBJECT, not to mention the whole logical think where god is unknowable in the first place... that is, if you're willing to be fair.

Whatever it is that you call 'god' to yourself is your own matter. i don't hold it against you unless you try to make it a public matter. As I'll explain at annoying length below, I think the outward assertion is unfair to somone who agrees that "hey maybe I can't know about god".

Why don't you demonstrate it.

Me of course.

Okay.

What is specious? I can't figure if you meant suspiscious or special or what.

Usually it is, unless I'm joking or whatever.

Oh I see you're asking the same favor? Okay. I respect you, but I don't respect your opinion on the matter of god. I do respect that you seem well-intended in the belief, but the belief simply annoys me as it's blatantly silly to me. The jury is out and will remain so, necessarily, for all time. It's a logicaly consequence of having a perspective. Something about a circle and a dot.

(smiling rosa?)

I don't think I have.

I wasn't trying to say you tried to convert me, I was trying to outline the logical implications of the situation.

Logically, assertions of god are simply unfounded. Unless you can show otherwise my opinion is unlikely to change, as I'm pretty confident I undertand the issue quite clearly. If I've missed something, please let me know.

i respect you, but I do not respect that believe and I never will. I respect your right to have it, but the belief itself disgusts me on a personal level.

PMT, I like and respect you, but as I said...

I'm not sure to which post you are referring. If it was my response to SS, I was not trying to be funny. He's dodging the obvious and it's annoying.

Pfffffffffft.

Yeah well uh.. kiss it granny.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Heheaahehahe.

Oh I'm just giving you hell.

Oh and hey, by me saying "you can feel whatever" I don't mean to be telling you what you can do - I though that obvious but I think I made the same interpretation on something SS said. I'm simply illustrating the boundaries I see as fair.

I get annoyed as piss if you assert god to me, because in doing so you imply authority where you simply have none (which is part of the basis for the unknowable thing)

(you imply authority by placing it as a "know" rather than a "I think". Myself, I'm bound to "i think" because the truth is that the basis for agnosticism trumps all other perspectives since it makes no claim, which puts you

(so when you say "i believe" you say "other answers are wrong" (by choosing the RIGHT one) which is the same as "people who believe other answers are wrong". IMO, that's simply unfair in a discussion. Again it's fine for personal beliefs or whatever, but shit like "we know god through the bible" is just unfailr, unfounded crap).

You can assert it to yourself all day long and I can respect that, though socially I'll likely distance myself from it if you do it out loud because it's creepy to me. Again, this is just the "boudaries of fair" as I see it, not me telling you what you can and can't do.

To be blunt: "I believe" leaves little room for conversation.

Oh and I wish I remembered where I posted that circle and dot thing. Basically it's like this. Let's consider the limits on our perception. Summarize yourself with a dot on a piece of paper (your you is inside the dot). Draw a circle around the dot. We'll call this your "scope of stimulus" or whatever. It's the place at which 'the tao' reflects into your perspective. The circle represents the border between the tao and your mind. To be fair IMO, you cannot assert things beyond your perspective. If there is something in yours that seems like "god" to you, that's cool, but to tell people "this is true!" or even to believe it for yourself, is IMO - completely unfair to yourself or to anyting you assert that too, because you don't know what exactly it is, because it's in the tao and must by the nature of your relationship to it, remain part of it forever. Something like that.

For those who aren't tao'n (ha, haha. (pronounced "down")), "the tao" is basically "the unknowable reality"... or for example, everything outside your mind. Even the keyboard I'm typing this on is part of the tao, as all I know of it is what I perceive (feel). I cannot say if there is more to it than what I can see.

Bah.

*snore*

 

PMT,

I believe in some sort of deity too, but I don't feel put down by what Wes says.

I myself keep barking about how what someone claims to know about God is *not all* there is to know about God. And once religious opinions are seen from this perspective, hardly any opinion is wrong or offensive.

The only wrong and offensive opinions are those who claim to know *everything* or the *essence* of what God is. These opinions show an immense lack of reverence for God, and also an immense lack of respect for other people.

 

SouthStar,

I was *emphasizing*.

 

Wes,

Huh, you've got my curiosity running ... the circle and the dot: you mentioned it in the "At home: In the Truman World?" http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=35302

Now can you remember what that other thread was?
I just can't find it, but it was around that time ...
Huh ...

 

I dunno thorne. I think I'm having just as hard a time following you as you are following me. Am I taking taking biblical texts out of context? Who's context? It's all in the eyes of the beholder. Hence the word "interpretation".

I think you are generalizing a lot in some of your comments. It's one thing to say that it will rain again or we will have a new president in the future because these things have happened in the past. That's a no-brainer. The weather has no free will anyway...it is strictly cause and effect. But, for example, If god "knows all" and he already knows who the next president will be then our choice at election time is already known to god. The way you will vote is already sewn up so to speak. The bible makes explicit predictions that there will be an evil person with the number 666 on his forehead and he will do many evil things. This is a very definite prediction. And this person will have no choice but to do what god has predicted he will do.

BTW, peter did deceive jesus. He deceived his trust in him.

 

It is harder for a sciforums member to enter the kingdom of heaven that it is for a camel to go through a needle.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Thnx for the heads up.. preciate it.. have you had any luck with that methodology yet?

 

I never said nor implied that what *we*/*I* know about God "is all there is to know"..

 

How can God be decieved?

Do you forget what scripture says about your "allegations"..?

 

In response to Wessmorris

Hey you, I like people the way they are. Yeah, I do. I suppose this is why I do not attempt to change folks in any significant way. I tried to teach my children to leave room in their comfort zone for those with opinions, customs, and religious beliefs unlike their own, while at the same time giving my young ones some room to think what they might about the beliefs. This seems to be the distinction you are trying to make; that is, that you respect me, but do not respect my beliefs. Really? I wonder.

YOUR WORDS:

I see nothing to compel me to think otherwise. That doesn't mean I can't respect you, or that I think you're stupid.

· …your internalized propogation of the myth in order to make yourself feel
better. . .
· It just means that your emotional status for whatever reason requires you to support the idea of something you made up based on someone else's suggestion….
· I don't respect your opinion on the matter of god.
· it's blatantly silly to me

STILL YOURS:

I think the outward assertion is unfair to someone who agrees that "hey maybe I can't know about god".
· Why don't you demonstrate it
· … the belief itself disgusts me on a personal level.
· Unless you can show otherwise my opinion is unlikely to change

· You are free to attempt to persuade me to feel otherwise. I'll be fair
· …someone who already believes in god CAN'T BE FAIR ABOUT THE .SUBJECT
· not to mention the whole logical think where god is unknowable in the first place... that is, if you're willing to be fair
· I'm pretty confident I understand the issue quite clearly.

AND YET MORE OF YOURS:

I was trying to outline the logical implications of the situation.
· god is unknowable in the first place...
· the belief simply annoys me
· Logically, assertions of god are simply unfounded …..
· I do respect that you seem well-intended
· If I've missed something, please let me know.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

What is specious? I can't figure if you meant suspiscious or special or what.

specious: adjective – seeming to be good, sound, correct, without really being so.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

pmt responds:

Foremost, you say you are disgusted with my blatantly silly, unfounded, belief, even though you think I mean well. In addition, you assume to know that I believe in God through indoctrination or by having made up some silly concept.

You say: If I am willing to agree with you that God is “not knowable in the first place” I will then be considered fair by you. How nice. In other words, if I can bring myself to agree with you, then I shall be fair in your eyes. Wow. Nevertheless, I am a bit confused, insomuch as you say, “someone who already believes in God cannot be fair.” Moreover, you say that “outwardly asserting that God is, is unfair.” That really puts me in a big old unfair circle! However, your outwardly asserting that I am naïve, disillusioned and disgusting, that I cannot think for myself, is a fair statement, because you say it, and, of course, you “see things clearly.” However, you “respect" me. Right! I can tell.

In addition, you write: “I get annoyed as piss if you assert god to me, because in doing so you imply authority where you simply have none (which is part of the basis for the unknowable thing)”

No plural “you” here, okay? I assert no authority toward you, even though I certainly have the years behind me. Just because you are annoyed with some one who is apparently driven to evangelize, does not give you good cause to assert that I am a moron in my last stage of regression, in that I have not allowed some old prejudice, ill will, or inflated ego, to cloud my knowledge of God. Wes, you do not fool me. You hate the disillusionment, the propaganda, if you will; the “I am better than you;” “I know God, and you know nothing” messages that come to you from those who would save you from hell. That is, they would, if only you would accept one of their boxes with God and all the rules in it. Well, listen you; no one has God in a box. He is your God, Wes. Why would a smart, wonderful person such as yourself, allow people to push him into a corner, where he covers his doubts to say, “Get the hell out of here; I reject all of it.”

From the beginning of man, there have been religions in one form or another. People before us worshiped the sun, feared the weather as some kind of message, and so on. Man uses what he knows, and man knew that somewhere beyond him was a power that he did not and could not understand. Everyone senses this, at one time or another. There is no evidence you say? Exactly what evidence do you require? Do not tell me, but think about it. See, I do not really believe in miracles, because I think it has all been done—so far as we are concerned, and that, aside from evolution, which is a natural phenomena, God is not going to interrupt nature’s program to open a sea, or throw a tree across the road ~to make you a believer. However, we can be in harmony with all that is, in a very special way. It makes sense, Wes. God, nature, us…-all related. All a part of the same marvel, so to speak, moved by the same energies, cooled by the same breezes and warmed by the same elements. We are nature, Wes. I think we forget that, and hold ourselves aside, or above the rest of what is. We are of the most High. What we know, we take for granted; what we do not know, we read about, guess about, theorize about, and that is okay, but we can be in harmony with what we know and what we do not know. This I know. We can start right there. It is a good place to start.

YOU WROTE: “so when you say "i believe" you say "other answers are wrong"

And, when you say that you do not believe, are you not saying that others are wrong? But wait! You do not say: “I do not believe.” You say rather that those who disagree with your agnosticism are disillusioned. They have been brainwashed. They are silly. Well, probably some are. Perhaps you would be interested to know that I think Agnosticism is an attempt to play it safe, a cop-out of sorts, a theory that really is not a theory, a place to hide. I had not mentioned it, because now I am going to have a whole bunch of good folks on my back, pounding my head with some sophisticated theological book learning! They will come up with adjectives that we have not even thought about. Just kidding. I love books.

FROM WES: “… that's simply unfair in a discussion. Again it's fine for personal beliefs or whatever, but shit like "we know god through the bible" is just unfailr, unfounded crap..”

Unless folks can agree on a premise, there is no valid argument. Therefore, I do not understand why anyone would try to prove God to someone with scriptures, when the person/people to whom they speak clearly do not believe the scriptures. Doing so desecrates the scriptures, at least to those who are opposed. Further, it is no more sensible than taking Nietzsche’s rantings and trying to prove to a Christian, a Muslim or a Jew, that there is no God.

You see, I agree with Spinoza that if all the bibles were burned, and all pens, ink, paper and other methods of recordings were destroyed, we would still have the Word of God. I believed in God, before church and before I read the Bible. This is probably one of the main reasons that my disillusions with church did not destroy my peace with God. Enough about that, but I thought I should mention it. [If you hate it, wad some paper and throw it. That ought to do it!]

Taoism is all right. I have a book about it. I have yet to reach the max in my search for truth. I read from various beliefs and like to do so. All religions have some similarities, and oftentimes those similarities are what make the most sense. I like to think for myself, and prefer to draw no absolutes, (and seldom draw circles). I am not overly found of fancy words, and simple phrases, however, as are often found in devotionals. (Of the subject, but are you aware—not that you would care, particularly—that just about anyone familiar with the Bible can make money writing devotionals? True story. I was rather stunned and declined.) I like the truth, even if it takes some chewing to get there.

Especially for you: The reason, dear person, that I say “I know that God is,” is actually because He cannot be proven (or disproved) by a book…not any book, not with calculus, not with theology, not with visions or dreams, but with a knowing reality, as you will see once you let go of those ropes and lose those barnacles.

Incidentally, even my grandchildren have never called me granny. They call me Grammy; therefore, if you are a teenybopper, you may also. Otherwise, I am just another adult that got old in the process. In any event, remember this, big guy: my mother could make a longshoreman blush, so watch it! ‘cause I remember some very colorful adjectives and exclamations.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

...................... ^ pmt ^