(Author’s note: This is the fourth and last installment in a series discussing why Christians worship God. On this blog, the first installment may be found here, the second here, and the third here. On the author’s blog, the first installment can be found here, the second, here, and the third, here.)
Intimate Worship: Our Response To God As Companion
It was very difficult to write this last installment about intimate worship. Imagine trying to explain, after 30 years of marriage, exactly why you love your wife. It’s hard to say, exactly; and then, you can’t express it without exposing a part of yourself that’s usually reserved only for her. Worse, you feel certain that some who don’t understand will belittle your description, because it will be difficult for them to understand how such a relationship is even possible. That’s what I’m facing here. I’m exposing an intimate part of my soul with the expectation that it will be despised. Worse, I know my expression is going to fall far, far short of the reality, because it simply can’t be expressed in words. This is not easy.
There is far too little written of the individual Christian’s relationship with God. So little is written, and it’s often so vague, that people who have not experienced it have little idea what we even mean by it. Not only that, but I have only a small idea that what I mean by it is similar to what someone else means by it. I know there are elements I have in common with other believers, because I hear them speak of it from time to time — answers to prayer, conviction about particular weaknesses, encouragement in various forms. But there seem to be some parts of my relationship with God that not all other believers experience; and likewise, there are some things others say about their relationships with God that go deeper than what I experience. It seems that because everyone is different, God addresses each of us individually. It seems that some parts of our relationship depend on our willingness to go there.
And yet, this is the central fact of Christianity — that each of us may draw close to God through the agency of Christ, and become His friend, confidante, and disciple.
All of us Christians have in common that God addresses our character, and changes it dramatically. He arranges the combination of events and information in such a way as to identify changes we must make to our character, and He causes us to change by way of circumstances. This is a long-term process; it begins on the first day one becomes a Christian, and continues unabated for decades; or at least, that’s what has happened to me.
God also provides encouragement at intervals along the way, letting us know how He feels about us. It’s not just information that we apply to our particular circumstances; reminders of particular lessons arrive at the moment when they’re most needed, and we become aware that God knows how we’re feeling, and knows precisely what we need to hear. He sends friends to us when we need them, and assistance. The man who has the skills to repair our stove appears just when we need him; a job comes open at just the right time; we hear a chance word that settles the secret worry of our heart. Most Christians that I know experience this providential timing of events, and divine provision for their needs.
Underneath all this, we learn general truth from reading the scriptures, and from interacting with other believers, and come to understand the framework within which we live in Christ. There are moments when what we read is precisely the thing we needed to remember, but most times we’re just building gradually on an existing foundation of truth and understanding.
And then, there are individual quirks regarding how God gets our attention and communicates, and these are different for everybody. My wife, for example, sees significance in colors. When God has something to say to her, she notices a particular color that stands out, and over the years she’s come to associate specific colors with specific meanings. Also, when God wants to get her attention, she loses something; she might misplace her car keys, for example, and whenever she finds them, the location where she finds them and the nature of how she misplaced them will give her insight into some problem she’s facing at the moment. I don’t experience either of those things, although because I know her, I pay attention when she loses something. I know God’s trying to get my attention when I hear the same phrase several times during the same day, and the phrase usually indicates the general tenor of the message. I had a friend a while back who was a pastor, who used to know he was supposed to call a specific individual if he heard that individual’s name three times on the same day. As soon as the man’s name came up the third time, this fellow would drop what he was doing, pick up the phone, and call; invariably, the answer he’d get would include “How did you know I needed to talk to you?” A lot of Christians tell me of this sort of interaction between them and God in their lives, but it’s different for every individual, and some do not experience anything like this.
All of the interaction I’ve described goes on subtly, without fanfare. God is seldom ostentatious; He does what He needs to do to get His point across with a bare minimum of disturbance, and He leaves no tracks. Nature is the stationery on which He writes His notes to us and the pen with which He writes them, so communication almost always occurs as something about which one could say “It’s just a normal event” or “It’s just a coincidence,” and it never comes with an audit trail. So those who never experience it, think we’re just making fanciful illusions about ordinary events; and yet, for those who do experience it, God’s communication is constant, persistent, unmistakable, undeniable, and always, always deeply meaningful.
In all of these things, the Christian life is like a marriage. God is present at all times. One learns to speak to Him constantly, and in turn, He speaks periodically to specific items that need adjustment. The constant interplay of prayer and answer gradually becomes a backdrop to life that is very much like the companionship of a spouse or a beloved friend. One becomes used to a constant undercurrent of conversation with God. One comes to rely on it. One falls in love with Him.
Beyond this, one develops a deeply seated sense of gratitude, because God is so constantly meeting our needs in such profound ways. This affects different people differently, but their expressions about it all have a ring to them that’s similar to all the other expressions. In my own case, I have a strong sense of what my life would have been like without His intervention. I’m a recovering sex addict; I doubt that I would have lived as long as I have, or else I would have become a hopeless pervert and ruined myself and others. I can’t think about this without tears of gratitude, so I keep it in the background most of the time.
Those who have not known God, or those whose experience of the Church has been completely about practicing religion and religious habit, have no idea what I’m talking about. For those of us who have experienced God in significant degree, though, our love for God is very much like our love for our parents, or for our spouse, or for a lifelong friend; only, coupled with those feelings is the additional feeling of gratitude, because this friend, this spouse, this parent, is infallible. He’s always right, always accepting, always trustworthy, and always profound. We owe everything to Him.
To speak of commanding our love is absurd. For the Christian who has learned to love God, there’s no question of command. We offer our love and gratitude unstintingly. How could we do otherwise? He’s our whole life. What else is there?
It is this constant, inner gratitude and affection for God that constitutes the last sort of worship I’m going to write about; this is the intimate communication and devotion between God and His beloved. To know and to adore are the very center of God’s being, the thing that identifies Him most accurately, the thing that He does simply because it’s who He is. Those who come to know Him, adore Him back in like manner. To know fully, even as we are fully known; this is heaven, and the eternal life, and true worship.
I just some questions:
“we learn general truth from reading the scriptures”
What is this general truth?
From your last post I asked:
How do you know that yours is the one true god?
This providential timing thing . . . could it not just be coincidence? In regards to your wife’s keys you say she sees colors and what not, but could she not be fufilling her own wishes by putting her keys down in places that fit the color scheme, only to miraculously find them later.
And finally this is something I’ve been thinking for the past few weeks: Why worry about an afterlife? I’ll be in paradise forever and ever. I’ll be tortured forever and ever. Why care? What if this life is it and all that people are seeing meaning in is just coincidence? I have to tell you, I see coincidences all of the time and when I examine them they don’t add up to anything. They don’t point to anything.
I walk around listening to Podcasts with my headphones on. Often a piece of dialogue I’m listening to will be echoed by my surroundings, sometimes surprisingly specificaly.
eg, I was in a shop looking for a Phillips vacuum cleaner, and just at that moment the guy I was listening to mentioned doing a voice-over for Phillips.
I was listening to a guy talking about alternative medicine being ‘filled with quacks’, just as a bus passed me with a bunch of ducks on it’s side advert.
I passed a shop called Blakes, just as the DJ talked about his love of the poet Blake.
It’s quite startling when it happens, but it’s just coincidence – I’m wearing the headphones a lot and only remember the moments where the audio jives with my surroundings.
So… 35 years of what an intelligent, educated man calls a relationship, and you guys want to tell me about your occasional coincidences, and suppose you’re talking about the same thing.
I can understand why you’d want to, because if there IS Someone with whom I, and millions of others whose testimonial evidence matches mine, can have a relationship, then …
Ironically, in the thread following Part II of this series, Tim is complaining about how arrogant, how rude it is for me to suggest to Toby that it’s possible that there could be satisfactions in life that he has not experienced. How dare I judge another man’s experience, he wonders. And yet here, atheists have not the slightest qualm to assert that what I’m calling a relationship is the same thing they experience when the DJ talks about William Blake, and they walk past a store called “Blakes” — as if I were truly too stupid, or too biased, or too starry-eyed, to know the difference.
Do you REALLY suppose I’m so completely clueless as to gather together a few instances like that an suggest it amounts to a relationship? You have so little respect for my intellect that you don’t think I’m capable of filtering out such incidences? Why is that, exactly?
Sorry, the arrogance just gets to me. And I KNEW that’s what you’d do, too; it’s right up there in paragraph 1.
So, it’s ok. Dismiss it if you like. I know better than to try to convince you otherwise; I’ve tried that with others before. You don’t want to know.
I guess this will be a brief conversation.
I’m exposing an intimate part of my soul with the expectation that it will be despised. Worse, I know my expression is going to fall far, far short of the reality, because it simply can’t be expressed in words. This is not easy.
Well maybe you should start by lowering the flame shield; I can’t see anyone actively despising anyone for trying to make a point.
Second; if it can’t be explained in words, then what exactly do you mean to accomplish by, er, committing it to words?
I know God’s trying to get my attention when I hear the same phrase several times during the same day, and the phrase usually indicates the general tenor of the message. I had a friend a while back who was a pastor, who used to know he was supposed to call a specific individual if he heard that individual’s name three times on the same day. As soon as the man’s name came up the third time, this fellow would drop what he was doing, pick up the phone, and call; invariably, the answer he’d get would include “How did you know I needed to talk to you?” A lot of Christians tell me of this sort of interaction between them and God in their lives, but it’s different for every individual, and some do not experience anything like this.
On the one hand, it’s nifty that such incidents are able to work out positively for everyone. On the other hand, at the risk of sounding offensive, that sounds like a classic case of Paranoid Schizophrenia or Bipolar Disorder.
It’s a common pattern in people who have PS or a form of Bipolar to instill meaning in apparently trivial functions; to perceive messages in things like billboards, books, magazines, movie quotes, and even colors, for example. Not saying that’s what you’re experiencing, necessarily, but the similarities between the behavior you describe here and the behavior of clinically-diagnosed Bipolar/Schizophrenic patients is actually pretty deep.
In other news, while we’re on the subject of weird coincidences….about two years ago, I was on my way to the dentist’s office in my car, listening to a Bad Religion song, “Come Join Us,” on my car stereo. I got to the dentist’s office, I went inside, and I sat down. I picked up the first magazine I saw — which turned out to be a Christian periodical — and I flipped through it arbitrarily for a few minutes before setting it down cover-down (so I could tell which one I had glanced through apart from the ones I hadn’t). On the back was printed the phrase, “Come Join Us” in large letters. I thought it was interesting. But I felt no immediate compulsion to draw a significance between the ad (or anything the words in the ad might have related to) and the song I’d just finished listening to.
So Mr. Weingart, do you think it was wrong of me to ignore this “sign?”
Ironically, in the thread following Part II of this series, Tim is complaining about how arrogant, how rude it is for me to suggest to Toby that it’s possible that there could be satisfactions in life that he has not experienced.
Maybe you should read my latest reply, Mr. Weingart. That’s not the claim I made.
P.S.
I’m no psychiatrist, but I have to wonder what a professional one would have to say about Mr. Weingart’s attitude. He seems very aggressive with little or no provocation, and he’s so quick to judge and leap at perceived threats, even in casual conversation. The more and more I examine his behavior, the more and more consistent it seems to gel with a lot of general descriptions of Bipolar/Schizophrenia.
And no, I’m not talking out of my rectal cavity here; BP/PS runs in my father’s side of the family, and my father is himself diagnosed with BP/PS.
Phil, I don’t despise you, and I’m not pouring scorn on you either. I don’t take away from the experiences you’ve had. I wasn’t trying to belittle your experiences with my comparison, just giving examples of coincidences that have happened to me. They might strike you as trivial, but I only gave one or two – I didn’t go into some of the really bizarre ones because I thought someone might reply that they genuinely believe I might have been ignoring mystical messages.
“35 years of what an intelligent, educated man calls a relationship… You have so little respect for my intellect that you don’t think I’m capable of filtering out such incidences? Why is that, exactly?”
I’m sure you’re a smart guy. You’ve told us you are often enough and I see no reason why you’d lie about it. However, I’m sure you’d agree that there are lots of smart people who subscribe to different religions to you, and many of them believe they have a relationship with a God that you believe is entirely fictional. You can perhaps say that a Jew or Muslim in fact has a relationship with ‘the same God’ as you, but it’s a stretch to say the same of a Hindu who believes he has a relationship with Vishnu and Ganesh.
“Sorry, the arrogance just gets to me.”
Phil, you’re the one who once posted to me that you believe yourself to be vastly my intellectual superior, which is not only arrogant but a poor debating tactic. Personally, I think it’s quite possible to be very clever and very wrong, so intellectual superiority is generally a moot point in these kind of debates. My IQ tests at 148, and I admit to often getting things wrong!
Oh, let’s not let it come to quoting IQs!
Mr. W, let’s not get miffy here. Look at it this way: it’s a matter of predisposition. A person into crystals is predisposed to believe if they can heal or ease tension. A nonbeliever is predisposed to be skeptical. A believer in sky gods is predisposed to see that god’s hand all over and all into everything. Can you see why there was an instant response of ‘coincidence’? So when you say:
“35 years of what an intelligent, educated man calls a relationship, and you guys want to tell me about your occasional coincidences, and suppose you’re talking about the same thing.”
You can’t blame someone for pausing, considering, then saying, “Uh, yeah, pretty much that’s what we’re saying.” The length of your marriage and how committed and wonderful it is has no bearing. It has nothing to do with your intelligence. I’m sure I’m not alone in thinking along these lines—You believe in an intervening god and so when these . . . moments/coincidences occur you focus on them and attribute them to your god. I feel quite certain that if everyone began looking around they’d find things like this happening all of the time, they just aren’t predisposed to assign them any significant meaning. Even believers probably ignore many of these things and don’t attribute them to an almighty.
If you read your account above and someone had written it like this, wouldn’t you dismiss it?
“And then, there are individual quirks regarding how Nature gets our attention, and these are different for everybody. My wife, for example, sees significance in flower colors. When Nature has something to say to her, she notices a particular flower color that stands out, and over the years she’s come to associate specific colors with specific meanings. Also, when Nature wants to get her attention, she loses something; she might misplace her Mocha Latte, for example, and whenever she finds it, the location where she finds them and the nature of how she misplaced them will give her insight into some problem that’s mucking with her Qi (chi) . . . I know Nature’s trying to get my attention when I see the same crystal several times during a hike. I had a friend a while back who was a wiccan, who used to know he was supposed to call a specific individual if he saw that individual’s birthstone three times on three consecutive rolls of his rune stones. As soon as the man’s stone came up the third time, this fellow would drop what he was doing, pick up the phone, and call; invariably, the answer he’d get would include “How did you know I needed to talk to you?” Of course we all know that individual is a little needy like that, but the stones don’t lie.”
Phil Weingart says: Those who have not known God, or those whose experience of the Church has been completely about practicing religion and religious habit, have no idea what I’m talking about. For those of us who have experienced God in significant degree, though, our love for God is very much like our love for our parents, or for our spouse, or for a lifelong friend; only, coupled with those feelings is the additional feeling of gratitude, because this friend, this spouse, this parent, is infallible. He’s always right, always accepting, always trustworthy, and always profound. We owe everything to Him.
I say Amen! Once someone inters into the family of God it is truly very simple.
Phil,
You said: You have so little respect for my intellect that you don’t think I’m capable of filtering out such incidences?
I am not sure anyone has said they think that, but it does bring up an interesting question. How do you decide/know that something is such an incidence and how do you know when it’s something bigger?
I don’t know if any of you have ever had the chance to listen to late night AM radio in the US. I used to do a lot of driving in the middle of the night and would always listen, and I actually got a chance to listen to a program again last night.
There are various shows which focus on the paranormal — extraterrestrial life, other dimensions, etc. What has always stuck me about these programs is that they bring forth this whole subculture which is so deeply committed to all of these things, the majority of which I find, quite frankly, silly.
The ideas are ones that I can barely even relate to, yet they are believed with such strong passion. I’ve just always found that striking.
I say this partly in response to your statement: I can understand why you’d want to, because if there IS Someone with whom I, and millions of others whose testimonial evidence matches mine, can have a relationship, then …
I am not saying you’re trying to use the sheer force of numbers here — I just think it’s interesting.
What I mean is: there are millions of people who believe in all of these paranormal things. They can sit together and say “we have had these experiences and these things are so obvious, how can those people out there not get it?” They can say this with complete faith and honestly.
Last night, there was a discussion of how all consciousness and though exists in a separate dimension from our own, and we (and all life) simply tap into that consciousness. This concept can beget many complicated extrapolations, many of which explain the “coincidences” that are being talked about here.
I don’t believe in that idea, my point is just that these people could say things very much like you’re saying here, with just as much honestly and good faith, and I wonder how you’d respond to them.
Anyway, those are just some rambling thoughts about the topic.
Here is a another question. I don’t mean to say this to disprove your point. It’s, again, just sort of a commentary.
Let me start with the presupposition that we (or Christians at least) should take an attitude similar to that of Paul (authorship questions aside) in 1 Timothy 1: “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst.”
Why would G-d intervene enough to send you a sign and help you find your keys, but not intervene in the life of some 2 year old on her way to Birkenau from Budapest or Thessaloniki?
A child starves every 5 seconds on this earth, and G-d is coordinating colors so someone can find keys…
(I don’t mean to start a discussion on theodicy, and I don’t intend that as a critique of your point. I’m just sharing a thought. Feel free to respond, but I am not seeking a response.)
* Starvation statistic is from the UN Food and Agriculture Organization.
A child starves every 5 seconds on this earth, and G-d is coordinating colors so someone can find keys…
Boris says: God should send the magical birds to drop the magical food on the starving children like he supposedly did the Israelites in the desert. The Bible God could feed the starving children if he wanted to. Why doesn’t he?
The Bible says that in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. That includes everything necessary to feed and provide for its inhabitants. Can anyone deny that the earth is capable of producing more than enough food to feed the entire globe? Well then, if people are starving, whose fault is that? If God made the earth, is He also supposed to plant and distribute our crops for us? Whose fault is it that people are starving in North Korea?
“Whose fault is it that people are starving in North Korea?”
It’s Kim Jong-Il’s fault – you can’t blame the starving children themselves. They didn’t elect the guy, they had no say in the matter. So the point still stands. Are you truly blaming the starving children of the world for their plight? That’s pretty callous.
“If God made the earth, is He also supposed to plant and distribute our crops for us? ”
The question was, if God can intervene to help people find their keys, why not intervene to save children from starving to death? You’re not answering it.
“If God made the earth, is He also supposed to plant and distribute our crops for us? ”
The question was, if God can intervene to help people find their keys, why not intervene to save children from starving to death? You’re not answering it.
That’s actually a pretty good answer to Phil’s statement; why should I believe that god is willing to coordinate the physics of the world to help someone find his/her keys? If he made the world so that all the things we need are where they’re supposed to be, then whose fault is it if we can’t find our keys? If god made the materials we make our keys out of, is he supposed to keep track of them for us, too?
Either way, we get a contradiction, though. If god doesn’t intervene in one situation on principle, then why does he intervene in the other (in complete disregard of that same principle)? Especially given that one is a life and death matter, where the other is a simple problem that can be easily fixed (by going to Wal-Mart and getting your keys copied or remade).
“Are you truly blaming the starving children of the world for their plight? That’s pretty callous.”
I’m not blaming the starving children of the world for their plight, but rather those that look on and see the starving and do nothing.
When an infant is crying because it’s time for his feeding, should the parent wait for God to miraculously feed him? Should the mother with her breasts, or dad with a bottle, that God provided, feed him themselves?
Paula said:
“Well then, if people are starving, whose fault is that? If God made the earth, is He also supposed to plant and distribute our crops for us? Whose fault is it that people are starving in North Korea?”
Boris made a good point. God did magically provide food for the Israelites in the desert. So why not the North Koreans? Maybe now he just doesn’t give a crap. Or maybe it’s more fun to watch the little ants in his grand ant farm fight and die and starve and kill each other over stupid crap he reportedly said that’s so ambiguous that it leads to multiple interpretations that anger the different groups so that they can commit homicide in his name. All the while he laughs and thinks, “gee, I’m clever.”
Paula, your comment “I’m not blaming the starving children of the world for their plight, but rather those that look on and see the starving and do nothing.” is quite interesting. In another post Ernie goes on about how welfare and social programs are leading to the downfall of society. So how do you view welfare? In this statement you seem to be championing it. Personally I think it’s a good place for tax money to go. Certainly better than war, weapons research, and subsidized farming. If I could choose where my tax money went it’d go to education for all and healthcare for all.
Paula,
As Andrew pointed out, you didn’t really answer the question or provide a possible resolution to the contradiction. (To follow what Tim said, if you were a deist, fine, because no contradiction would exist.)
Let me add another question though, since you have taken the conversation in that direction. If Phil’s wife looses her keys, whose fault is that?
If Phil’s wife looses her keys, whose fault is that?
Boris says: Satan’s?
“Should the mother with her breasts, or dad with a bottle, that God provided, feed him themselves?”
Unfortunately, if Dad can’t get a job and mother’s breasts are shrunk because she’s starving themselves, then baby is still not going to get fed, through no fault of any of the three. And this is the position that millions of families find themselves in, strange though this may seem to someone not living in a third world country.
I’m not blaming God, because I don’t believe God exists. I’m pointing out that if you believe in a God who intervenes in human affairs in order to help them find their keys, you’d expect them to wonder why this same God doesn’t help people in far worse situations.
And no Paula, as Luke says, you still haven’t addressed this. I’m guessing because you can’t.
Things happen for a reason. God doesen’t give people more problems than they can handle. I hope you understand Andrew. God bless to all peace and love, Emily
“God doesen’t give people more problems than they can handle.”
How does this apply to millions of children starving to death? In what way is this not something they can’t handle?
Toby R. Says: “So how do you view welfare? In this statement you seem to be championing it.”
I am not championing for welfare because state welfare only creates dependency, and worse, an entitlement attitude that often boils into rage and resentment. Do you realize what this world would be like if people simply followed God’s instructions? There would be no murder, no wars. There would be no welfare, because families would take care of their own (and families would stay together) There would be no laziness, no “freeloading.” There would be no starvation. I could go on, but the point is: God HAS provided us answers, whose fault is it that we don’t seek them or heed them when we find them?
Andrew Ryan Says: “The question was, if God can intervene to help people find their keys, why not intervene to save children from starving to death? You’re not answering it.”
From the beginning God gave man a free will and mind.. He could have intervened when Eve was tempted with the fruit, but He didn’t. Can you pray and ask God to help you find your car keys? Sure, and He can bring it to memory. Can you pray and ask God to help feed yourself or a starving child? Sure, and He can. The questions isn’t if God can, but are we asking? God is not a Dictator, He doesn’t force His will upon us. His will is that none should perish without Him, but millions will. I believe that God does intervene for a starving child and gives them dying grace. We live in a wicked sinful world, and because of man’s sin, came all the suffering we experience today. God is a loving God, but He is also a just one. There has always been consequences and accountability for sin. Does it seem unfair? Sure, at times. But, God does right all the time, and I put it into His hands and just try to follow.
Andrew that is a problem they can handle. If they are starving that just means that they will go to Heaven sooner, and that would be wonderful, to be with God in Heaven as soon as possible. God bless to all peace and love Emily
Paula: “Can you pray and ask God to help you find your car keys? Sure, and He can bring it to memory. Can you pray and ask God to help feed yourself or a starving child? Sure, and He can. ”
Right, so why do millions of children starve? You’re still not answering the question Paula. Either he CAN intervene – in which case he can produce keys and yet he lets millions starve – or he CAN’T intervene, in which case the keys story is nonsense.
Emily: “If they are starving that just means that they will go to Heaven sooner, and that would be wonderful, to be with God in Heaven as soon as possible.”
So are you saying that if you had the chance to save someone’s life, you would just let them die, so that they could go to heaven sooner?
Emily: “Andrew that is a problem they can handle.”
If starving to death is something people can handle, can you give me an example of what it would look like if God gave people things they could NOT handle? How would you know the difference?
“…that just means that they will go to Heaven sooner, and that would be wonderful”
Can I just check, Emily, do you say the same thing about aborted babies – that it’s great because they get to heaven more quickly? I’m not sure that you’ve thought this through.
I have come to realize you cannot argue with someone who doesn’t believe in God or the Love of God. They will always questions His motives….As a child of God, I’m not to question his motives or why He does or does not intervene. He knows what’s best. He is God. His ways are above my ways. No I don’t always understand, but I don’t have to. I just trust that He is right and just. Sin is sin, we cannot stop sin, but one day He will come back to judge all those that have not trusted Him. An yes, we will bow before Him and give an account. Suffering happens, we don’t like it, but even Jesus himself suffered the death of the cross. All tears, sorrow, death, pain, etc…will not end until we are in Heaven. God bless.
Paula: I have come to realize you cannot argue with someone who doesn’t believe.
I am not sure anyone is arguing with you.
I made a statement many posts ago. You responded to a side issue, and Andrew and I were simply pointing out that you didn’t really provide an answer for the contradiction. I think our assumption was that you were trying to provide such an answer.
Ironically though, now that you’ve said that you can no longer “argue” with us (though I am not sure how might know what I do and do not believe), you have provided an answer to the actual issue that was raised.
Paula: I don’t always understand.
That is a perfectly fine answer I think. You don’t have to understand.
Paula:I just trust that He is right and just.
But you do not see that He is right and just by taking in the world around you, is that what you’re saying; that’s why you must just trust Him?
You praise Him when keys are found, but see no need to withhold praise when a child starves, because you trust that child starved for some higher reason?
Would you say you trust Him against your better instincts (what I mean is — it would be easier to trust Him if no one starved and keys just disappeared and were never found)?
If you are basing it on trust, what happens if the G-d you are worshiping is actually one you would consider evil?
If you have been tricked into worshiping the devil how would you know?
“Do you realize what this world would be like if people simply followed God’s instructions? There would be no murder, no wars. There would be no welfare, because families would take care of their own (and families would stay together) There would be no laziness, no “freeloading.” There would be no starvation. I could go on, but the point is: God HAS provided us answers, whose fault is it that we don’t seek them or heed them when we find them?”
To me that is the most naive drivel I’ve ever read on this site. Sure there would be murder. We’d all be stone people that went against the will of god. We’d be going to war with people that didn’t believe. We’d be getting “messages” from god to smite this group or that one. Yeah, really lovely.
The whole welfare thing is off subject, but I’ll just ask this: do you know what the first tax was? It wasn’t called a tax it was called tithing. and it was for the church to help the poor. Hey, it was also the first welfare system. And it’s no better or worse than the government one. I know, my mom works as a secretary for a church that has a food pantry and the same people come in all of the time. What’s the difference in a church giving out welfare and the government giving out welfare?
If there is a god that helps some woman find her keys but lets thousands suffer for any reason then it is not a god worth worshiping, mysterious ways or no.
And why does a person “lose” their keys then they see a color and then find them? It probably has more to do with self fulfilling prophecy and keeping yourself inside the little belief sphere that makes you happy, confirms your beliefs, and keeps you in wonder.
Do you realize what this world would be like if people simply followed God’s instructions? There would be no murder, no wars.
1) Sure, I’ll give it to you that if everyone felt exactly the same on every issue, then there would be no need for violent dissent. The same could be said of any worldview that doesn’t expressly permit violent dissent. I could say that if you all felt exactly like I do, there would be no suffering. However, that is hardly a reason that I would invoke as to why you should adopt my worldview.
2) However, the fact that there wouldn’t be any unChristian killings doesn’t mean there wouldn’t be murders. The only difference is that Christians would escape justification by citing Christian foundations for their killings. They’re perfectly “moral” (by the Christian definition), but still atrocious to someone like me, who deems any killing that is not in response to a violent action (or in the interest of immediate defense of one’s life) to be unnecessary and atrocious.
God HAS provided us answers, whose fault is it that we don’t seek them or heed them when we find them?
If you are speaking to a person who has been raised well, who has learned to cope with the suffering and harshness that is implicit in the existence of any human society, then I don’t see any problem with what you say here. But I have to ask you….would you honestly look a starving Ethiopian orphan in the eyes and say that to his/her face? Would you say to him/her, “You are responsible for your own life/death; regardless of whether or not you were raised with the right tools to deal with life’s hardships, or whether or not the physical means necessary for your survival are within your powers to obtain, it is your fault and nobody else’s that you will die a painful death of starvation”?
Regardless of your answer, my point is this: I do not see it as just or rational to hold a person accountable simply for being unable to deal with life’s challenges. Being unwilling to, yes, but I think that too many people abuse that loophole and accuse just any old body who doesn’t believe in their god of being “unwilling” to deal with things. Some people really don’t have the tools — emotional, physical, or otherwise — to deal with life’s hardships; I may defer to the rape victim mentioned in the other topic, the ~13% of rape victims who commit suicide as a result of the rape and being unable to cope with the life that comes after it. This is one of those situations where I say, “If they make it, then I applaud their courage and determination, and their ability to see where there is darkness. But if they do not, then I don’t really blame them, either, because if I were in their shoes — if I lacked the skills and knowledge that they lacked — I can’t honestly say that I would still reach the same place that I have reached, knowing what I know. And so I can’t honestly blame them for not being able to accomplish something that is, for all intents and purposes, not reasonably within their ability. Although I will be quite impressed if they are so able.” I just think it’s unrealistic and impractical to assume that everyone “should” just suck it up and deal with life. Maybe you think they “should,” but for everyone it’s not that easy. And when we approach the realm of near-impossibility, I can no longer honestly say that I expect a person to come out on top.
Does that make sense?
Another quick example….if your god turns out to be real. I don’t realistically expect for a starving Ethiopian youth to look at the world around him/her, draw a conclusion that the Christian Biblical Yahweh exists, look for interesting coincidences in nature, attribute them to Yahweh, and infer a meaning that seems relevant to his/her immediate suffering, which he/she will then use to solve the predicament at hand. If that happens, then power to ‘em — I mean, they survived incredible odds — but if they don’t, I think it’s just plain ridiculous to say that they failed in any valid way. The odds are near impossible.
Can I just check, Emily, do you say the same thing about aborted babies – that it’s great because they get to heaven more quickly? I’m not sure that you’ve thought this through.
I tried to tell you, Sir Ryan….it’s not worth the effort….
They will always questions His motives
True; as you would question the motives of one you do not trust.
Also, as you would question the motives of one whose existence is asserted by many but proven by none; whose existence is used as a pedestal from which to launch suspicious political campaigns and make millions of dollars off of people who give in good faith, who may well honestly believe in god. Mostly as you would question the motives of one in whose existence you don’t believe, but that you entertain for the sole purpose of expressing to another why it is, exactly, that you don’t believe in such a being’s existence.
Suffering happens, we don’t like it, but even Jesus himself suffered the death of the cross.
I feel obligated to make this clear as a non-believer; I do not have a problem with the fact that suffering exists. Naturally, as a human being, I am inclined towards easing the suffering of my fellow humans, but from a conceptual standpoint, it does not surprise, shock, or move me in any way to know that suffering exists. I can accept that. Really, I have no choice but to accept that.
No, my problem is not with the existence of suffering. It’s with the idea of a god who can literally solve all the world’s problems — without violating the free will of humans — with a wave of his metaphorical hand, and who chooses to use that power to help priveleged upper-middle-class folk in the wealthiest nation in the world find their keys one morning/evening, instead of using it to guide a group of starving orphans to a way of life that will lead them to food, shelter and self-sufficiency. Sure, if they survive long enough then they will learn resourcefulness and frugality, but what about the ones that don’t survive long enough? What lesson is there for those children to learn in their short lives?
Toby says:
“What’s the difference in a church giving out welfare and the government giving out welfare?”
With church giving out welfare they don’t expect anything back. Government giving welfare you have to abide by their rules or no welfare.
“I will not be a party to stealing money from one group of citizens to give to another group of citizens, no matter what the need or apparent justification” ~ President Grover Cleveland
If only he could still be president…
(As long as we’re following tangents…)
Seriously though Paula, we’ll need Ernie so we can properly define stealing.
The government takes money from me and gives it to firemen and firewomen, provided they follow certain rules. Is that stealing?
If the government gave say $1,000 per month to each family below the poverty line, as long as they accept it — no rules, no questions asked, would you support that?
The church doesn’t expect anything back . . . except maybe listening to their blather. Perhaps reading the pamphlets they pass out with the food. Maybe expect the people to actually show up at the church on Sunday and give ten percent of their nothing. Your description of the difference in the church and government really makes the government look like the winner. Direction without guidance or rules isn’t of much value. The church would then give money away forever and ever and the government would at least say, “Hey, I’m cutting you off if you don’t find a way to make it on your own. You’re fully capable. Go on now. Here, we’ve got agencies to help you find a job.”
Toby R. Says: “The church would then give money away forever and ever… ”
For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land. Deuteronomy 15:11
No body is forced to listen to “blather” or to read pamphlets, or maybe expect the people to actually show up at the church on Sunday and give ten percent of their nothing. The church giving welfare also help people become self-reliant, provide opportunities for people to work for assistance they receive, provide opportunities for people to serve others, etc.
No body is forced to listen to “blather” or to read pamphlets, or maybe expect the people to actually show up at the church on Sunday and give ten percent of their nothing.
Actually, they are. It’s a common practice at Christian-oriented homeless shelters (at least around here) to “preach first and eat later.”
The church giving welfare also help people become self-reliant, provide opportunities for people to work for assistance they receive, provide opportunities for people to serve others, etc.
You mean….kinda like welfare?
Paula says that Welfare is different because something is expected in return. Doesn’t that make it MORE likely to teach people self-reliance than just a hand out?
Tim, have a listen to Todd Friel interviewing Christopher Hitchens on Wretched Radio. He does a better show there. Just google christopher hitchens wretched radio. Friel starts off pretty confident, but I’m pretty sure that by the end even he knows it hasn’t gone very well for him.
Paula: No body is forced to listen to “blather” or to read pamphlets, or maybe expect the people to actually show up at the church on Sunday and give ten percent of their nothing.
I am with Tim on this, I am not sure how easy things really are in many churches. (Not all churches are the same, of course.)
I have two anecdotes about this.
Last week I was listening to the Matt Freideman show (he is a talk show host on American Family Radio, the same network that carries Dr. Turek’s show). He told a story about hitchhiking, and meeting two experienced hitchhikers. They asked him if he knew where to go if he was really in trouble and needed a place to spend the night. He answered that he would go to a church (he is a minister now) and they laughed. Mr. Freideman said it was clear from their reaction that they had tried this before, and the help just wasn’t there (‘The board has to meet to approve, then elders have to…, …’ they said). Their advice was to go to a bar, and he’d meet someone who’d been in such a spot before and would be ready to help.
Another story is from my own life. I once found a man who needed some help. I spent some time with him and we had lunch, but he needed more than that. I couldn’t really do much more for him. I offered to take him to a good church (it was one of my first reactions, that should be a place one can go when one is in need). He refused. I could tell that he too tried that before, and the help just wasn’t there.
Now, as I said all churches are different, and these are just anecdotes, but I think they represent something potentially important.
I think it is important to say that government welfare is imperfect as well, but perhaps the two systems side-by-side can help more people than either system standing alone.
What do you think, Paula?
Also, I’d like to, if you’re willing (no obligation of course), get your answer to some of the questions I asked above which related to the previous discussion (before the tangent).
I’ll re-post them for ease:
You praise Him when keys are found, but see no need to withhold praise when a child starves, because you trust that child starved for some higher reason?
Would you say you trust Him against your better instincts (what I mean is — it would be easier to trust Him if no one starved and keys just disappeared and were never found)?
If you are basing it on trust, what happens if the G-d you are worshiping is actually one you would consider evil?
If you have been tricked into worshiping the devil how would you know?
I’ll also add another question. If I believed that G-d had helped me find me keys, I don’t know if my first reaction would be to praise Him. I think I might be distraught that something trivial was done for me, while others suffered tremendously with no (sign of) help. If my reaction involved prayer, it might not be a prayer of thanks, but rather a prayer of regret — why me and not them?
The question I suppose is, do you (and Phil and anyone else) have this reaction initially? But then trust that G-d did what he did for His reasons (which are by definition right), and just let that overrule your own judgment?
There are lots of churches that won’t help people directly (locally, I suppose is putting it better, which is more often where it’s needed). Small churches that donate money to larger christian “missions” or charities. And who really knows what kind of board is running these charities and how much they choose to pay themselves for doing god’s work.
Luke Says: “Would you say you trust Him against your better instincts (what I mean is — it would be easier to trust Him if no one starved and keys just disappeared and were never found)”?
It is easy to trust God when all is going great. If I truly need the keys God will provide them for me.
Philippians 4:19
But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.
Luke: “If you have been tricked into worshiping the devil how would you know”?
Galatians 5:22
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
Anything opposite these are from the devil.
But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.
Problem is, you define “riches” and “glory” as “whatever god has/is.”
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
Problem is, you define” love” and “joy” and “peace” and “kindness” as “bringing people to god by whatever means necessary.” Which sometimes includes not-so-peaceful, not-so-loving, not-so-joyful, not-so-kind behavior.
“But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, Anything opposite these are from the devil.”
But how do you know these are good qualities, if you only have God’s word for it? It’s a circular argument. You know God is good because he tells you he is.
Of course, you could argue that love, joy, peace etc are intrinsically good – that any God who offers those things MUST be good. But this means you are able to understand these are good things with or without God. Which is fine – that’s the position I take. But it cuts the legs away from the argument that you can only be good through God, or that the very idea of good is meaningless without God.
Hey Paula,
Thanks for your answers. I have some follow up comments and questions, of course.
Paula:It is easy to trust God when all is going great.
I think this statement only makes sense if you take a self-centered view. Here is what I mean: the original thought that led to this exchange was based on something going well for you (through G-d’s intervention) while things are going badly all around you/us.
So yes, if we think of ourselves, there may be times when things are “going great,” but I don’t know if there has ever been a time we could describe this way when looking at the big picture (at least since the Fall). The world has always been full of suffering — creation groans (Rom 8:22).
It is with that recognition of ongoing and constant suffering that I asked my question: “Would you say you trust Him against your better instincts (what I mean is — it would be easier to trust Him if no one starved and keys just disappeared and were never found)?”
Paula: If I truly need the keys God will provide them for me.
I would have a similar concern with this statement as well.
Are you saying that children who starve to death do not “need” food?
How could you ever need keys any more than a starving child needs nutrition?
Luke: If you have been tricked into worshiping the devil how would you know?
Paula: But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
Anything opposite these are from the devil.
OK, so here is the question then: The “fruit” in this case is arranging colors so that someone may find keys, while allowing a child to starve every 5 seconds. How do you judge the situation just described as “love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness”?
I would like to ask all who are able and want to, to pray for me. I have a final math exam today, and I need to get a high enough grade on it to make it to 9th grade so I ask that when anyone gets the chance please pray for me. Thank you all for listening. God bless you all peace and love,Emily
I have prayed for you Emily. God bless.
Good luck Emily!
Thank you for the prayers, and the good luck wishes. I just finished the test and it was really difficult. Hopefully I got a good grade on it. I prayed pratically every five minutes. My friends have important tests also today. Could everyone pray for them to? Thank you for listening, and caring. God bless to all, peace and love, Emily
In order to understand why Christians worship God, we need to know right, and wrong. We all know right, and wrong, but sometimes we choose to do wrong. I have a test to see who knows right from wrong in a difficult situation. Please watch the music video Hard Rock Halleujah By Lordi. Then tell me if what they did to the people was right or wrong. i hope everyone checks out the video. God Bless to all peace and love,Emily
Luke says: “Are you saying that children who starve to death do not “need” food?”
Of course not. God will supply food and He has. Through people.
Luke says: “How could you ever need keys any more than a starving child needs nutrition?”
When people are suffering with no hope and then God brings hope, that’s proof to believe God is real. All the kids have seen God. He does care through the faithful giving from people who care.
Luke: Are you saying that children who starve to death do not “need” food?”
Paula:Of course not. God will supply food and He has. Through people.
How is this true in the cases of children who have starved do death?
If a child has starved to death then food was not supplied.
Luke:How could you ever need keys any more than a starving child needs nutrition?
Paula:When people are suffering with no hope and then God brings hope, that’s proof to believe God is real.
I honestly don’t even know what this means (your statement is simply a non sequitur). Can you tell me what this means in real, concrete terms when it relates to the thousands of children who starve to death each day?
Luke says:”How is this true in the cases of children who have starved do death? If a child has starved to death then food was not supplied.”
Yes, children die but many are kept alive because of people faithfully helping and giving.
It is a simple response of love from the heart. God’s heart.
“For I was hungry, and you fed me. I was thirsty, and you gave me a drink. I was a stranger, and you invited me into your home. I was naked, and you gave me clothing. I was sick, and you cared for me. I was in prison, and you visited me.” Matthew 25:35
Luke says: “I honestly don’t even know what this means…”
Sorry I did not make myself clear. What I meant was if God is real then people have hope in getting the needed food etc. And He is real.
“Not one sparrow … can fall to the ground without your Father knowing it. And the very hairs of your head are all numbered. So don’t worry! You are more valuable to Him than many sparrows” Matthew 10:29-31
If God cares for the sparrows then keys and the hungry are just as important.
Paula, all you seem to be saying is that although millions of children starve to death in terrible suffering, you see proof of God in the fact that not every child in the world starves to death. You can believe what you want, but I find this deeply unconvincing.
A situation where millions starve and others don’t, with no pattern over who lives or dies, is exactly what I would expect to find in a world where no God is intervening in our affairs. Likewise a situation where sometimes people find their keys and sometimes people don’t.
Andrew Ryan Says: “…is exactly what I would expect to find in a world where no God is intervening in our affairs.”
Do you want your free choice taken away from you? That’s exactly what God would have to do if He were to enforce His will on the earth. For if God were to intervene in the matter of suffering, would He not also intervene in the matter of sin? If He did, He would have to be a dictator. Then how would we react? We would not want that, and according to the Bible, God doesn’t want it either. He wants us to obey Him because we want to, not because we have to. And in order to accomplish this, He must allow two things to happen. First, in order to grant us free choice, He must provide us with graphic examples of the consequences of the wrong choice. Secondly, if He wants us to seek His perfect order, and this perfect order is not to be found in this life, then He must allow injustices and sufferings; for if everything in this life was fair, good and happy, what need would there be to seek a better life? Why would we seek a Deliverer, if there was nothing to be delivered from? If there is a heaven, then we must know that it is infinitely superior to our lives here; if there is a hell, then we must understand suffering now, so we can avoid it when we die. Seen from this perspective, suffering is not something that ought to turn people away from God, but draw them to Him.
God is pleading with us to repent. He greatly desires that we turn to him. He tells us in II Peter 3:9, “The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some men count slackness; but is long suffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.” God wants us to repent so we can be saved. He is patiently waiting on us. But eventually our time will run out. The longer we put off repentance, the harder our heart gets.
To all the dads, Have a blessed Father’s Day!
“Do you want your free choice taken away from you? That’s exactly what God would have to do if He were to enforce His will on the earth.”
Fine, so you don’t think he intervenes to help people find their keys, which was the claim that started this particular discussion?
Do you want your free choice taken away from you? That’s exactly what God would have to do if He were to enforce His will on the earth.
If god truly existed, and if that was what was “right,” then yes, I would prefer to “have my free choice taken away from me,” because I wouldn’t need it. We should all be doing what’s right anyway, right? So why give people the ability to do wrong? So we can feel all “saintly” when we do right?
He would have to be a dictator.
How is giving you the “choice” of following him or eternal punishment any different from just making you do what’s “right?” To you, it would be “bad” for us to not experience free will. Well, to me, it would be worse for us to experience eternal punishment. At least with no free will we would not be aware of the possibility of an alternative. With eternal punishment, you are aware and yet can never experience the alternative.
So if you ask me, he’s a worse dictator operating by your perception of him than he would be if he was what you call a “dictator.”
He wants us to obey Him because we want to, not because we have to.
Seems to me like he wants you to obey him because you want to because you don’t want to suffer eternal punishment. If god existed and only wanted you to believe in him because you wanted to, he would not have to force your hand by threatening you if you did not. He would allow you to live without him without any devastating supernatural consequences. That’s simply contradictory — only the consequences you face in this life, as a direct result of your actions.
And in order to accomplish this, He must allow two things to happen. First, in order to grant us free choice, He must provide us with graphic examples of the consequences of the wrong choice.
I watched a movie the other day on Youtube, about this unpleasant fellow named GG Allin who was apparently some kind of “gangster” rocker. He made a statement that people should be raped and hurt because it makes them stronger and teaches them to deal with hurt and pain in the future, and it keeps it from happening to them again — kind of like an immunization against painful experience.
That sounds dangerously close to what you are saying here.
He must allow injustices and sufferings; for if everything in this life was fair, good and happy, what need would there be to seek a better life?
And yet you yourself claim to seek this “better life,” and you admit that you would enjoy a world where everyone believes in god and everything is perfect. That is the kind of world that can only exist without free will; so your ultimate goal as a Christian would be to establish a world that you say you believe cannot exist? Forgive me if I am confused.
Why would we seek a Deliverer, if there was nothing to be delivered from?
If god had made it so, then we would already have what you say “needs delivering.” So tell me: is it better to be left in a constant state of wanting, or to have what you need? Do you enjoy the concept of a world that needs something but does not have it, or would you moreso enjoy a world that has what it needs and operates thusly? Why would it be so bad that we “wouldn’t need deliverance,” because god would have already “delivered” us from those things?
Are you saying that the only reason to live is to seek this deliverance, but never truly achieve it?
if there is a hell, then we must understand suffering now, so we can avoid it when we die.
I hate to address this comment as it is completely irrelevant, but I will say that I believe that death is the end of suffering, not the beginning.
God wants us to repent so we can be saved. He is patiently waiting on us. But eventually our time will run out. The longer we put off repentance, the harder our heart gets.
*yawn* Do you realize how much this sounds like a threat? Do you also realize how few people (like myself) are going to actually listen and take what you say seriously when you basically threaten them with hell if they do not? It’s totally unrealistic and shows the depravity of your argument. If the threat of hell is your reason for believing in god, then I have even more reason to denounce it, because I don’t think fear of the consequences should be a reason for doing what you think is “right.” And I don’t think it makes sense to cite consequences as a reason why other people should do what you believe is “right.” If you did it because you felt it was right, then you would be doing so regardless of the consequences, and you could make a case on that instead.
Are you saying that the only reason to live is to seek this deliverance, but never truly achieve it?
P.S. Allow me to clarify slightly; I speak of mankind on a mass scale, not of individual humans, when I say this. As a whole, mankind can never be “saved” (as you say it). Not everyone will make what you call the “right” choice. That is a fact, and I don’t think anyone has a problem admitting that this is true. So why, then? Why are those people given the “free will” to basically damn themselves for eternity? That’s like inviting everyone into a room and giving each one of them a knife, and telling them, “do whatever you like with it.” Those who will hurt themselves will do it, and those who will hurt others will do so as well. Why not just not give them a knife? How can you not know that people will be hurt? How is this “beneficial” to those people in any way? Worse, how is it “beneficial” to the ones who are hurt but choose not to hurt others?
Paula : God wants us to repent so we can be saved. He is patiently waiting on us. But eventually our time will run out. The longer we put off repentance, the harder our heart gets.
Can you show me where the word “hell” is written in this statement?
Tim: “*yawn* Do you realize how much this sounds like a threat? Do you also realize how few people (like myself) are going to actually listen and take what you say seriously when you basically threaten them with hell if they do not?”
When did I threaten you with hell? If you believe hell doesn’t exists how can it be a threat to you?
When did I threaten you with hell? If you believe hell doesn’t exists how can it be a threat to you?
1) Hell isn’t a threat to me, that’s the point of what I was saying. It’s ridiculous to use it as an argument for turning Christian because if you don’t believe it exists then it has no weight.
2) I was referring to when you had addressed Hell much earlier:
Why would we seek a Deliverer, if there was nothing to be delivered from? If there is a heaven, then we must know that it is infinitely superior to our lives here; if there is a hell, then we must understand suffering now, so we can avoid it when we die. Seen from this perspective, suffering is not something that ought to turn people away from God, but draw them to Him.
Which ties directly into what you said later:
God wants us to repent so we can be saved. He is patiently waiting on us. But eventually our time will run out. The longer we put off repentance, the harder our heart gets.
Saved? From what? Obviously you don’t think we need to be “saved” from the suffering of this world. You seem (as I do) to think that worldly suffering is normal and continuous and mostly unavoidable. And what else could you mean when you say, “But eventually our time would run out?” Do you hear how that sounds?
I mean, you have no problem whatsoever with the idea of a god who allows a child to be born, know nothing but suffering and never have a chance to see anything different, and die a slow and painful (or quick and brutal) death in some third-world nation. To you, it’s somehow the child’s fault….or “man’s fault,” whatever that means. Yeah, so let’s say that mankind is to blame for the troubles of this world. How does that change the fact that innocent people die for no reason? How does that factor into your view? I really would like to know that. How does an “infinitely loving” god justify something like that without resorting to some glossy metaphor?
Again Christians worship God because other people have frightened them out of their minds. There is NO other reason. There never has been and there never will be. All the rest of these posts are so much blah blah blah.
Boris, you don’t make any sense. Christians worship God because they love Him. I love God more than my parents. If you watch the video I mentioned earlier you’ll learn something. I don’t know how old you are, but at a young age you should have learned why people worship God. I hope your perspective changes,and you find your way to God. God bless to all peace and love,Emily
You love God more than your parents? If you were my kid I’d take you to get a check-up from the neck up. Your parents created you, not God. There is no God. When you grow up and go to college you’ll probably figure that out. Meanwhile take a science class when and if you get to the ninth grade.
Phil – thanks for sharing. I know precisely what you are talking about since my walk with Christ truly began. Many times events could be explained away in a non-spiritual sense, but there are the occasional times when God’s actions are so far beyond “coincidence” ordinary rationale fails miserably.
As for conveying this – it’s not easy. If one has never been exposed to light, how does one comprehend it? Too much light would painful, alien, harmful. Only the most subtle visible difference in visibility would spark the basis for understanding, but even that has its shortcomings.
There is a profound difference between head knowledge and experiential knowledge, even if one desires to count simulation as experience. For instance consider close combat. One can have some idea of what that may be like. One might even run through simulations & training exercises, but there’s nothing like reality. No one who’s actually been through real close combat can share that experience with others who haven’t. And there is a knowing shared between those who have had that experience which completely transcends the normal. That’s a brotherhood that has only one baptism – by fire.
Sharing doesn’t always mean comprehension by the others. Unless an experience is generated, and is willingly taken to heart, there will be no true meaning at all.
Too much light would painful, alien, harmful.
How so? It might hurt at first, but your eyes would adjust.
Many times events could be explained away in a non-spiritual sense, but there are the occasional times when God’s actions are so far beyond “coincidence” ordinary rationale fails miserably.
Do you have any specific examples in mind? Situations that not just allow for, but demand a “spiritual response?”
Sharing doesn’t always mean comprehension by the others.
I’m glad you said that, actually. It reinforces what I’ve been saying; there’s a difference between showing something to someone, and that someone seeing it. You can use words to describe something, but if those words don’t mean anything to the person you’re talking to, they are (naturally) going to be confused by what you mean.
Unless an experience is generated, and is willingly taken to heart, there will be no true meaning at all.
On that note, I have an honest question: Do you think that there are people who have honestly never experienced what you claim to have experienced? If so, do you blame that person(s) for not believing what you do? If you do blame them or hold them accountable (i.e. you see them as “denying” something), then why, or on what basis?
Many times events could be explained away in a non-spiritual sense, but there are the occasional times when God’s actions are so far beyond “coincidence” ordinary rationale fails miserably.
Boris says: People of all theistic religions make the same claims about experiencing God. I don’t know why Christians expect skeptics to accept claims from them that the Christians would not accept from members of other religions.
Tim D – too much light is blinding.
One cannot intensively watch an arc-welder and expect to walk away without eye damage. And there’s no level of accommodation on your own that can alter that. Truth is like that. Subtle differences do eventually grow, but not without spiritual assistance at some point. However, in addition to seeing truth, one also is exposed to realities never considered. There’s a Hebrew word – ahkchariet, which has to do with perceiving consequences. It means to look ahead with a wisdom to seek the consequences of our actions. You don’t know what you don’t know, but we do have the power to reason that if we continue some action, certain consequences will become ever more probable.
An illustration might help – entering a casino to gamble will have consequences, generally most people lose money. If you know the house wins 80% of the time, is it wise to cut your losses and leave when the money on you is spent or do you stay? Is making arrangements to sign over your house to continue gambling wise or foolish? The further your descent into the financial abyss of indebtedness the greater the amount must be won to break even, and even more to come out ahead, but the odds have changed against your favor. When the thugs come to work you over for the money, who do you have to blame? If you used the principle of ahkchariet you would look at the odds, seek out out those who have experienced loss, consider what you have, and instead may choose to put your money elsewhere.
To answer your question as honestly as I can – there are people who have never experienced what I’ve experienced. In fact, though there are similarities between Phil’s experiences and mine, they are not the same. That doesn’t make his any less real than mine. Your question about blame regarding the experience might be misplaced however, because no one can be blamed for what they didn’t do, only for what they actually do, otherwise that would be unjust – right?
Let’s go back to the casino illustration. Suppose you were going to enter the casino, and as you reach the door, you see it open wide and out comes a man who says, “Don’t go in there, there is a 99.89% chance you’ll lose everything” Do you ignore him and continue on in? Now suppose this man tells you, “I used to be rich, but I gambled it all away, I know what I’m talking about” Do you ignore him or ask him questions? Suppose as you stand there talking, the doors open up and bouncers heave a young man out onto the pavement. Would you still want to go in? If you did so, could you really blame the man?
Now suppose you’re already in the casino, and you’re indebted to the house. Along comes someone who tells you to stop – do you listen? If they convey their story, would it be wise to follow their advice?
You probably see where this goes. My point is the very first step is being honest with ourselves. I think you’d agree, we’d have to be intellectually honest about where we stand with ourselves, and the wreckage we create in our lives. Self-denial is pretty nasty. Because if we don’t acknowledge there’s a problem, we likely won’t consider the ahkchariet at all.
One cannot intensively watch an arc-welder and expect to walk away without eye damage. And there’s no level of accommodation on your own that can alter that. Truth is like that.
Ah, I see what you mean. Although I wouldn’t say “truth is like that,” so much as I would say “paradigm shifts are like that;” slow and subtle, they can cross a lot of ideological distance, but if you just drop an encyclopedia of reasons why you think they’re wrong into their lap, they won’t likely make the commitment to trying to understand you (which is part of the reason why I think 99% of Evangelical Spur-of-the-Moment attempts to convert random strangers don’t work). I was actually writing something on that very note earlier this week 0.0
because no one can be blamed for what they didn’t do, only for what they actually do, otherwise that would be unjust – right?
Depending on what you mean by that, I could agree or disagree. There are certain crimes called “crimes of omission;” are you familiar with the term? If so, I have to ask if that is the kind of blame you are referring to as “unjust.”
You probably see where this goes. My point is the very first step is being honest with ourselves. I think you’d agree, we’d have to be intellectually honest about where we stand with ourselves, and the wreckage we create in our lives. Self-denial is pretty nasty. Because if we don’t acknowledge there’s a problem, we likely won’t consider the ahkchariet at all.
Interesting; I haven’t heard enough of your arguments to discern any undertones that might be prevalent in what you say here, but on the bottom line I’d have to say I basically agree with what you’re saying 0.0
Also, that word sounds sort of like a fusion of “ankh” and “chariot,” though I’m sure that’s got little to do with it. Pointless reference, really, just that I consider myself somewhat of a linguistic buff, and I thought it was interesting. I wonder if they have a common linguistic lineage?
“You probably see where this goes. My point is the very first step is being honest with ourselves. I think you’d agree, we’d have to be intellectually honest about where we stand with ourselves, and the wreckage we create in our lives. Self-denial is pretty nasty. Because if we don’t acknowledge there’s a problem, we likely won’t consider the ahkchariet at all.”
So . . . people that don’t believe in a god are ignorant and perhaps have a sickness akin to addiction (in this case addicted to being “blind to the truth”)?
Tim D. – True, paradigm shifts are like that, although they don’t always have to be subtle or slow, but I think you’re right, it’s more accurate to say it’s a kind of paradigm shift, or greater revelation.
Re: crimes of omission – also agree, and I thought about that when giving my illustration. To be considered just or unjust there would have to be a violation of existing statutes. If one knew the statute and willingly violated it, that’s usually considered a greater crime than one unknowingly breaking a law, but it’s not always true that knowing the statute will change the outcome. Some laws have immediate impacts. For instance, breaking the law of gravity by jumping from a high cliff or building (without a parachute or device) will most likely result in death or massive injury. A baby crawling out the 15th floor window, doesn’t know the law, but the results are the same as the guy who jumped. So some laws have a nature that disregard accountability when it comes to consequences.
Heh: ahkchariet – fusion of ankh and chariot. Not close (nice try!). Hebrew is fascinating (still learning). Roots, stems, and of course Masoretic vs non-Masoretic shadings based on context usually make it a challenge. I tried to provide a transliteration that sounds like the pronunciation. If you’re curious about the word, it’s used to describe the specific Torah portion (Achariet Mut) dealing with Yom Kippur in Leviticus 16. BTW – Achariet Mut means something like Under Consequence of Death (mut).
Tim, I appreciate the thoughtful exchange. Upcoming obligations are going to make it hard to get back to you for a few days, but I have enjoyed our conversation so far. Cheers.
I won’t be able to talk to you wonderful people for a year, and I just want to let you all know that I love and care about you all and I hope all of you find your way to God. God bless you all peace and love, Emily