Zone1 Humanity and Jesus

[frigidweirdo]

Yes, God exists. God is. Consider how mankind now has a better understanding of science. In many ways, this has also brought about a better understanding of God. It is not a new God, but a new understanding of God--just as we have a new understanding of science.

Thing is, logic says God doesn't exist.

God made man in his image. So God needs arms, and legs and a heart and a liver and lungs and a nose? What for?

Everything God is, is convenient for HUMANS, not for anything else. A human-centric view. God in the past filled the gaps of knowledge, if we do human sacrifice, if we make these huge monoliths, we will have better weather, better crops, better the things we need.

Now God doesn't need human sacrifices, doesn't need huge monoliths. Now he needs to fill the gaps of modern life.

Far to convenient to exist.

 

[frigidweirdo]

We have Quakers who do not pick up arms against anyone. There is also a religion that will not til the soil because it might disturb worms and insect life that exist in the soil. In this life, we see both ends of the spectrum of physical life.

Yeah, different people see God differently. So, some dude who is supposedly all powerful, can't even get his message across. I'd say Islam and Christianity are two vastly different religions. Both fill the needs of humans but in contrary ways. Why? If God is telling people how to worship him?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Consider we are a people in training, a people being taught. When a student fails, teachers begin again with that student until he learns. Was the first failure forgiven or was it a matter of starting over with a new beginning? Each day God greets the world with, "Today we begin." Let's not fail.

So what are we supposed to learn? That flooding is because of God and we need to sacrifice people until the flooding stops?

 

[Meriweather]

Thing is, logic says God doesn't exist.

This is the the mountain mankind can't seem to make it over. There are those of us who either (through experience) know God exists or have faith that he does. And there are those who have utterly convinced themselves God does not exist.

So, some dude who is supposedly all powerful, can't even get his message across.

The problem lies not with the messenger and his message, but with the receivers. Some hear it, put it in play, and rejoice in the results.

Some hear but shrug it aside as something they don't need. Some hear it decide this message gets in the way of the power and wealth which they see as being more valuable than the message. The rich and powerful then manipulate and fight against those who have received and are trying to live the message.

There are, indeed, wolves in sheep's clothing.

 

[Meriweather]

So what are we supposed to learn? That flooding is because of God and we need to sacrifice people until the flooding stops?

No.

 

[frigidweirdo]

This is the the mountain mankind can't seem to make it over. There are those of us who either (through experience) know God exists or have faith that he does. And there are those who have utterly convinced themselves God does not exist.

The problem lies not with the messenger and his message, but with the receivers. Some hear it, put it in play, and rejoice in the results.

Some hear but shrug it aside as something they don't need. Some hear it decide this message gets in the way of the power and wealth which they see as being more valuable than the message. The rich and powerful then manipulate and fight against those who have received and are trying to live the message.

There are, indeed, wolves in sheep's clothing.

I went out with someone when I was in my early 20s and their friend got told my God that he would pass all his exams. So this friend didn't study for his exams. Guess what happened?

He failed his exams.

I could go on about humans and how they accept things that just aren't true. Make connections with things that just aren't there. We see faces everywhere, on Mars, in clouds etc.

I could ask you why you think you "know" that God exists, but I KNOW that I will dismiss it. Because I've never, ever seen anyone EVER give a valid reason for it.

I've looked at how people become saints, oh my word it's ridiculous. It's people wanting to believe and finding things that just aren't there.

At the same time if you want to KNOW that God exists, you can do this too. If it gets you through the pointlessness of life, the bored of life and means you don't get by by hurting others or hurting yourself, then whatever.

I'm looking at the messages, and they just say to me "humans made these messages for humans".

 

[frigidweirdo]

No.

So, God has changed then? Conveniently God has gone from a God that people needed 5,000 years ago, to a God people need in the modern era. Like God became a hippy, put on a Hawaiian shirt and some shades and started speaking in rap.

 

[Meriweather]

So, God has changed then?

No.

 

[frigidweirdo]

No.

Well that's a conversation killer. Bye.

 

[Meriweather]

Well that's a conversation killer.

Perhaps it was the question. Earlier I mentioned that today people know more about science and therefore see natural disasters differently. For the most part they are no longer seen as a punishment. It was not the natural disasters that changed, but people's knowledge of natural disasters. Knowledge of science grows as does our knowledge of God. It's not the natural disaster or God that changes--it is the growth in our own knowledge and awareness.

For some it may be as simple as, So God does not send punishments? Then there is no God. For others it is a greater understanding of not only God's works, but how he works.

If you choose to end the discussion with the question that had already been addressed (So God has changed then?) that's fine--mainly because the other point that has been addressed is that I have no desire to convert anyone to a belief in God, but to only increase understanding on why others have such great faith in God.

The main point of the Biblical version of the Great Flood? Speech. Biblical authors were fantastic in presenting lessons within a story or historical event.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Perhaps it was the question. Earlier I mentioned that today people know more about science and therefore see natural disasters differently. For the most part they are no longer seen as a punishment. It was not the natural disasters that changed, but people's knowledge of natural disasters. Knowledge of science grows as does our knowledge of God. It's not the natural disaster or God that changes--it is the growth in our own knowledge and awareness.

For some it may be as simple as, So God does not send punishments? Then there is no God. For others it is a greater understanding of not only God's works, but how he works.

If you choose to end the discussion with the question that had already been addressed (So God has changed then?) that's fine--mainly because the other point that has been addressed is that I have no desire to convert anyone to a belief in God, but to only increase understanding on why others have such great faith in God.

The main point of the Biblical version of the Great Flood? Speech. Biblical authors were fantastic in presenting lessons within a story or historical event.

If our knowledge of God has changed, maybe we're still wrong.

We thought if we sacrificed people, God would give us good things.

We know this isn't true.

Problem is the Bible was written at a time when people thought these things. Maybe the Bible is wrong.

The question is: How do we know what God wants?

How do we differentiate between what humans want, and what a human will CLAIM God wants, and what God actually wants?

How do we test individuals to see whether they can communicate with God or not? How do we test they're lying or not?

It's not about "God doesn't send punishments, so there is no God"

It's about looking at God and realizing that God is a human construct.

We look at Harry Potter. He's made in the shape of a human. He has arms, and legs, and a heart and eyes, and ears. Why? Because we make fictional characters that we can understand. I remember reading the Hitchhikers' Guide To The Galaxy and giving up pretty quickly because some of the characters were weird. They didn't resonate with me.

The Bible says God made us in his image. Which image? Physical? Because God has been portrayed by many as looking like humans. Especially like a bearded man.

Or do we mean in the mental way? Clearly if someone's as powerful as the one who created the universe, we wouldn't be able to comprehend anything. Even scientists or mathematicians who are smart are known to be not that good at dealing with normal people.

But no, what we get from God is "love". Something not very well explained, rather wishy washy word that means whatever we want it to mean. But it gives us a sense of purpose in life, a sense of security.

The same things that sacrifice, rain dances and the like gave people in the past. A sense that they're somehow in control, nothing much to worry about as long as you get in touch with God.

All too convenient.

Rather more complex than "God doesn't send punishments, so God can't exist".

 

[Meriweather]

It's about looking at God and realizing that God is a human construct.

The irony here is that the above is your own human construct of God.

Ever consider that all that we meet are an anthropomorphism of our own self? I see frigidweirdo through Meriweather eyes, just as Meriweather is seen through frigidweirdo eyes. What needs to be faced is that just as frigidweirdo is more than just a Meriweather construct, so is God more than a construct of any (or even many) humans.

The idea of God as a homicidal maniac is a human construct or anthropomorphism, which by definition means we see something, and place our own understanding upon it, just as we do when we assign human qualities to anything that is not human, and as we place our own understanding of ourselves as humans onto other humans.

The judgment you placed on God with your reading of the Biblical account of the Great Flood is your own protest that this is not what God should be or even what God is. That is seeing beyond the human anthropomorphism, searching for the reality.

 

[Meriweather]

If our knowledge of God has changed, maybe we're still wrong.

Go beyond this to, Maybe we are still learning. The humility in this is accepting we know so little of God and what we don't know of him is vast.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The irony here is that the above is your own human construct of God.

Ever consider that all that we meet are an anthropomorphism of our own self? I see frigidweirdo through Meriweather eyes, just as Meriweather is seen through frigidweirdo eyes. What needs to be faced is that just as frigidweirdo is more than just a Meriweather construct, so is God more than a construct of any (or even many) humans.

The idea of God as a homicidal maniac is a human construct or anthropomorphism, which by definition means we see something, and place our own understanding upon it, just as we do when we assign human qualities to anything that is not human, and as we place our own understanding of ourselves as humans onto other humans.

The judgment you placed on God with your reading of the Biblical account of the Great Flood is your own protest that this is not what God should be or even what God is. That is seeing beyond the human anthropomorphism, searching for the reality.

Not my construct of God. I don't believe in a God. It's the construct I see people talking about all the time.

Yes, a relationship is a combination of two people. People change when confronted with a differing personality. However if there is a God, he's the God of the WHOLE UNIVERSE. The chances of life elsewhere are huge.

We're not the center of solar system, our Sun isn't in the center of our galaxy, our galaxy isn't in the center of out cluster of galaxies.

We're not the center of anything. But our God seems to think we are. In fact people used to get killed (by the Christian Church) because they refused to accept that the Sun went around the Sun.

The idea of God as a homocidal maniac is one from the Bible. Who wrote the Bible? All it takes is someone looking at the modern world and comparing to see that's what God is, according to the Bible.

Yes, we're taking what humans do, and what humans call it.

You could say that if there is a God he sees things differently. In which case you'd be saying "life is not important". I mean the Earth has seen quite a few mass extinctions, we had life that didn't use oxygen to live. That died off.

So, are we saying "God loves us"? No. We're saying God is so indifferent to who we, as humans are, it's like we're a tiny mite that we can't even see.

Then God says "you're angering me, you're not important, I'm sure what comes later will be better, I've done it before".

But that's not what you see and not what most other religious people see. Why? Because religion GIVES them things. It gives them love, it gives them reasons for things. God is great, we pray to him and things happen to us.

It doesn't match with what the Bible says, or what history says.

Why? Because we invented God the same as we invented Harry Potter.

I just read that part of the Bible.

I can't see it meaning anything else. How can you? Unless of course the original versions didn't say "I'm going to kill you all", but I'm sure they did.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Go beyond this to, Maybe we are still learning. The humility in this is accepting we know so little of God and what we don't know of him is vast.

The problem is, if we learned one thing, then we dropped it and now we think it's ridiculous and now we think something else, maybe it's all made up.

What evidence is there that it's true?

We can go through all the saints to find out how made up all their sainthood malarkey was.

I could pick a random saint and it'd show you just how flimsy the "evidence" is. To the point that it's almost a joke.

We used to have multiple Gods, some still do. Why?

 

[Meriweather]

How do we differentiate between what humans want, and what a human will CLAIM God wants, and what God actually wants?

What is the most perfect, the most loving, the most just, the most merciful? Of all these humans seem most confused by justice and mercy, thinking one must be chosen over the other. The better question would be for humans to ask themselves, "What is it I want" and how close to perfection, love, justice, and mercy are these desires?

How do we test individuals to see whether they can communicate with God or not? How do we test they're lying or not?

Test. That is our greatest failure. The Bible flatly states don't test God, so what do we do? We bang our heads against a brick wall trying to test God. It is easier for me to present a math test to my chinchillas and expect results than it is to test God. Accept he cannot be tested and it is useless to try.

Was your friend who said God told him he would pass his math test without studying lying or mistaken? Was he deep in prayer or deep into wishful thinking? God is truth because God is reality. Wishful thinking lies outside reality. The student with the math test can be studied. Was the result the reality of God or of wishful thinking?

 

[frigidweirdo]

What is the most perfect, the most loving, the most just, the most merciful? Of all these humans seem most confused by justice and mercy, thinking one must be chosen over the other. The better question would be for humans to ask themselves, "What is it I want" and how close to perfection, love, justice, and mercy are these desires?

Test. That is our greatest failure. The Bible flatly states don't test God, so what do we do? We bang our heads against a brick wall trying to test God. It is easier for me to present a math test to my chinchillas and expect results than it is to test God. Accept he cannot be tested and it is useless to try.

Was your friend who said God told him he would pass his math test without studying lying or mistaken? Was he deep in prayer or deep into wishful thinking? God is truth because God is reality. Wishful thinking lies outside reality. The student with the math test can be studied. Was the result the reality of God or of wishful thinking?

I don't understand your first paragraph.

The Bible says don't test God. Perfect. How to stop people thinking for themselves. Accept what I say. Blasphemy, the perfect way of shutting people up.

Who wrote the Bible? God doesn't have hands to write with. He can't pick up a pen.

I'm not even testing God. I'm looking at logic and the logic doesn't work.

God made the universe, and as far as we can tell, the universe is perfectly logical. We don't know all the math, we don't know what a quark is made from, we do the math for quantum physics, for string theory and it doesn't all add up, but as far as we know, it's all logic.

That's how we can get to the Moon, we send a problem, we do the math, and it goes and it gets there because we understand that it all works on logic.

And now I'm looking at the logic and the logic says "there isn't a God, unless he's a fictional character like Harry Potter"

Does Harry Potter exist?

Was the friend of a friend mistaken? Was he delusional? Was he a liar?

Doesn't really matter. Because if he could say this, then ANYONE could say this. The people who wrote the Bible could have been the same as him. Or, it could not be any of this, God could just be a social construct.

A tribe needed to feel good, one guy wanted to be powerful in the tribe. So he said he could talk to God, him alone. No one else could. God said we need to do this if we're going to survive. They did this, they survived. PROOF that this man was right, he got his power, he got his share of the young girls, he was important.

Just like people want to be important nowadays. And some of them say they can cure AIDS by saying God talks to them, some say they talk to God and get lots of money.

Even Trump claims some kind of religion which is hilarious.

 

[Meriweather]

Not my construct of God. I don't believe in a God. It's the construct I see people talking about all the time.

And that is what you believe about God...you have constructed your own belief based on what people are saying. Hearsay. That's how you arrived at your own conclusion and formed your own belief/non-belief.

 

[frigidweirdo]

And that is what you believe about God...you have constructed your own belief based on what people are saying. Hearsay. That's how you arrived at your own conclusion and formed your own belief/non-belief.

Yes, I'm looking at what YOU PEOPLE, Christians, say about God. You've got a book about it. I can look at your book and I can poke a million holes into the book, into the arguments.

I'm using YOUR SOURCES.

"Hearsay"? Maybe, the Bible is "hearsay". Which means all the other stuff, all the "there is a God" "God said this" "God did that" "Jesus did this" is ALL HEARSAY.

 

[Meriweather]

The idea of God as a homocidal maniac is one from the Bible.

No. That is your conclusion based on your own understanding of what was presented.

You could say that if there is a God he sees things differently. In which case you'd be saying "life is not important". I mean the Earth has seen quite a few mass extinctions, we had life that didn't use oxygen to live. That died off.

So, are we saying "God loves us"? No. We're saying God is so indifferent to who we, as humans are, it's like we're a tiny mite that we can't even see.

Love is not something God does. Love is who he is.

But that's not what you see and not what most other religious people see. Why? Because religion GIVES them things. It gives them love, it gives them reasons for things. God is great, we pray to him and things happen to us.

No, religion does not give love anymore than philosophy gives love. Religion gives guidance in living one's life.