"So then, you would define yourself as a follower of Christ?"
I have difficulty in understanding why that matters?
I have difficulty in understanding why that matters?
-
Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).
"UFO's" drug culture, and the occult
- Thread starter Gondrio
- Start date
Gondrio
Rising Star
fractal enchantment said:
I'm asking what what he believes himself to be. Christian, Buddhist, Hindu a mixture of the three. Why would it not matter?
He obviously believes in God. He said it himself. So as a result, there are many questions that must follow. Its called logic. Or do you not believe that 2+2=4? Would you agree that God has certain attribution? Or is God inside of you? If so, then how did the universe come to be? You say God is love, yet in order for God to love, must he not also hate (if you love babies, you must hate abortion)? What then may I ask does God hate? If God does not hate, then how does he love?? What is God, external or internal? You said that you "still remember the realization, the awe I felt when I came to understand that there is actually a God. I wept like a long lost child, who finally found his way home." So I would assume your God is external? If so, are you unable to identify him, or do you worship someone, or something as God? There are many many questions you must ask before you ask the question of all questions... "who or what is God?"
clouds
Human
Three questions:
1. Is everyone here implying that God is the God of all the universe?
2. If yes... wouldn't you need to know the entire universe to affirm that?
3. If no... who or what is the God of the rest of the universe?
We must remember that when we say: "There is a God.", we must specify the dimensions of his/hers jurisdiction.
1. Is everyone here implying that God is the God of all the universe?
2. If yes... wouldn't you need to know the entire universe to affirm that?
3. If no... who or what is the God of the rest of the universe?
We must remember that when we say: "There is a God.", we must specify the dimensions of his/hers jurisdiction.
Gondrio
Rising Star
clouds said:
I affirm that God is the God of all the universe, but also beyond. God has no limited jurisdiction. This is simply what it means to be an omniscient, omnipotent, eternal being.
having said that, the same question can be applied to anything. If we do not not know all the facts in the universe, past, present, and future, how can we ever attain certainty that we have correct information about any one fact?
Ultimately, there are only two possible solutions to the problem: (1) We must learn all the facts of the universe in order to be sure that no subsequently discovered fact will prove to be false, or (2) someone who does know all the facts in the universe, and who never lies, could tell us some true facts that we can then be sure will never be contradicted.
This second solution is in fact what we have in God's words in Scripture. God knows all facts that ever have been or ever will be. And this God who is omniscient (all knowing) has absolutely certain knowledge. There can never be any fact that he does not already know. Thus, there can never be any fact that would prove that something God thinks is actually false. Now it is from this infinite storehouse of certain knowledge that God has spoken to us in Scripture, in which he has told us many true things about himself, about ourselves, and about the universe he has made.
He tells us in Revelation 22:13 - "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."
He tells us in Psalm 19:1 - "The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork."
He tells us in Romans 3:23 - "for all [men] have sinned and fall short of the glory of God"
Now you may be asking? Why would God reveal himself in a book? Well, for that I suggest you read "the power of words, and the wonder of God" by John Piper (Free PDF), but it can be said, that if you look at the rest of creation you will see that God is a God of system. We have the solar system, the planetary system, the eco-system... just ask any doctor, the human body is a system. It is easy to see that the Bible can be organized into a system. Both old and new testament. And also a systematic theology. God is the hidden God, who reveals Himself.
clouds
Human
The Catholic Church has said that it is possible that alien life forms exist. What would you tell the aliens (if you could communicate with them) if they argument that Jesus Christ is not their God? What if some alien civilization has another God or Gods? Would you try to convince them that Jesus is the True God and that they are wrong? What if they have proof of the existence of their Gods? Even worse, what if they have proof that Jesus is not your God? What would be your approach?
I am asking this not to engage in a circular discussion about religion, but to try to discuss probable interplanetary ethics. I really think that we must always have present that we are living in a pretty much unknown universe. And if Jesus was an alien, that doesn't mean that all aliens in the universe think alike.
I am asking this not to engage in a circular discussion about religion, but to try to discuss probable interplanetary ethics. I really think that we must always have present that we are living in a pretty much unknown universe. And if Jesus was an alien, that doesn't mean that all aliens in the universe think alike.
Gondrio said:
No. In your terms, I'd be more like a hopeless sinner I think.
I tried to accept Christ into my life and give him total reign over my world, but I couldn't. I couldn't say the same heartfelt YES to Christ, which I said to God. With God it was easy, it was so in my face, so direct. My experience was the YES in itself. With Christ, it's different. For me, Christ is still a concept. A huge concept for sure, but that alone is not enough to say that all-encompassing YES. (There is no cheating in these matters, as you most likely know.)
Gondrio
Rising Star
clouds said:
Okay..... first, Jesus Christ was an alien because he was God. God is not like us at all. This is what it means to be holy (aside from being morally pure). He is completely set apart. A complete and utter alien. Second, I don't agree with the Roman Catholic church, so quite frankly, I could care less what they have to say about aliens. Though I will humor you for the sake of the argument.
This argument basically boils down to a battle for the divinity of Christ. Because while Christ only made an atonement for the human race, if he were the divine Son of God (with the attribution portrayed in scripture), then he would not be excluded as the God of otherworldly beings merely because they are idolaters, who deny there maker like much of the human race.
I think that we can at least come to terms that Christ claimed he was the Son of God. So if in the future, I were to come in contact with a race of alien lifeforms (and that's a BIG "IF" ) I would probably proceed by setting forth an argument that goes something like this:
Only three possibilities can be ascribed to Jesus Christ? 1) He was a lunatic 2) He was a liar 3) He was the Son of God... Most nonreligious people, and even many people of other religious, like Gandhi, see him as history's greatest moral teacher. However, they are just digging your own grave, because a good moral teacher does not deceive, and a lunatic is not a good man. There are lunatics in asylums who sincerely believe they are God. The "divinity complex" is a recognized form of psychopathy. Its character traits are well known: egotism, narcissism, inflexibility, dullness, predictability, inability to understand and love others as they really are and creatively relate to others. In other words, this is the polar opposite of the personality of Jesus! More than any other man in history, Jesus had the three essential virtues every human being needs and wants: wisdom, love, and creativity. he wisely and cannily saw into peoples hearts, behind their words. He solved insolvable problems. He also gave totally to other, including his very own life. Finally, he was the most creative, interesting, unpredictable man who ever lived. No one... believer, unbeliever or agnostic was ever bored by Him. The common verb predicated of those who met Jesus was "thaumazo", "to wonder." Lunatics are not wonderful, but Jesus was the most wonderful person in History. If that were lunacy, lunacy would be more desirable than sanity.
If on the other hand, Jesus was a liar, then he had to have been the most clever, cunning, Machiavellian, blasphemous wicked, satanic deceiver the world has ever known, successfully seducing billions into giving up their eternal souls into his hands. If Christianity is a lie, it is by far the biggest and baddest lie ever told, and Jesus is the biggest and baddest liar. But in every way Jesus was morally impeccable. He had all the virtues, both soft and hard, tender and tough. Further, he died for his "lie." What would motivate a selfish, evil liar to do that? I have never known anyone who thought Jesus was a deliberate liar. That would be more bizarre than calling Mother Teresa a party animal! But if Jesus must be either Lord, liar or lunatic, and he cannot be either liar or lunatic, then he must be Lord.
Gondrio
Rising Star
cellux said:
Ultimately, like you basically said, the farthest you could be taken would be a generic Deism. But Christian belief is ultimately based upon subjective religious experience. The Gospel is a foolish message (1 Corinthians 1:18 ), and would be foolish to us too had not God opened our hearts to receive the message. It takes a change of heart, to see the desirability of Christ. Real Christianity does not say "you have to stop doing this, and this, and this so you don't go to Hell". Real Christianity is all determined by desire. Its about catching a glimpse of the beauty of Jesus Christ so that to do anything other than live for Him appears absolutely absurd! I couldn't resist crediting a few texts:
Matthew 13:44 - "The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which a man found and covered up. Then in his joy he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field."
Ezekiel 36:26 - "And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh"
1 Corinthians 1:18 - For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
1 Corinthians 2:14 - "But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised."
Revelation 3:16 - "So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth."
But if you see this, then what do you want to achieve here?
People either hear the calling or not. And if they do not, can you make them hear it?
Even if you can, I don't think the best way is to "attack" others with statements from the Bible. Those who haven't tasted this nectar that you are talking about, cannot see the deeper meaning of the Bible. For them, it's just a book. What may be evident to you, is nothing to them.
People either hear the calling or not. And if they do not, can you make them hear it?
Even if you can, I don't think the best way is to "attack" others with statements from the Bible. Those who haven't tasted this nectar that you are talking about, cannot see the deeper meaning of the Bible. For them, it's just a book. What may be evident to you, is nothing to them.
unansweredquestions
Rising Star
well the assertion that god is omnibenovolant stems from logical reasoning. God is perfect, and god is morally good. Throughout the bible, god is attributed with perfection and benevolance. Following that, god is perfectly good; omnibenevolant.Gondrio said:
im still wondering why? i dont think you adressed the motivation behind such a needless, stressful test?Gondrio said:
this kind of leads me back to my issue with god being so loving. would such a loving being really endorse rape of his childrens spouses?Gondrio said:
speaking off, why exactly does god need to sacrifice his son in such a horribly painful way in order so that he can forgive all mans sins? ....surley the grousome crusifixtion is abit needless? he could have skipped that part out, hes the one forgiving?
Gondrio
Rising Star
cellux said:
Those who hear "the calling", hear it through some form of the gospel message.
1 Corinthians 1:21 - "It pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe"
2 Corinthians 4:6 - "How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching?"
I cant. God can. The same "God who said, "Let light shine out of darkness," made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ." (2 Corinthians 4:6)
"Face of Christ" = the brightness of his personal character.
cellux said:
If I come off as disdainful or overbearing, then for that I'm genuinely sorry. It is not my intention to "attack", but rather "defend". Regardless, you're the one asking all the questions. Can I help it that you have a healthy sense of curiosity? And would good would it do to leave you in the dark, when the light is just a click away?
cellux said:
Once the flame of the Gospel flickers alive among an unreached people group, it will spread like wild fire. Believe me, I've seen it happen. I have confidence not in man, but in God.
Gondrio
Rising Star
unansweredquestions said:
I never denied the omnibenevolence of God. Though that is only one of his many attributes. We cannot ignore the wrath of God simply because it is inconvenient for us. Gods wrath is as much a divine perfection as His faithfulness, power, or mercy. It must be, because there is no blemish, not the slightest defect in the character of God. Yet there would be if "wrath" were absent from Him. As I stated earlier, "God is love therefore He must hate. Ie. If you love Jews you must hate the holocaust.
Indifference to sin is a moral blemish, and he who hates it not is a moral leper. How could He who is the Sum of all excellency look with equal satisfaction upon virtue and vice, wisdom and folly? How could He who is infinitely holy disregard sin and refuse to manifest His "severity" (Rom. 9:12) toward it? How could He who delights only in that which is pure and lovely, loathe and hate not that which is impure and vile? The very nature of God makes Hell as real a necessity, as imperatively and eternally requisite as Heaven is. Not only is there no imperfection in God, but there is no perfection in Him that is less perfect than another. IOW we are the ones lacking perfection. Not God.
Not that God’s anger is a malignant and malicious retaliation, inflicting injury for the sake of it, or in return for injury received. No, while God will vindicate His dominion as the Governor of the universe, He will not be vindictive.
This reply does not mean that Jesus does not consider Himself good. He rather wants to show the man that "No one is good except God alone", so that the man may realize that all his works do not make him good, and that he is not capable of earning eternal life.
John 4:25 - "The woman said to him, “I know that Messiah is coming (he who is called Christ). When he comes, he will tell us all things. Jesus said to her, “I who speak to you am he."
unansweredquestions
Rising Star
unansweredquestions said:
Gondrio said:
unansweredquestions said:
Gondrio said:
granted, it is one many attributes. attributes which together, cause many philsophical problems and illogical reasoning.
Gondrio
Rising Star
unansweredquestions said:
God is love, yes. God is also the original pattern for righteousness/justice. God's righteousness is essentially his unswerving allegiance to his own name - his own glory. God is righteous to the degree that he upholds and displays the honor of his name. He is righteous when he values most what is most valuable, and what is most valuable is his own glory. IOW God must vindicate the glory of his name. How does he do it? Wrath against the unjust.
But if God is a God of love, he must be for us. Is, then, God for himself or is he for us?
The answer which I want to try to persuade you is true is this: because God is unique as the most glorious of all beings and totally self-sufficient, he must be for himself in order to be for us. If he were to abandon the goal of his own self-exaltation, we would be the losers. His aim to bring praise to himself and his aim to bring pleasure to his people are one aim and stand or fall together. I think we will see this if we ask the following question:
In view of God's infinitely admirable beauty and power and wisdom what would his love to a creature involve? Or to put it another way: What could God give us to enjoy that would show him most loving? There is only one possible answer, isn't there? HIMSELF! If God would give us the best, the most satisfying, that is, if he would love us perfectly, he must offer us no less than himself for our contemplation and fellowship. This was precisely God's intention in sending his Son. (Ephesians 2:18, 1 Peter 3:18 )
God is the one Being in all the universe for whom seeking his own praise is the ultimately loving act. For him self-exaltation is the highest virtue. When he does all things "for the praise of his glory" as Ephesians 1 says, he preserves for us and offers to us the only thing in all the world which can satisfy our longings. Himself.
you say: If you love this then you must hate that.
I really don#t see how loving one thing means you must hate another. How is that the logical consequence of the other. Aside from this being reductionist thinking and applying Boolean logic where obviously there is more than yes and no, there is just no obvious reason for one thing leading to the other. I love life, I don't hate death. I try to understand both sides of everything and leave hatred behind. Naturally both emotions exist, but having one does not necessarily mean that the other has to exist in equal force. These kind of emotions are not opposite forces that are in balance by/because of some natural law. What we call love and hate are concepts that are not the same as the love that exists within the divine IMO. When we say God is love, we don't mean the kind of love we have for one another.
The God that I've met does not judge. God encompasses, includes, experiences, abides. God may experience hatred (through us), but does not hate. Let me quote now...
God is the free personality, God is absolute consciousness. If we understand it this way, that it is God looking out through our eyes, not indirectly or secretly, but directly, meaning the feeling of I is actually the same as the feeling of God then this quote becomes something profound. God is not outside. And God is not wrathful or hateful. God creates this world through us, as perception is the creator of our world, but God is not a universal chess player moving pieces around. God is the pulse of this world, the heart beat, the blood... and God is the highest intelligence, because God is free of all that could limit.
I'm too tired to make my point clear right now, I appologize. I simply do not believe that love and hate the way we experience them in a materialistic dual/Boolean way apply to the perception of the divine. In my experience hatred is part of the illusion of the self that we create and identify with on a daily basis. It is not the opposite of love in the sense that one cannot exist without the other. hatred is perhaps - like darkness is the absence of light - simply the absence of love (and understanding and compassion).
I really don#t see how loving one thing means you must hate another. How is that the logical consequence of the other. Aside from this being reductionist thinking and applying Boolean logic where obviously there is more than yes and no, there is just no obvious reason for one thing leading to the other. I love life, I don't hate death. I try to understand both sides of everything and leave hatred behind. Naturally both emotions exist, but having one does not necessarily mean that the other has to exist in equal force. These kind of emotions are not opposite forces that are in balance by/because of some natural law. What we call love and hate are concepts that are not the same as the love that exists within the divine IMO. When we say God is love, we don't mean the kind of love we have for one another.
The God that I've met does not judge. God encompasses, includes, experiences, abides. God may experience hatred (through us), but does not hate. Let me quote now...
(a quote from a quote out of Divine Invasion by PKD)
God is the free personality, God is absolute consciousness. If we understand it this way, that it is God looking out through our eyes, not indirectly or secretly, but directly, meaning the feeling of I is actually the same as the feeling of God then this quote becomes something profound. God is not outside. And God is not wrathful or hateful. God creates this world through us, as perception is the creator of our world, but God is not a universal chess player moving pieces around. God is the pulse of this world, the heart beat, the blood... and God is the highest intelligence, because God is free of all that could limit.
I'm too tired to make my point clear right now, I appologize. I simply do not believe that love and hate the way we experience them in a materialistic dual/Boolean way apply to the perception of the divine. In my experience hatred is part of the illusion of the self that we create and identify with on a daily basis. It is not the opposite of love in the sense that one cannot exist without the other. hatred is perhaps - like darkness is the absence of light - simply the absence of love (and understanding and compassion).
Enoon said:
No need!
That was quite well put actually!
All the fear & damnation is the man-made-man-controlling part of any religion, it's sad.
There is the original, wonderful message of unconditional love buried deep under all that dogma, but it just gets lost in all the words & rules when you get caught up in them....rather than the core message.
Jesus said:
Jesus said:
The golden rule!
Is there really a need for anything more?
WS
Gondrio
Rising Star
Enoon said:
I don't think you understand where I'm coming from... Isn't the essence of righteousness to be moved by perfect delight in what is perfectly glorious? And isn't the opposite of righteousness when we set our highest affections on the things of little or no worth?
And so the righteousness of God is the infinite zeal and joy and pleasure that he has in his own worth and glory (and He has loved the the perfect image of his own glory--his Son). And if he were to ever act contrary to this eternal passion for his own perfections, he would be unrighteous. He would be an idolater.
Therefore, failure to love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, strength, and soul. Ie. to break a single commandment is idolatry, and insulation against an infinitely worthy, and righteous God. If the punishment rises with the dignity of the one insulted (we see this in our own justice systems), then God must punish sin with perfect justice according to his perfect righteousness. The rest is obvious.
So, God is the original pattern for "goodness". Now what is the opposite of good? You may have you're own personal preferences about God, and life, but that doesn't by any means negate the morality of that preference, if there is an original pattern for morality.
Lastly, you say you don't hate death, but how can you honestly say this when you have not a clue what death actually entails? Isn't it all just a guessing game on your part?