What Is God Made From?

[Alan Burns]

If you truly believed the deity had given you a direct order to kill one of your children, or anyone else for that matter, would you obey?

You have chosen to ask a hypothetical question about a scenario that will never happen.  God is not evil, and He will not ask me to do anything which is inherently evil - it is just not possible.

However, I have been asked to do something which I would never normally consider because I felt totally incapable - to lead the singing in a charismatic prayer group.  In my youth I would attend the early morning Mass because I wanted to avoid the singing -  I could not sing and I did not like to hear singing during Mass.  When the opportunity arose to lead the singing in the prayer group I felt God prompting me to say "yes".  Little did I know at the time that this decision would change my life - I discovered God's love for the first time, and I also met my future wife.   

[Alan Burns]

It only takes one act of conscious free will to show evidence for the human soul.

Not at all, Alan. One act of free will is evidence for free will, and nothing else. Attributing it to an invented "soul" doesn't wash.

Science can't and I believe never will explain the human attributes of self awareness and free will.  You, Len, are putting your faith in a future scientific revelation which might never happen.  I am putting my faith in the God given revelation that it is my soul which gives me awareness of what is in my brain together with the capability to manipulate it.

[torridon]

It only takes one act of conscious free will to show evidence for the human soul.

Not at all, Alan. One act of free will is evidence for free will, and nothing else. Attributing it to an invented "soul" doesn't wash.

Science can't and I believe never will explain the human attributes of self awareness and free will.  You, Len, are putting your faith in a future scientific revelation which might never happen.  I am putting my faith in the God given revelation that it is my soul which gives me awareness of what is in my brain together with the capability to manipulate it.

Well you are both wrong imv. Alan's faith in a soul is just a fantasy with zero science to back it up. Len generally respects science but is in denial on this point - that we are flesh and blood creatures, subject to the (largely deterministic) laws of nature that govern flesh and blood.  That we feel that our choices are free, is not much of an argument really.

[Leonard James]

Science can't and I believe never will explain the human attributes of self awareness and free will.

I don't need science to explain it, Alan, I have my own perfectly satisfactory explanation for it. Of course, I may be wrong, but until such time as that is shown, it satisfies me.

You, Len, are putting your faith in a future scientific revelation which might never happen.

I really can't see why that matters.

I am putting my faith in the God given revelation that it is my soul which gives me awareness of what is in my brain together with the capability to manipulate it.

Well, if that is the only way you can be happy, I accept that is your belief.

[ippy]

It only takes one act of conscious free will to show evidence for the human soul.

Not at all, Alan. One act of free will is evidence for free will, and nothing else. Attributing it to an invented "soul" doesn't wash.

Science can't and I believe never will explain the human attributes of self awareness and free will.  You, Len, are putting your faith in a future scientific revelation which might never happen.  I am putting my faith in the God given revelation that it is my soul which gives me awareness of what is in my brain together with the capability to manipulate it.

Barmy, but there AB, you're not alone.

ippy

[Leonard James]

Len generally respects science but is in denial on this point - that we are flesh and blood creatures, subject to the (largely deterministic) laws of nature that govern flesh and blood.  That we feel that our choices are free, is not much of an argument really.

I don't deny that our choices depend a lot on our nature/nurture, but at the end of the day, it is undeniable that we can respond to the dictates of our nature/nurture ... or do the opposite.

For me that clearly demonstrates free will.

[Nearly Sane]

Len generally respects science but is in denial on this point - that we are flesh and blood creatures, subject to the (largely deterministic) laws of nature that govern flesh and blood.  That we feel that our choices are free, is not much of an argument really.

I don't deny that our choices depend a lot on our nature/nurture, but at the end of the day, it is undeniable that we can respond to the dictates of our nature/nurture ... or do the opposite.

For me that clearly demonstrates free will.

Argument by underlining

[floo]

If you truly believed the deity had given you a direct order to kill one of your children, or anyone else for that matter, would you obey?

You have chosen to ask a hypothetical question about a scenario that will never happen.  God is not evil, and He will not ask me to do anything which is inherently evil - it is just not possible.

However, I have been asked to do something which I would never normally consider because I felt totally incapable - to lead the singing in a charismatic prayer group.  In my youth I would attend the early morning Mass because I wanted to avoid the singing -  I could not sing and I did not like to hear singing during Mass.  When the opportunity arose to lead the singing in the prayer group I felt God prompting me to say "yes".  Little did I know at the time that this decision would change my life - I discovered God's love for the first time, and I also met my future wife.   

The deeds attributed to the deity featured in the Bible are evil!

[BashfulAnthony]

If you truly believed the deity had given you a direct order to kill one of your children, or anyone else for that matter, would you obey?

You have chosen to ask a hypothetical question about a scenario that will never happen.  God is not evil, and He will not ask me to do anything which is inherently evil - it is just not possible.

However, I have been asked to do something which I would never normally consider because I felt totally incapable - to lead the singing in a charismatic prayer group.  In my youth I would attend the early morning Mass because I wanted to avoid the singing -  I could not sing and I did not like to hear singing during Mass.  When the opportunity arose to lead the singing in the prayer group I felt God prompting me to say "yes".  Little did I know at the time that this decision would change my life - I discovered God's love for the first time, and I also met my future wife.   

The deeds attributed to the deity featured in the Bible are evil!

For the umpteenth time:  How is the NT message of love and forgiveness "evil?"  Why don't you answer? 

[BashfulAnthony]

If you truly believed the deity had given you a direct order to kill one of your children, or anyone else for that matter, would you obey?

You have chosen to ask a hypothetical question about a scenario that will never happen.  God is not evil, and He will not ask me to do anything which is inherently evil - it is just not possible.

However, I have been asked to do something which I would never normally consider because I felt totally incapable - to lead the singing in a charismatic prayer group.  In my youth I would attend the early morning Mass because I wanted to avoid the singing -  I could not sing and I did not like to hear singing during Mass.  When the opportunity arose to lead the singing in the prayer group I felt God prompting me to say "yes".  Little did I know at the time that this decision would change my life - I discovered God's love for the first time, and I also met my future wife.   

The deeds attributed to the deity featured in the Bible are evil!

For the umpteenth time:  How is the NT message of love and forgiveness "evil?"  Why don't you answer?

 

Nothing wrong with  being in a minority.  Preferable to simply and lamely following the herd:  only dead fish go with the current, eh?

[Dicky Underpants]

Well if the deity could make itself known to you in a way which makes you certain it exists, why couldn't the deity do me the same favour when I was a child and begging it to make its presence felt in my life? Either it didn't give a damn, or it doesn't exist, the latter seeming more credible to me!

All I can say is keep trying

Assuming it exists, if it can't come through for a child who needed it, why should it bother to come through for an adult who doesn't?

This was well said, floo. If God does not make himself known to us in the depth of suffering when we cry out to him, why on earth should we 'keep trying' to see if he puts in an appearance when times are better? I know that at the lowest time of my life (and I'm not talking about fleabites here) the deity declined to make himself known. As for the sufferings of a little child ("for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven", we are told), they can indeed seem unspeakable. I cannot see the point of anyone 'keeping trying' when they are met with a deafening silence. The next move is over to the supposed deity.....

[BashfulAnthony]

    Seriously, though...

I am serious in saying that I believe my ability to reason is impervious to attacks by gods and demons ... just as seriously as you believe your "God" exists.

Or, to put it another way: " My mind is closed totally;  and could someone help me to understand why I am posting here?"

No, no, BA. You really do misunderstand Floo's point - one of the best she's made ever. If God does not make himself known to us in the depth of suffering when we cry out to him, why on earth should we 'keep trying' to see if he puts in an appearance when times are better? I know that at the lowest time of my life (and I'm not talking about fleabites here) the deity declined to make himself known. As for the sufferings of a little child ("for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven", we are told), they can indeed seem unspeakable. I cannot see the point of anyone 'keeping trying' when they are met with a deafening silence. The next move is over to the supposed deity.....

If you are being "ignored," then there is a reason.  If you do not truly believe, then do not expect God to act as some kind of GP, there for your benefit, when you can offer no true belief and allegiance.  We could all do with help in so many ways in our everyday lives;  that doesn't mean that God has to do everything for you.

[Dicky Underpants]

If you truly believed the deity had given you a direct order to kill one of your children, or anyone else for that matter, would you obey?

You have chosen to ask a hypothetical question about a scenario that will never happen.  God is not evil, and He will not ask me to do anything which is inherently evil - it is just not possible.

However, I have been asked to do something which I would never normally consider because I felt totally incapable - to lead the singing in a charismatic prayer group.  In my youth I would attend the early morning Mass because I wanted to avoid the singing -  I could not sing and I did not like to hear singing during Mass.  When the opportunity arose to lead the singing in the prayer group I felt God prompting me to say "yes".  Little did I know at the time that this decision would change my life - I discovered God's love for the first time, and I also met my future wife.   

The deeds attributed to the deity featured in the Bible are evil!

I'm going to attempt to be a sort of moderate voice here, floo. In the early part of the Bible, the deeds of the deity certainly seem to be weighted down on the evil side. There are also deeds attributed to the deity which are good. Since all we know of these supposed 'deeds', and all we know of God's supposed 'goodness' are simply accounts written from the point of view of men (and some women), there is no reason to suppose that the deity is one thing or the other. Sometimes he appears good, sometimes bad. You cherry pick the bad, BA cherry picks the good - and in fact, since he rejects the whole of the Old Testament, he's halfway to your viewpoint in any case. And his view of the loving Jesus in the NT, though highly attractive, and supported by a fair number of scholars, in itself can only be upheld by strenuously rejecting various 'uncomfortable' texts, or explaining them away.

I wonder, is it possible to approach the Bible without some kind of emotional involvement, in the attitude of objective scholarship? I certainly had a very emotional attitude to it in the (distant) past, but now I try to see it as an interesting collection of ancient texts, some of which can still move me, but without feeling any compunction to believe. I find the byways of scholarship about the Bible interesting, in the same way that some historians get enthused about the civilisations of the ancient Maya or the Hittites. But maybe I'm in a minority too.

[Dicky Underpants]

    Seriously, though...

I am serious in saying that I believe my ability to reason is impervious to attacks by gods and demons ... just as seriously as you believe your "God" exists.

Or, to put it another way: " My mind is closed totally;  and could someone help me to understand why I am posting here?"

No, no, BA. You really do misunderstand Floo's point - one of the best she's made ever. If God does not make himself known to us in the depth of suffering when we cry out to him, why on earth should we 'keep trying' to see if he puts in an appearance when times are better? I know that at the lowest time of my life (and I'm not talking about fleabites here) the deity declined to make himself known. As for the sufferings of a little child ("for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven", we are told), they can indeed seem unspeakable. I cannot see the point of anyone 'keeping trying' when they are met with a deafening silence. The next move is over to the supposed deity.....

If you are being "ignored," then there is a reason.  If you do not truly believe, then do not expect God to act as some kind of GP, there for your benefit, when you can offer no true belief and allegiance.  We could all do with help in so many ways in our everyday lives;  that doesn't mean that God has to do everything for you.

I had originally mis-addressed that post to you, and corrected it. But yours was a truly stupid post, pathetic in its simplistic attitude. I don't care about being 'ignored'. I was talking about a time in my life when help was needed*. I came through that alone. Do you really think I'm crying out to the deity now? Learn something about people, and about yourself.

*And I certainly offered absolute allegiance at that time. Do you really think I haven't considered these things from the depths?

[BashfulAnthony]

If you truly believed the deity had given you a direct order to kill one of your children, or anyone else for that matter, would you obey?

You have chosen to ask a hypothetical question about a scenario that will never happen.  God is not evil, and He will not ask me to do anything which is inherently evil - it is just not possible.

However, I have been asked to do something which I would never normally consider because I felt totally incapable - to lead the singing in a charismatic prayer group.  In my youth I would attend the early morning Mass because I wanted to avoid the singing -  I could not sing and I did not like to hear singing during Mass.  When the opportunity arose to lead the singing in the prayer group I felt God prompting me to say "yes".  Little did I know at the time that this decision would change my life - I discovered God's love for the first time, and I also met my future wife.   

The deeds attributed to the deity featured in the Bible are evil!

I'm going to attempt to be a sort of moderate voice here, floo. In the early part of the Bible, the deeds of the deity certainly seem to be weighted down on the evil side. There are also deeds attributed to the deity which are good. Since all we know of these supposed 'deeds', and all we know of God's supposed 'goodness' are simply accounts written from the point of view of men (and some women), there is no reason to suppose that the deity is one thing or the other. Sometimes he appears good, sometimes bad. You cherry pick the bad, BA cherry picks the good - and in fact, since he rejects the whole of the Old Testament, he's halfway to your viewpoint in any case. And his view of the loving Jesus in the NT, though highly attractive, and supported by a fair number of scholars, in itself can only be upheld by strenuously rejecting various 'uncomfortable' texts, and explaining them away.

I wonder, is it possible to approach the Bible with out some kind of emotional involvement, in the attitude of objective scholarship? I certainly had a very emotional attitude to it in the (distant) past, but now I try to see it as an interesting collection of ancient texts, some of which can still move me, but without feeling any compunction to believe. I find the byways of scholarship about the Bible interesting, in the same way that some historians get enthused about the civilisations of the ancient Maya or the Hittites. But maybe I'm in a minority too.

A good post, DU.  One point I would make is that if you are able to approach the Bible without emotional involvement, then you are never going to effectively engage with it.  It is a highly emotional subject, and there's nothing wrong with that.   Being emotional does not preclude you from appreciating the difficulties involved.

[Dicky Underpants]

  One point I would make is that if you are able to approach the Bible without emotional involvement, then you are never going to effectively engage with it.

Okay, but I've already said that at one point (in fact two points) in my life was very emotionally involved with it. That brought nothing but tears and confusion. I see much more clearly now, and have fewer headaches.

[floo]

If you truly believed the deity had given you a direct order to kill one of your children, or anyone else for that matter, would you obey?

You have chosen to ask a hypothetical question about a scenario that will never happen.  God is not evil, and He will not ask me to do anything which is inherently evil - it is just not possible.

However, I have been asked to do something which I would never normally consider because I felt totally incapable - to lead the singing in a charismatic prayer group.  In my youth I would attend the early morning Mass because I wanted to avoid the singing -  I could not sing and I did not like to hear singing during Mass.  When the opportunity arose to lead the singing in the prayer group I felt God prompting me to say "yes".  Little did I know at the time that this decision would change my life - I discovered God's love for the first time, and I also met my future wife.   

The deeds attributed to the deity featured in the Bible are evil!

I'm going to attempt to be a sort of moderate voice here, floo. In the early part of the Bible, the deeds of the deity certainly seem to be weighted down on the evil side. There are also deeds attributed to the deity which are good. Since all we know of these supposed 'deeds', and all we know of God's supposed 'goodness' are simply accounts written from the point of view of men (and some women), there is no reason to suppose that the deity is one thing or the other. Sometimes he appears good, sometimes bad. You cherry pick the bad, BA cherry picks the good - and in fact, since he rejects the whole of the Old Testament, he's halfway to your viewpoint in any case. And his view of the loving Jesus in the NT, though highly attractive, and supported by a fair number of scholars, in itself can only be upheld by strenuously rejecting various 'uncomfortable' texts, and explaining them away.

I wonder, is it possible to approach the Bible with out some kind of emotional involvement, in the attitude of objective scholarship? I certainly had a very emotional attitude to it in the (distant) past, but now I try to see it as an interesting collection of ancient texts, some of which can still move me, but without feeling any compunction to believe. I find the byways of scholarship about the Bible interesting, in the same way that some historians get enthused about the civilisations of the ancient Maya or the Hittites. But maybe I'm in a minority too.

I don't think the deity behaves well in the NT, either!

[BashfulAnthony]

  One point I would make is that if you are able to approach the Bible without emotional involvement, then you are never going to effectively engage with it.

Okay, but I've already said that at one point (in fact two points) in my life was very emotionally involved with it. That brought nothing but tears and confusion. I see much more clearly now, and have fewer headaches.

What I'm really saying is, did you truly believe, in your distress; or were you looking for instant balm?  I don't say this in a negative manner.  I honestly believe that God will respond to you if you believe with all your heart.

[Dicky Underpants]

If you truly believed the deity had given you a direct order to kill one of your children, or anyone else for that matter, would you obey?

You have chosen to ask a hypothetical question about a scenario that will never happen.  God is not evil, and He will not ask me to do anything which is inherently evil - it is just not possible.

However, I have been asked to do something which I would never normally consider because I felt totally incapable - to lead the singing in a charismatic prayer group.  In my youth I would attend the early morning Mass because I wanted to avoid the singing -  I could not sing and I did not like to hear singing during Mass.  When the opportunity arose to lead the singing in the prayer group I felt God prompting me to say "yes".  Little did I know at the time that this decision would change my life - I discovered God's love for the first time, and I also met my future wife.   

The deeds attributed to the deity featured in the Bible are evil!

I'm going to attempt to be a sort of moderate voice here, floo. In the early part of the Bible, the deeds of the deity certainly seem to be weighted down on the evil side. There are also deeds attributed to the deity which are good. Since all we know of these supposed 'deeds', and all we know of God's supposed 'goodness' are simply accounts written from the point of view of men (and some women), there is no reason to suppose that the deity is one thing or the other. Sometimes he appears good, sometimes bad. You cherry pick the bad, BA cherry picks the good - and in fact, since he rejects the whole of the Old Testament, he's halfway to your viewpoint in any case. And his view of the loving Jesus in the NT, though highly attractive, and supported by a fair number of scholars, in itself can only be upheld by strenuously rejecting various 'uncomfortable' texts, and explaining them away.

I wonder, is it possible to approach the Bible with out some kind of emotional involvement, in the attitude of objective scholarship? I certainly had a very emotional attitude to it in the (distant) past, but now I try to see it as an interesting collection of ancient texts, some of which can still move me, but without feeling any compunction to believe. I find the byways of scholarship about the Bible interesting, in the same way that some historians get enthused about the civilisations of the ancient Maya or the Hittites. But maybe I'm in a minority too.

I don't think the deity behaves well in the NT, either!

As I pointed out - one has to cherry-pick the NT to get rid of the nasty bits But both the good and the bad are there - and the reports are simply in a collection of ancient writings.

[Dicky Underpants]

  One point I would make is that if you are able to approach the Bible without emotional involvement, then you are never going to effectively engage with it.

Okay, but I've already said that at one point (in fact two points) in my life was very emotionally involved with it. That brought nothing but tears and confusion. I see much more clearly now, and have fewer headaches.

What I'm really saying is, did you truly believe, in your distress; or were you looking for instant balm?  I don't say this in a negative manner.  I honestly believe that God will respond to you if you believe with all your heart.

"Instant balm" my arse! Three or four years is hardly 'instant' and the period nearly ended with my death. I said, I was not talking about flea-bites...

You say you believe God will respond, and many others will testify that God does not respond. What I do believe that if you are truly disposed to be convinced of the existence of 'spiritual' things, then the mind itself can often come up with some extraordinary experiences.

[BashfulAnthony]

If you truly believed the deity had given you a direct order to kill one of your children, or anyone else for that matter, would you obey?

You have chosen to ask a hypothetical question about a scenario that will never happen.  God is not evil, and He will not ask me to do anything which is inherently evil - it is just not possible.

However, I have been asked to do something which I would never normally consider because I felt totally incapable - to lead the singing in a charismatic prayer group.  In my youth I would attend the early morning Mass because I wanted to avoid the singing -  I could not sing and I did not like to hear singing during Mass.  When the opportunity arose to lead the singing in the prayer group I felt God prompting me to say "yes".  Little did I know at the time that this decision would change my life - I discovered God's love for the first time, and I also met my future wife.   

The deeds attributed to the deity featured in the Bible are evil!

I'm going to attempt to be a sort of moderate voice here, floo. In the early part of the Bible, the deeds of the deity certainly seem to be weighted down on the evil side. There are also deeds attributed to the deity which are good. Since all we know of these supposed 'deeds', and all we know of God's supposed 'goodness' are simply accounts written from the point of view of men (and some women), there is no reason to suppose that the deity is one thing or the other. Sometimes he appears good, sometimes bad. You cherry pick the bad, BA cherry picks the good - and in fact, since he rejects the whole of the Old Testament, he's halfway to your viewpoint in any case. And his view of the loving Jesus in the NT, though highly attractive, and supported by a fair number of scholars, in itself can only be upheld by strenuously rejecting various 'uncomfortable' texts, and explaining them away.

I wonder, is it possible to approach the Bible with out some kind of emotional involvement, in the attitude of objective scholarship? I certainly had a very emotional attitude to it in the (distant) past, but now I try to see it as an interesting collection of ancient texts, some of which can still move me, but without feeling any compunction to believe. I find the byways of scholarship about the Bible interesting, in the same way that some historians get enthused about the civilisations of the ancient Maya or the Hittites. But maybe I'm in a minority too.

I don't think the deity behaves well in the NT, either!

As I pointed out - one has to cherry-pick the NT to get rid of the nasty bits But both the good and the bad are there - and the reports are simply in a collection of ancient writings.

With respect:  then you didn't believe with all your heart.  It's never too late to re-think and find a way.  I have been through phases of doubt over the years; anybody who says otherwise is not being truthful.  But I never gave up thinking and searching.  In the end I think I have found what I sought, without intending to be complacent about it.

[floo]

If you truly believed the deity had given you a direct order to kill one of your children, or anyone else for that matter, would you obey?

You have chosen to ask a hypothetical question about a scenario that will never happen.  God is not evil, and He will not ask me to do anything which is inherently evil - it is just not possible.

However, I have been asked to do something which I would never normally consider because I felt totally incapable - to lead the singing in a charismatic prayer group.  In my youth I would attend the early morning Mass because I wanted to avoid the singing -  I could not sing and I did not like to hear singing during Mass.  When the opportunity arose to lead the singing in the prayer group I felt God prompting me to say "yes".  Little did I know at the time that this decision would change my life - I discovered God's love for the first time, and I also met my future wife.   

The deeds attributed to the deity featured in the Bible are evil!

I'm going to attempt to be a sort of moderate voice here, floo. In the early part of the Bible, the deeds of the deity certainly seem to be weighted down on the evil side. There are also deeds attributed to the deity which are good. Since all we know of these supposed 'deeds', and all we know of God's supposed 'goodness' are simply accounts written from the point of view of men (and some women), there is no reason to suppose that the deity is one thing or the other. Sometimes he appears good, sometimes bad. You cherry pick the bad, BA cherry picks the good - and in fact, since he rejects the whole of the Old Testament, he's halfway to your viewpoint in any case. And his view of the loving Jesus in the NT, though highly attractive, and supported by a fair number of scholars, in itself can only be upheld by strenuously rejecting various 'uncomfortable' texts, and explaining them away.

I wonder, is it possible to approach the Bible with out some kind of emotional involvement, in the attitude of objective scholarship? I certainly had a very emotional attitude to it in the (distant) past, but now I try to see it as an interesting collection of ancient texts, some of which can still move me, but without feeling any compunction to believe. I find the byways of scholarship about the Bible interesting, in the same way that some historians get enthused about the civilisations of the ancient Maya or the Hittites. But maybe I'm in a minority too.

I don't think the deity behaves well in the NT, either!

As I pointed out - one has to cherry-pick the NT to get rid of the nasty bits But both the good and the bad are there - and the reports are simply in a collection of ancient writings.

Can you point out the good, please?

[Dicky Underpants]

With respect:  then you didn't believe with all your heart.  It's never too late to re-think and find a way.

No - that's what I believe now. It is not what I believed then.

[BashfulAnthony]

"Can you point out the good, please?"

Allow me to butt in:  since you never read my posts, your answer is, simply:  love, forgive, do unto others, turn the other cheek,  etc.

[Dicky Underpants]

Can you point out the good, please?

Don't be silly. Jesus is reported as having healed people, having preached love and forgiveness etc. Not to mention having gone courageously to a  hideous death. You know this.
I don't know if these things actually happened, i don't know for absolute certain whether he actually existed - or at least I can't prove it. But I can't see that everything recorded in the NT comes under the category of 'evil', even though a lot obviously does.