Searching for GOD...

[Sassy]

Sass says we need to read it in a manner seeking God. I did that but still lost my faith.

You lost your faith because you were one of those who the troubles of this life closed in on you so easier to give up.

I think you need to re-think what I have been saying...

[Rhiannon]

No I don't, Sass. I was in a good place when I lost my faith. Later when I really was in the shit you'd have thought he'd have come back though, wouldn't you?

[BashfulAnthony]

No I don't, Sass. I was in a good place when I lost my faith. Later when I really was in the shit you'd have thought he'd have come back though, wouldn't you?

Rhiannon, you have to seek Him:  He won't come unless you do; and unless you really, really, want Him

[Rhiannon]

BA, I cried out, I begged on my knees, quite literally.

[BashfulAnthony]

BA, I cried out, I begged on my knees, quite literally.

I learned, long ago, that God always listens to all you ask for:  sometimes the answer is no, and we do not know why.. Think of children who constantly ask their parents for this, that or the other.  Mostly the answer is no, and the children don't know why:  but there is good reason.  God is our Heavenly Father, and there are always good reasons.  You may not like "no," but just as with your earthly father, you don't stop loving him because of it; nor do you stop asking!  So, don't give up:  you never know what might yet happen.  We all want what we want, instantly, that's human nature;  but be patient, and above all, keep trying.  I pray that God may answer you still.

[Leonard James]

BA, I cried out, I begged on my knees, quite literally.

I learned, long ago, that God always listens to all you ask for:

No you didn't. You have no way of knowing that "God" is listening or not.

sometimes the answer is no, and we do not know why.. Think of children who constantly ask their parents for this, that or the other.  Mostly the answer is no, and the children don't know why:  but there is good reason.

But parents always say 'yes' or 'no'. "God" never says anything.

God is our Heavenly Father, and there are always good reasons.  You may not like "no," but just as with your earthly father, you don't stop loving him because of it; nor do you stop asking!

Parents will explain why they say 'no'. "God" never does.

So, don't give up:  you never know what might yet happen.  We all want what we want, instantly, that's human nature;  but be patient, and above all, keep trying.

Trying t o contact something you don't believe exists is a fool's errand.

I pray that God may answer you still.

I can assure you that you are talking to the wall.

[torridon]

I learned, long ago, that God always listens to all you ask for:  sometimes the answer is no, and we do not know why.. Think of children who constantly ask their parents for this, that or the other.  Mostly the answer is no, and the children don't know why:  but there is good reason.  God is our Heavenly Father, and there are always good reasons.  You may not like "no," but just as with your earthly father, you don't stop loving him because of it; nor do you stop asking!  So, don't give up:  you never know what might yet happen.  We all want what we want, instantly, that's human nature;  but be patient, and above all, keep trying.  I pray that God may answer you still.

That takes no account of people who pray and get no response at all, neither a yes nor a no, just a zero response. It also suggests that God is a response from within the believers mind that addresses emotional needs within the individual. This rationale accounts for the diversity of theist beliefs over time and across cultures and from person to person. It also accounts for why people can 'find' God by some process of inner reflection driven by spiritual need, but when we look using hard  evidence of a cosmic creator with a determinedly dispassionate ethos there is nothing there. This suggests God is a psychological response within the minds of believers.

[Hope]

That takes no account of people who pray and get no response at all, neither a yes nor a no, just a zero response. It also suggests that God is a response from within the believers mind that addresses emotional needs within the individual. This rationale accounts for the diversity of theist beliefs over time and across cultures and from person to person. It also accounts for why people can 'find' God by some process of inner reflection driven by spiritual need, but when we look using hard  evidence of a cosmic creator with a determinedly dispassionate ethos there is nothing there. This suggests God is a psychological response within the minds of believers.

The problem with this analysis, torri, is that there are plenty of people who state that they were 'found' by God rather than 'finding' him.  In other words, there was no "response from within an individual's mind that addresses emotional needs within the individual".  At the same time, there are those who state that they spent years searching for God, without success, until they stopped specifying hgowthey felt that God ought to appear or realte to them.

In fact, you actually show this by your comment "but when we look using hard evidence of a cosmic creator with a determinedly dispassionate ethos there is nothing there", you are setting human parameters on a supernatural entity.  Ironically, when faced by the time when God appeared to humanity in the closest he ever came to this "using hard evidence of a cosmic creator with a determinedly dispassionate ethos" (for which there is a degree of hard evidence) people like you seem to reject it.

[Leonard James]

Well the bible does say, Gods Kingdom is within you 😉

Those words should be written in large red letters on the cover! 

[floo]

One would expect if a deity, and was of a benign disposition, existed it would make its presence clear to a child who was in desperate need of solace at the time! As it didn't bother, either it didn't give a damn, or more likely doesn't exist!

[Leonard James]

The problem with this analysis, torri, is that there are plenty of people who state that they were 'found' by God rather than 'finding' him.  In other words, there was no "response from within an individual's mind that addresses emotional needs within the individual".

That is a faulty deduction. Anybody whom "God" found (by whatever means) must have had an emotional need.

 

At the same time, there are those who state that they spent years searching for God, without success, until they stopped specifying hgowthey felt that God ought to appear or realte to them.

Exactly! Since looking for him produced nothing, they gave up, and then their minds produced him from what they had gleaned from the Bible.

In fact, you actually show this by your comment "but when we look using hard evidence of a cosmic creator with a determinedly dispassionate ethos there is nothing there", you are setting human parameters on a supernatural entity.

Since we don't have any other parameters to search with, it's logical not to invent any. They will always be 'human parameters'.

Ironically, when faced by the time when God appeared to humanity in the closest he ever came to this "using hard evidence of a cosmic creator with a determinedly dispassionate ethos" (for which there is a degree of hard evidence) people like you seem to reject it.

Because the only evidence for it is what people tell you ... a notoriously unreliable tool.

[Alien]

BA, I cried out, I begged on my knees, quite literally.

That must have been a terribly hard time. I'm sorry you had to go through it.

[torridon]

That takes no account of people who pray and get no response at all, neither a yes nor a no, just a zero response. It also suggests that God is a response from within the believers mind that addresses emotional needs within the individual. This rationale accounts for the diversity of theist beliefs over time and across cultures and from person to person. It also accounts for why people can 'find' God by some process of inner reflection driven by spiritual need, but when we look using hard  evidence of a cosmic creator with a determinedly dispassionate ethos there is nothing there. This suggests God is a psychological response within the minds of believers.

The problem with this analysis, torri, is that there are plenty of people who state that they were 'found' by God rather than 'finding' him.  In other words, there was no "response from within an individual's mind that addresses emotional needs within the individual".  At the same time, there are those who state that they spent years searching for God, without success, until they stopped specifying hgowthey felt that God ought to appear or realte to them.

In fact, you actually show this by your comment "but when we look using hard evidence of a cosmic creator with a determinedly dispassionate ethos there is nothing there", you are setting human parameters on a supernatural entity.  Ironically, when faced by the time when God appeared to humanity in the closest he ever came to this "using hard evidence of a cosmic creator with a determinedly dispassionate ethos" (for which there is a degree of hard evidence) people like you seem to reject it.

If people are 'found by God' that might just mean that they previously had no conscious awareness of their need for a God, but perhaps the need or desire was there subliminally, waiting for an opportunity to find expression.  That seems to me  a likelier explanation than a cosmic being introducing himself to humans on this planet at random out of the blue through some sort of secret telepathy.

As to your second paragraph, claims are not hard evidence, especially those of ancient peoples not so schooled as us in critical thinking.  There are many alive today claiming to be God or to be Jesus returned, and we tend now to ignore such claims because we have all learned the lesson that fantastic claims require fantastic evidence in order to be taken seriously. Religions of the ancient world gained a foothold in the collective human psyche before we developed more disciplined approaches to sorting out truth from fiction.

[Rhiannon]

BA, I cried out, I begged on my knees, quite literally.

I learned, long ago, that God always listens to all you ask for:  sometimes the answer is no, and we do not know why.. Think of children who constantly ask their parents for this, that or the other.  Mostly the answer is no, and the children don't know why:  but there is good reason.  God is our Heavenly Father, and there are always good reasons.  You may not like "no," but just as with your earthly father, you don't stop loving him because of it; nor do you stop asking!  So, don't give up:  you never know what might yet happen.  We all want what we want, instantly, that's human nature;  but be patient, and above all, keep trying.  I pray that God may answer you still.

Thanks, BA, but I really am ok with it. It was a long time ago now, and my path now suits me just fine.

[Rhiannon]

BA, I cried out, I begged on my knees, quite literally.

That must have been a terribly hard time. I'm sorry you had to go through it.

Thank you. It was. But over now.

[Sebastian Toe]

In doing so they ignore the very warnings and signs of the times.
If people read the bible in a manner that sought to know God...how many would be so ignorant of those signs?

What signs?
Is there a list somewhere?

You claim to know the bible but see not the signs?

You claim to know the bible yet you interpret the nature of Jesus differently from nearly all of the other Christians on this forum, who also claim to know the bible.
You are very forthright in showing them why they are wrong and you are correct on that topic.

So why so shy this time in laying out your knowledge regarding the 'signs'?

[floo]

The Bible is open to many interpretations, some crazier than others!

[Hope]

The Bible is open to many interpretations, some crazier than others!

So are Shakespeare's plays, Dickens' novels, Caesar's 'Commentarii de Bello Gallico'.  So what?  Does that make them any less valuable and - in the case of the latter - any less true?

[Shaker]

I learned, long ago, that God always listens to all you ask for:  sometimes the answer is no, and we do not know why.

Bashers, can you think of a methodology by which you can make a genuine distinction between:

(1) A god that exists but says 'no'

and

(2) No god and the operation of random chance?

Because it seems to me that if you can't draw a meaningful distinction between the two scenarios - in other words if you have no means of testing the god hypothesis - then belief in a god is useless. Superfluous - surplus to requirements. It adds nothing and does no useful work, and should be rejected.

George Carlin did a good routine about this a good many years ago 

[Shaker]

Rhiannon, you have to seek Him:  He won't come unless you do; and unless you really, really, want Him

What then do you make of the Argument from Reasonable Non-Belief (sometimes referred to as the Argument from Divine Hiddenness) as propounded in slightly different formulations by J. L. Schellenberg and Theodore Drange, an argument which posits that any truly benevolent god worthy of the name (a) would want all creatures to be aware of its existence and (b) would know how to arrange this state of affairs and (c) would be able to bring about this state of affairs, yet vast swathes of the human population believe no such thing? Therefore the hypothesis is invalidated.

[Alien]

I learned, long ago, that God always listens to all you ask for:  sometimes the answer is no, and we do not know why.

Bashers, can you think of a methodology by which you can make a genuine distinction between:

(1) A god that exists but says 'no'

and

(2) No god and the operation of random chance?

Because it seems to me that if you can't draw a meaningful distinction between the two scenarios - in other words if you have no means of testing the god hypothesis - then belief in a god is useless. Superfluous - surplus to requirements. It adds nothing and does no useful work, and should be rejected.

George Carlin did a good routine about this a good many years ago 

Yes, determine whether God exists. If he does exist, then any non-answers to prayer must be "No" or "Not yet".

[Shaker]

Yes, determine whether God exists. If he does exist, then any non-answers to prayer must be "No" or "Not yet".

I was asking Bashers, but seeing as you're here ... go ahead.

[Alien]

Yes, determine whether God exists. If he does exist, then any non-answers to prayer must be "No" or "Not yet".

I was asking Bashers, but seeing as you're here ... go ahead.

I just did.

[Shaker]

No, I meant determine whether God exists or not (which is in itself not a methodology but requires one).

[Alien]

No, I meant determine whether God exists or not (which is in itself not a methodology but requires one).

What do you mean by "God"?