Searching for GOD...

[Rhiannon]

The King of Twist
by Steve Turner:


You twist with guile, you twist with charm,
You twist my mind, you twist my arm,
You twisted silver in my palm:
You are the King of Twist.

You twist and speak, you twist and stare,
You twist in grass, you twist in air,
You twist until the twist is there:
You are the King of Twist.

You twist the screw, you twist the vice,
You twist the rope, you twist the knife,
You twist the living out of life:
You are the King of Twist.

You twist the thorn, you twist the whip,
You twist the kiss, you twist the lip,
You twist the spear, you twist the tip:
You are the King of Twist.

You twist the nail that twists your fate,
You twist towards the judgement date,
Which is the final twist.
This is the final twist.

Putting something in bold font does not make it sensible, relevant or true.

[Rhiannon]

Of course I do.

Are you sure you're safe around us?

[Shaker]

Putting something in bold font does not make it sensible, relevant or true.

That's the Argumentum ad Sassyum

[Gonnagle]

Dear Shaker,

That's the Argumentum ad Sassyum

 

Dear Floo,

What has tinnitus to do with this thread?

Well the reason you can't hear Our Lord is because of your tinnitus, or maybe Missus I just thought you would be interested

Gonnagle.

[Nearly Sane]

The King of Twist
by Steve Turner:


You twist with guile, you twist with charm,
You twist my mind, you twist my arm,
You twisted silver in my palm:
You are the King of Twist.

You twist and speak, you twist and stare,
You twist in grass, you twist in air,
You twist until the twist is there:
You are the King of Twist.

You twist the screw, you twist the vice,
You twist the rope, you twist the knife,
You twist the living out of life:
You are the King of Twist.

You twist the thorn, you twist the whip,
You twist the kiss, you twist the lip,
You twist the spear, you twist the tip:
You are the King of Twist.

You twist the nail that twists your fate,
You twist towards the judgement date,
Which is the final twist.
This is the final twist.

'You twist and turn like a ... twisty-turny thing. I say you are a weedy pigeon and you can call me Susan if it isn't so.'

[floo]

Dear Shaker,

 

Dear Floo,

Well the reason you can't hear Our Lord is because of your tinnitus, or maybe Missus I just thought you would be interested

Gonnagle.

Take more water with it!

[ekim]

All Christians I know believe that Jesus is God made man.

Perhaps you could elaborate as what that statement seems to say is that Jesus was a man.  Was he talking to himself when he said 'My God, my God why have you forsaken me'?

[Leonard James]

Perhaps you could elaborate as what that statement seems to say is that Jesus was a man.  Was he talking to himself when he said 'My God, my God why have you forsaken me'?

Stand by for the convoluted explanations! 

[floo]

Stand by for the convoluted explanations! 

 

[Alan Burns]

Perhaps you could elaborate as what that statement seems to say is that Jesus was a man.  Was he talking to himself when he said 'My God, my God why have you forsaken me'?

It is simply explained as the Trinity, three persons in one God - God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.

Christians remind themselves of the Trinity when they make the sign of the cross by saying, "In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit"

In this quotation, God the Son is speaking to His Father in Heaven

[Outrider]

First one: Why use the term artificial construct to describe the self from a point of view of reductionist naturalism?

Because it highlights the conclusion from the available evidence that our sense of 'self' as an independent, free-willed actor is erroneous.

Second one: If the self is an illusion?.....what is that is being ''illuded'' or doing the constructing. Or is this all just a ruse to make you guys look more sophisticated....like a beauty spot or powdered wig* ''Oh look at us we knoooooooow we are just a bunch of nerve tissue''.

Read Professor Hood's book, he makes  a very well-researched, well-structured case. Broadly, however, the illusion of self is generated as part of the ongoing feed-back mechanisms in the brain that we experience as awareness.

O.

[Outrider]

Name such a natural event then and point out the ''artificial construct'' (this should be good)

Human beings, the self.

O.

[Outrider]

I'm afraid My experience of God was nothing like the God constructed by prevailing culture....I.e. Secular Humanism.

Well, given that you rarely if ever actually offer anything, preferring to skulk at the sidelines and attempt to snipe away, it's hardly surprising we have no consistent idea of exactly which flavour of unevidenced claims your idea of a god might be.

Whereas that is very much nearer to your construct of God.

We work with what we're given - if you don't like the material, blame the writers, not the critics.

Therefore it turns out that God as traded by the vastly numerically superior antitheists on this forum is actually Your artificial construction

These anti-theists are so numerically superior that you can't name a single one of them... how strange.

O.

[Alan Burns]

Are you sure you're safe around us?

The existence of the devil is absolutely confirmed throughout the New Testament.  One of the Gospels translates a line in the Lord's prayer as "Deliver us from the evil one".  The temptation of Christ in the desert can't be ignored.  Any Christian who thinks the devil does not exist is on very shaky ground.

[Shaker]

The existence of the devil is absolutely confirmed throughout the New Testament.

It's not absolutely confirmed at all. It's absolutely asserted.

Learning the difference between the two might save you from many a slip-up in thinking.

[Outrider]

The existence of the devil is absolutely confirmed throughout the New Testament.  One of the Gospels translates a line in the Lord's prayer as "Deliver us from the evil one".  The temptation of Christ in the desert can't be ignored.  Any Christian who thinks the devil does not exist is on very shaky ground.

If so, even if we accept the fudgery of the Trinity to explain the three-fold nature of the deity, surely you don't have a monotheistic religion? You have an embodiment of 'law' and an embodiment of 'chaos' working at odds with one another?

O.

[Dicky Underpants]

Of course I do.

According to the Book of Job, the Devil is God's dirty jobsworth, and this certainly does not cast God in a particularly rosy light, certainly not so as to make us think of him as a god of love. This is of course only one image of the Devil in the Bible, which varies as much as the images of God. You have said that the God you believe in is far removed from the view of God that floo derives from the Bible. Though I don't think discussing such things is particularly profitable (I echo Shaker's view), just so as we know exactly where you stand, perhaps you could clarify a few details.
So - do you accept that God simply allows the Devil to do his dirty work, as in the B of J, or do you take a more dualist view, as Jesus is supposed to have expressed about the Devil in John's gospel:
"When he speaks a lie, he speaks for himself, for he is a liar, and the father of the lie".
Spiritual dualism, of course, opens another can of worms.......

[Dicky Underpants]

The existence of the devil is absolutely confirmed throughout the New Testament.  One of the Gospels translates a line in the Lord's prayer as "Deliver us from the evil one".  The temptation of Christ in the desert can't be ignored.  Any Christian who thinks the devil does not exist is on very shaky ground.

Anyone who thinks that the temptation of Christ in the desert warrants a completely literal interpretation needs a few lessons in geography, geology and trigonometry.

[Alan Burns]

According to the Book of Job, the Devil is God's dirty jobsworth, and this certainly does not cast God in a particularly rosy light, certainly not so as to make us think of him as a god of love. This is of course only one image of the Devil in the Bible, which varies as much as the images of God. You have said that the God you believe in is far removed from the view of God that floo derives from the Bible. Though I don't think discussing such things is particularly profitable (I echo Shaker's view), just so as we know exactly where you stand, perhaps you could clarify a few details.
So - do you accept that God simply allows the Devil to do his dirty work, as in the B of J, or do you take a more dualist view, as Jesus is supposed to have expressed about the Devil in John's gospel:
"When he speaks a lie, he speaks for himself, for he is a liar, and the father of the lie".
Spiritual dualism, of course, opens another can of worms.......

I do not think any human can fully explain this.  But the fact that Jesus had to suffer torture and death in order to open up the way for us to be delivered from evil suggests that it is not just a simple matter of allowing or curtailing the devil's actions - remember that the devil has free will which, by definition, is not controlled by God.  There is much in the Big Picture that we simply do not know.  I put my trust in God's love and trust that our faith in the Saviour will enable us to be delivered from evil.

[Maeght]

The existence of the devil is absolutely confirmed throughout the New Testament.  One of the Gospels translates a line in the Lord's prayer as "Deliver us from the evil one".  The temptation of Christ in the desert can't be ignored.  Any Christian who thinks the devil does not exist is on very shaky ground.

Alan, you do understand don't you that using the bible to support what you say isn't that useful when you are talking to people who don't believe in God and see the bible as being written by men?

[Alan Burns]

If so, even if we accept the fudgery of the Trinity to explain the three-fold nature of the deity, surely you don't have a monotheistic religion? You have an embodiment of 'law' and an embodiment of 'chaos' working at odds with one another?

O.

I do not think the limited capacity ofthe human brain to figure things out should define constraints of the nature of God and the nature of evil.  I have to accept that some things are beyond human understanding.  The fact that there are some things I do not understand does not in any way diminish my faith and trust in God.

[Dicky Underpants]

I do not think any human can fully explain this.

It is true that when you start from a spiritual view of life, the manifest horrors of existence and the persistence of human (and animal) suffering have prompted innumerable explanatory attempts by varying theologians (the Book of Job is one such attempt, the dualism of Gnosticism another).
However, a materialist view does not have quite such problems - shit happens, and beauty and goodness also exist. Admittedly, the origins of the aesthetic sense in humans is a complicated matter to explain, and I have my problems understanding talk of feed-back loops between the pre-frontal cortex and the basal ganglia

[Rhiannon]

The existence of the devil is absolutely confirmed throughout the New Testament.  One of the Gospels translates a line in the Lord's prayer as "Deliver us from the evil one".  The temptation of Christ in the desert can't be ignored.  Any Christian who thinks the devil does not exist is on very shaky ground.

That doesn't answer my question. If we have been devil-led are you sure you are safe to associate with such people?

[Outrider]

I do not think the limited capacity ofthe human brain to figure things out should define constraints of the nature of God and the nature of evil.  I have to accept that some things are beyond human understanding.  The fact that there are some things I do not understand does not in any way diminish my faith and trust in God.

Yet you just used that same limited capacity to suggest that anyone who didn't think the devil existed was just plain out wrong... now, though, that the implication is one that you don't like, it's suddenly questionable?

Either there is a devil, in which case you don't have a monotheism, or the devil is figurative - unless you're suggesting some sort of status akin to quantum indeterminacy in which you can have an actual devil until someone looks upon his works, at which point he becomes a figment once more...?

O.

[wigginhall]

It is true that when you start from a spiritual view of life, the manifest horrors of existence and the persistence of human (and animal) suffering have prompted innumerable explanatory attempts by varying theologians (the Book of Job is one such attempt, the dualism of Gnosticism another).
However, a materialist view does not have quite such problems - shit happens, and beauty and goodness also exist. Admittedly, the origins of the aesthetic sense in humans is a complicated matter to explain, and I have my problems understanding talk of feed-back loops between the pre-frontal cortex and the basal ganglia

Yes, it would be interesting to tabulate the different explanations of the 'manifest horrors'.   I think some theists argue that God is in charge of all of it, including the horrors.   My memory is that many Muslims believe this,  and some Christians - so for example, 9/11 was commanded by God to punish non-believers. 

Then you get a sort of half-way house, where God is in charge, but evil raises  its ugly head.  This becomes quite confusing, as God is in charge, but sort of, isn't.  The usual escape hatch here is free will. 

Deism represents a God who doesn't intervene in any case.

And there is the old response, I don't know.   

Yet you sense that the logic of omnipotence and omniscience has to be skirted round by many theists, along the coulda, woulda, shoulda principle.   God could cure babies with brain cancer, couldn't he?