Searching for GOD...

[Maeght]

Many people seem to analyse God as though He was a human being, and try to predict how He should react.
It is often quoted that a loving God would not allow the forces of evil.
Or that a loving God would not deny anyone their eternal salvation in Heaven.

But the Bible reveals to us that God's love is unconditional.
We cannot earn God's love - it is there for everyone.
As aptly illustrated in the parable of the Prodigal son:
The father's love for his wayward son never ceases, but the father does not impose his love.  He waits patiently for his son to turn back to him of his own free will.  His son's misadventures were a consequence of turning his back on his Father's love - it was not a punishment.

We cannot receive God's love if we turn our backs to Him.
In these increasingly worrying times, we all need to turn back to our loving Father in heaven and allow the power of His grace to work though us.

I wonder why people do that - when God is referred to as the Father, and loving people (a human emotion).

No idea what your religious speak in the rest of your really means I'm afraid.

[Outrider]

Many people seem to analyse God as though He was a human being, and try to predict how He should react.

What other yardstick do we have to use?

It is often quoted that a loving God would not allow the forces of evil. Or that a loving God would not deny anyone their eternal salvation in Heaven.

Seems reasonable.

But the Bible reveals to us that God's love is unconditional. We cannot earn God's love - it is there for everyone.

And yet we can be denied it; it is not unconditional, it's just not based on anything to do with us, it's entirely at the whim of the capricious god.

We cannot receive God's love if we turn our backs to Him.

But we are supposed to offer our love whether he turns his back on us or not. That's not an equitable relationship, that's abuse.

In these increasingly worrying times, we all need to turn back to our loving Father in heaven and allow the power of His grace to work though us.

No, in these increasingly worrying times we all need to focus on real world solutions to real world problems. That means trying to understand some particular interpretations of these myths, because people that believe in them are in positions of influence, but it doesn't mean accepting any of it as an actual depiction of reality.

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

What other yardstick do we have to use?

Seems reasonable.

And yet we can be denied it; it is not unconditional, it's just not based on anything to do with us, it's entirely at the whim of the capricious god.

But we are supposed to offer our love whether he turns his back on us or not. That's not an equitable relationship, that's abuse.

No, in these increasingly worrying times we all need to focus on real world solutions to real world problems. That means trying to understand some particular interpretations of these myths, because people that believe in them are in positions of influence, but it doesn't mean accepting any of it as an actual depiction of reality.

O.

How and to whom do you offer your love too?
what do you think salvation entails and why you should have it automatically?

[Outrider]

How and to whom do you offer your love too?

How varies from person to person. To whom; people that I've met and we've been mutually impressed with each other, family.

what do you think salvation entails and why you should have it automatically?

I don't think salvation is a thing, in the Christian sense, at all. Within that context, why should we have it automatically - because God loves us unconditionally, right? If he loves us unconditionally, why are there any sorts of conditions on salvation?

O.

[Gordon]

How and to whom do you offer your love too?

People: as expressed in my dealings with them, and they with me.

what do you think salvation entails and why you should have it automatically?

No idea: so far as I can see 'salvation' in the Christian sense is meaningless white noise, especially if the vehicle for this 'salvation' is via a long-dead person and where what is said about this person is of uncertain provenance, to extent that the existence of this person in antiquity can reasonably be doubted.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

How varies from person to person. To whom; people that I've met and we've been mutually impressed with each other, family.

I don't think salvation is a thing, in the Christian sense, at all. Within that context, why should we have it automatically - because God loves us unconditionally, right? If he loves us unconditionally, why are there any sorts of conditions on salvation?

O.

God can love us unconditionally but that doesn’t mean that we automatically respond to that love.

That aside there is little establishment here of how love is given and to who. Although you do mention mutuality.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

People: as expressed in my dealings with them, and they with me.

No idea: so far as I can see 'salvation' in the Christian sense is meaningless white noise, especially if the vehicle for this 'salvation' is via a long-dead person and where what is said about this person is of uncertain provenance, to extent that the existence of this person in antiquity can reasonably be doubted.

How are your dealings different between someone you don’t love and someone you do?

Christianity does not propose a long dead person.

[Enki]

How and to whom do you offer your love too?
what do you think salvation entails and why you should have it automatically?

Normally I don't bother to respond to Alan's religious exhortations, but you ask pertinent questions resulting from Outrider's measured response to Alan's latest statements, so I thought they did deserve a response.

How and to whom do you offer your love too?

To my immediate family, to those around me whom I know and care for, and, as much as possible, to others, especially those who are in need. It would be entirely meaningless for me to offer a false love to a God whom I don't believe exists, therefore that has never entered my thoughts.

what do you think salvation entails and why you should have it automatically?

Two questions, with one reliant upon the other. My answer to the first question would be that in salvation, in the most general Christian terms, there is the idea that humans automatically sin, and that we in some way need to be absolved from those sins by being saved by a close union with God, and that a belief in Jesus Christ as the medium in which that can be attained is necessary to gain this union with God.
As I don't accept the Christian view of sin(i.e. transgression against god's laws) as having any relevance to me, it follows quite naturally that I regard Christian salvation as equally meaningless. In the light of that, your second question then becomes rather pointless.

[Gordon]

How are your dealings different between someone you don’t love and someone you do?

I try to treat everyone with respect, and I think the term 'love' can accommodate that. Everyone I know on a personal basis means something to me, and I regard that as important and one of the joys of life.

Christianity does not propose a long dead person.

Even so, what they do propose is that someone who, if they did exist, lived in antiquity and can somehow offer 'salvation' to those of us alive today, and that doesn't sound at all convincing: especially so when some claim to have an active relationship with this long dead person.

[Outrider]

God can love us unconditionally but that doesn’t mean that we automatically respond to that love.

If love is unconditional, it doesn't require reciprocation. It shouldn't matter whether or not we love god back if his love is unconditional.

That aside there is little establishment here of how love is given and to who.

Because, in no particular order, love is a many-splendoured thing, I don't owe you (or anyone else here) an insight into those aspects of my life and history, and we weren't considering if/how I love, but rather how your god is supposed to love.

Although you do mention mutuality.

For some relationships. For others (i.e. my children), I've loved them from before they were even aware of themselves, let alone of me.

O.
[/quote]

[Alan Burns]

What other yardstick do we have to use?

Try the divine revelations of Scripture, which indicate that God's nature is beyond human comprehensions, so it would be futile for us to judge what God should do using our own fallible intellect.

And yet we can be denied it; it is not unconditional, it's just not based on anything to do with us, it's entirely at the whim of the capricious god.

No - we are never denied God's love.
As illustrated in the parable of the prodigal son - the wayward son deliberately turns his back on the Father's love to pursue his own chosen path.  The Father's love is always there for him, but the son has the option to reject it.  It would have been wrong for the Father to impose his love - that would lead to resentment.  For love to work as intended, the son needs to accept it of his own free will.

[Aruntraveller]

For love to work as intended, the son needs to accept it of his own free will.

So not unconditional then.

[Alan Burns]

I would like to share a recent experience.

You may be aware of the sudden unexpected death of my wife's sister at the age of 69 from cardiac arrest. (see prayer thread)

My wife's immediate concern was "What will happen to her soul?" because Christine and her husband were both brought up as Roman Catholics, but they both drifted away from their faith.  My wife and I are very concerned that there will be no religious content at her funeral.

A few days after Christine dies, I started reading a book entitled "Three more months" which I had downloaded on Kindle a few weeks earlier at a special offer for 99p.  In the first few chapters, a woman in her sixties dies unexpectedly from cardiac arrest.  Her family and friends are devastated.  The deceased woman has a sister.  Both were brought up as practicing Roman Catholics, but the deceased woman had drifted away from the faith, and the other sister was still a devout church goer.  The children of the deceased woman are not planning to have a religious service, claiming "it is what mom wanted."  The sister then states "I want to make sure that her soul is taken care of."

The book is fiction, but of all the works of fiction that have ever been written, nothing could have come closer to the reality which was uppermost in my mind at the time I read it.

[Outrider]

Try the divine revelations of Scripture, which indicate that God's nature is beyond human comprehensions, so it would be futile for us to judge what God should do using our own fallible intellect.

It can say that he's a sentient licquorice allsort, for the difference it makes, the only sentient life we have to use as a basis for comparison remains humanity - our only basis for judgement is how the depiction of god stands up, or fails, against the range of behaviours evinced by humanity.

No - we are never denied God's love.

Tell that to, say, the residents of Kharkiv today. Or Yemen. Or Somalia. Tell that to the parents at pick up time at your local special needs school. Tell that to the brothers and sisters sat at home waiting for their parents to come home alone from the child cancer wards. Love that isn't expressed is love denied, and a love that doesn't do what it can is not love it's self-indulgence. God could, apparently, stop it all in an instant, but doesn't.

O.

[torridon]

Try the divine revelations of Scripture, which indicate that God's nature is beyond human comprehensions, so it would be futile for us to judge what God should do using our own fallible intellect.

So, these 'divine' revelations are really incomprehensible revelations.  That's kind of been my point all along

[torridon]

No - we are never denied God's love.
As illustrated in the parable of the prodigal son - the wayward son deliberately turns his back on the Father's love to pursue his own chosen path.  The Father's love is always there for him, but the son has the option to reject it.  It would have been wrong for the Father to impose his love - that would lead to resentment.  For love to work as intended, the son needs to accept it of his own free will.

Your analogy fails to mention that the father had set the devil onto his son in the first place.  What loving father would do that ?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Normally I don't bother to respond to Alan's religious exhortations, but you ask pertinent questions resulting from Outrider's measured response to Alan's latest statements, so I thought they did deserve a response.

To my immediate family, to those around me whom I know and care for, and, as much as possible, to others, especially those who are in need.

That would be the Good Samaritan kind of love.

It would be entirely meaningless for me to offer a false love to a God whom I don't believe exists, therefore that has never entered my thoughts.

I don’t quite know what this God you don’t believe exists is like. Most who don’t  believe are agnostic about God but certain he couldn’t be the Christian God based on their own subjective understanding of love. But what of the person who isn’t self satisfied with the quality of their own love? Is that because they have been led to feel inadequate by bad actors or because they have a grasp of a more superior love?

Two questions, with one reliant upon the other. My answer to the first question would be that in salvation, in the most general Christian terms, there is the idea that humans automatically sin, and that we in some way need to be absolved from those sins by being saved by a close union with God, and that a belief in Jesus Christ as the medium in which that can be attained is necessary to gain this union with God.

There is an element here that humans choose to sin as in they choose to do good. That we have inherited a fallen world, undeniably in my view gives us a propensity to choose sin.....but that is still a choice.

I would say that sins are symptomatic of alienation from God which is a class of sin on it’s own

As I don't accept the Christian view of sin(i.e. transgression against god's laws) as having any relevance to me, it follows quite naturally that I regard Christian salvation as equally meaningless. In the light of that, your second question then becomes rather pointless.

What about Sin as alienation from God though. Do you not see that as a possible personal position.

In the Anglican confession there are the sins against our fellow men... surely these are relevant to you?

[Enki]

That would be the Good Samaritan kind of love.

I have no problem with that at all, bearing in mind that the Samaritan in question wasn't a follower of Jesus, and that similar ideas have been and are part of all sorts of religious traditions. I do think however that, in general terms, the closer the object of that love is to the individual the more that love will manifest itself.

I don’t quite know what this God you don’t believe exists is like.

As Alan was originally talking about God's love being 'unconditional', and the following posts followed on from that premise, I would have thought it was rather obvious I was talking about the Christian God.

Most who don’t  believe are agnostic about God but certain he couldn’t be the Christian God based on their own subjective understanding of love.

Whatever. I simply don't have any belief in any God, which, as is relevant to this thread, that clearly includes the Christian God. Also, my lack of belief doesn't relate primarily to my understanding of love at all, but rather to the complete lack of evidence for any God's existence.

But what of the person who isn’t self satisfied with the quality of their own love? Is that because they have been led to feel inadequate by bad actors or because they have a grasp of a more superior love?

Possible, just as it is possible that such a person has been unable to express
their own natural love satisfactorily due to problems within their own lives. It also begs the question as to who decides just what is 'a more superior love' of course.

There is an element here that humans choose to sin as in they choose to do good. That we have inherited a fallen world, undeniably in my view gives us a propensity to choose sin.....but that is still a choice.

I would say that sins are symptomatic of alienation from God which is a class of sin on it’s own

I know you do. However, for me, as I made clear, a relationship with a God in which I don't believe is meaningless, ditto for the idea of a fallen world, alienation from God etc.

What about Sin as alienation from God though. Do you not see that as a possible personal position.

Yes, of course it is possible, if one has a belief in a such a God. Obviously, in my case, I don't, so it isn't relevant for me.

In the Anglican confession there are the sins against our fellow men... surely these are relevant to you?

Only insofar as they align with my own sense of morality. I wouldn't even call them sins in any religious sense, of course, so the idea of kneeling and praying using the words of the confession from the Anglican book of Common Prayer would be entirely inappropriate in my case.

[Alan Burns]

Tell that to, say, the residents of Kharkiv today. Or Yemen. Or Somalia. Tell that to the parents at pick up time at your local special needs school. Tell that to the brothers and sisters sat at home waiting for their parents to come home alone from the child cancer wards. Love that isn't expressed is love denied, and a love that doesn't do what it can is not love it's self-indulgence. God could, apparently, stop it all in an instant, but doesn't.

O.

Pain and suffering are a part of life.
I do not see the big picture, neither does anyone else.  But what I do perceive is that many people come to a crossroads in their lives caused by some form of crisis.  They have a choice to turn to God to help them through it, or to turn away from God.  I know of many people who can testify that they discovered God's love by turning to Him during a critical period in their lives. God does not promise to take away our pain - He promises to give us the strength to endure it if we keep faith with Him.  And His greatest promise is to take away our sins through His own suffering, death and resurrection in order to lead our souls to their eternal home in Heaven.

[Outrider]

Pain and suffering are a part of life.

Why?  God is supposedly omnipotent, God has supposedly made the hierarchies of angels who don't have to go through pain and suffering, there are any number of examples around the world of the vast gulf in the extent and depth of suffering. God created this world, rather than others, and didn't need to - God chose suffering.

I do not see the big picture, neither does anyone else.  But what I do perceive is that many people come to a crossroads in their lives caused by some form of crisis.  They have a choice to turn to God to help them through it, or to turn away from God.  I know of many people who can testify that they discovered God's love by turning to Him during a critical period in their lives.

"Hey, I had to torture you into it, but it's OK because you love me now..." I'm pretty sure we'd lock people like that up if we caught them.

God does not promise to take away our pain - He promises to give us the strength to endure it if we keep faith with Him.

Why doesn't he take away our pain? If I could take away the pain of my loved ones  I would, in a heartbeat. The idea that you might consciously use pain and suffering to try to 'teach' people is monstrous. If you've reached a point in someone's life where the suffering has happened then maybe you try to salvage something from it by framing the learning that's arisen from it as a benefit, but if you can stop it before it happens you do.

And His greatest promise is to take away our sins through His own suffering, death and resurrection in order to lead our souls to their eternal home in Heaven.

If that's already promised why are we still suffering, why is there still the threat of hell? If our sins have been forgiven why do  we still need to suffer? What the hell is 'sin' anyway - it's not any sort of moral judgement, it's not tied to any rational set of rules or principles, it's purely obedience or not to an arbitrary selection of a host of arbitrary demands - there's no 'why', there's no justification, there's no nuance. There's just 'obey or be damned' because a capricious tyrant wants it.

How has someone born with a developmental disorder that brings them suffering but not understanding 'sinned' at all, how can there be judgement on those without the capacity to understand either the crime or the punishment?

O.

[torridon]

Pain and suffering are a part of life..

Therefore in a God-created scenario, pain and suffering are not just some inevitable consequence, they are willed by God.  How does a loving God choose to inflict suffering ?  It doesn't add up, your thinking doesn't make any sense, you need to go back to first principles and start over.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

As Alan was originally talking about God's love being 'unconditional', and the following posts followed on from that premise, I would have thought it was rather obvious I was talking about the Christian God.

There was a statement about sin which made me unsure whether you weren't talking Judaism rather than christianity.

Whatever. I simply don't have any belief in any God, which, as is relevant to this thread, that clearly includes the Christian God. Also, my lack of belief doesn't relate primarily to my understanding of love at all, but rather to the complete lack of evidence for any God's existence.

would you say that this ''lack of evidence leaves you agnostic or fully atheist, in the lack of evidence equals evidence of lack, sense? I believe that things can evidence themselves, but then I am not hide bound by empiricism.

Only insofar as they align with my own sense of morality. I wouldn't even call them sins in any religious sense, of course, so the idea of kneeling and praying using the words of the confession from the Anglican book of Common Prayer would be entirely inappropriate in my case.

I find the term own sense of morality confusing, could this not be blunted? Is it not pervious, do you reckon, to a greater love than it has already been aligned with? You sound like you have limited the extent of your perception of love.

[Dicky Underpants]

Try the divine revelations of Scripture, which indicate that God's nature is beyond human comprehensions, so it would be futile for us to judge what God should do using our own fallible intellect.No - we are never denied God's love.

It is significant that the question is posed in a very human way in the Book of Job, and all God can do (according to this "divinely inspired" scripture) is to reply to the suffering Job's completely legitimate questions by a reference to his power
. That of course is no answer whatsoever. One wonders why the 'almighty' bothered to reply at all. He could at least have offered a bit of comfort by saying "you don't understand now, but everything will be okay, I promise you". No, the answer is "Look how marvellous I am - can you create a whale or a crocodile? No - then shut up, worm".
Of course, the text does show the limitations of the scribes who cooked up the story, because they couldn't see any sense in meaningless undeserved suffering either. But they felt obliged to write something.

As illustrated in the parable of the prodigal son - the wayward son deliberately turns his back on the Father's love to pursue his own chosen path.  The Father's love is always there for him, but the son has the option to reject it.  It would have been wrong for the Father to impose his love - that would lead to resentment.  For love to work as intended, the son needs to accept it of his own free will.

The son in this instance was perfectly aware of the existence of his father. For the parable to have any real force nowadays, everyone should be aware of the 'Father's' existence, and it is patently obvious that they are not. And before you start on Vlad's favourite hobbyhorse about "goddodging", let me politely say that is a load of bollocks.

[Dicky Underpants]

Pain and suffering are a part of life.
I do not see the big picture, neither does anyone else.  But what I do perceive is that many people come to a crossroads in their lives caused by some form of crisis.  They have a choice to turn to God to help them through it, or to turn away from God.  I know of many people who can testify that they discovered God's love by turning to Him during a critical period in their lives.

But not universally true, certainly not in my case. No doubt some feel they've received divine help or at least comfort. Others completely the reverse: they are met with a deathly silence.  I suppose you'd say by way of excuse "God moves in mysterious ways". If that is the case, I don't wonder that people feel they'd better just try to get on with their lives without him, particularly since millions have no awareness of his existence anyway.

[Enki]

There was a statement about sin which made me unsure whether you weren't talking Judaism rather than christianity.

Not from me, as I made it abundantly clear I was talking about Christian ideas of salvation.

would you say that this ''lack of evidence leaves you agnostic or fully atheist, in the lack of evidence equals evidence of lack, sense?

Fully atheist in that I have no belief in any god, and agnostic in that there is no way that I can absolutely establish that no god exists, hence it always remains a possibility.

I believe that things can evidence themselves,

All I can say is that as regards the idea of a god, I see no evidence of it being an actual thing and therefore it follows that it is incapable of evidencing itself.

but then I am not hide bound by empiricism.

As I find no logical reason to assume a god, as I find no evidence in my experience for said god and as I find no empirical evidence for said god and as I try to employ an inquiring, rational and skeptical mind, I would say that I am also not bound by empirical evidence.

I find the term own sense of morality confusing, could this not be blunted? Is it not pervious, do you reckon, to a greater love than it has already been aligned with? You sound like you have limited the extent of your perception of love.

You might find the idea of personal morality confusing, but I don't, and I have set out the grounds for my position before so I see no point in doing so again. Can it be blunted? Yes, just as anyone's morality can be blunted in certain circumstances. Indeed the history of the Christian religion seems to show this par excellence.
Again, I'm not sure what you mean by 'a greater love', so unless you develop this point, then the idea that I am limiting 'the extent of (my) perception of love',  lacks traction as far as I am concerned.