There is no health in us.

[Dicky Underpants]

No, you have not. Which questions about Christianity would not need us to first prove the existence of God? Do I have to prove the existence of God to explain why the Orthodox Church and Roman Catholic Church split? Presumably not. Do I have to prove the existence of God to explain why Arminians have a different understanding of predestination to Calvinists? If not, why do I have to prove the existence of God to answer the OP? Does not the OP assume, for the sake of the OP, that God exists?

And there I am entirely with you, Alan. The point you are making seems so obvious that you shouldn't need to be making it, but apparently it doesn't seem to get through.

[wigginhall]

Dicky - yes, the inseparability of the human and divine in Jesus is insisted on by both some Christians and some mythicists.   They both argue that there could not have been a purely human figure Jesus, the first because he was intrinsically divine, the second, because he intrinsically could not exist.   I remember mythicists saying, how could a man walk on water, therefore no Jesus.   They don't seem able to separate history from myth, yet ancient history is full of myth and legend. 

[Alien]

No, you have not. Which questions about Christianity would not need us to first prove the existence of God? Do I have to prove the existence of God to explain why the Orthodox Church and Roman Catholic Church split? Presumably not. Do I have to prove the existence of God to explain why Arminians have a different understanding of predestination to Calvinists? If not, why do I have to prove the existence of God to answer the OP? Does not the OP assume, for the sake of the OP, that God exists?

And there I am entirely with you, Alan. The point you are making seems so obvious that you shouldn't need to be making it, but apparently it doesn't seem to get through.

The OP could have been posted on the faith-sharing board, I suppose. Rhiannon is a Pagan, but at least there we don't have to prove God exists every time we post something. I think the ethos of that board would allow Rhiannon to post her question there, so perhaps next time...

[Dicky Underpants]

Dicky - yes, the inseparability of the human and divine in Jesus is insisted on by both some Christians and some mythicists.   They both argue that there could not have been a purely human figure Jesus, the first because he was intrinsically divine, the second, because he intrinsically could not exist.   I remember mythicists saying, how could a man walk on water, therefore no Jesus.   They don't seem able to separate history from myth, yet ancient history is full of myth and legend.

Thank heavens - or something! for your clear thinking, wiggi.

[Dicky Underpants]

No, you have not. Which questions about Christianity would not need us to first prove the existence of God? Do I have to prove the existence of God to explain why the Orthodox Church and Roman Catholic Church split? Presumably not. Do I have to prove the existence of God to explain why Arminians have a different understanding of predestination to Calvinists? If not, why do I have to prove the existence of God to answer the OP? Does not the OP assume, for the sake of the OP, that God exists?

And there I am entirely with you, Alan. The point you are making seems so obvious that you shouldn't need to be making it, but apparently it doesn't seem to get through.

The OP could have been posted on the faith-sharing board, I suppose. Rhiannon is a Pagan, but at least there we don't have to prove God exists every time we post something. I think the ethos of that board would allow Rhiannon to post her question there, so perhaps next time...

Fight the good fight, Alan. However much we differ in outlook, you can be sure that when you make a perfectly valid point (if I see it) I will try to support you*.
You may have noticed also that Rhiannon, despite her taking leave of Christianity, is by no means a completely hostile critic, and will often try to find something positive to say about her former faith, especially when some particularly thoughtless denigration is being delivered.

*The idea of biblical inerrancy is still a pile of pants, though - and always will be. That's a prophecy for you

[Alien]

No, you have not. Which questions about Christianity would not need us to first prove the existence of God? Do I have to prove the existence of God to explain why the Orthodox Church and Roman Catholic Church split? Presumably not. Do I have to prove the existence of God to explain why Arminians have a different understanding of predestination to Calvinists? If not, why do I have to prove the existence of God to answer the OP? Does not the OP assume, for the sake of the OP, that God exists?

And there I am entirely with you, Alan. The point you are making seems so obvious that you shouldn't need to be making it, but apparently it doesn't seem to get through.

The OP could have been posted on the faith-sharing board, I suppose. Rhiannon is a Pagan, but at least there we don't have to prove God exists every time we post something. I think the ethos of that board would allow Rhiannon to post her question there, so perhaps next time...

Fight the good fight, Alan. However much we differ in outlook, you can be sure that when you make a perfectly valid point (if I see it) I will try to support you*.
You may have noticed also that Rhiannon, despite her taking leave of Christianity, is by no means a completely hostile critic, and will often try to find something positive to say about her former faith, especially when some particularly thoughtless denigration is being delivered.

*The idea of biblical inerrancy is still a pile of pants, though - and always will be. That's a prophecy for you

[Sassy]

You are right, Sass, in that position does not equate relationship. But first you'd have to question why someone was taking those positions - in my case it was because of my relationship with God and a desire to serve him. Like you I'd felt that since childhood, which is why it was so strange when it ended - and ended very abruptly. I was happily a mum of two, feeding my younger daughter in my nursing chair when I realised God just wasn't there. Because I'd also had animist experiences as a child, and these didn't change, this is what I now go with.

My family and I, have been through an awful lot of heartache and sad time.
But if I am honest those times do not erase God and do not make God any less real.
I cannot deny God because life gives us hard blows...

I could live my life as if not a believer but how could it be sincere.
As the psalm says:

King James Bible
If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.

Living for self, does not make God any less real.

Deuteronomy 31:8King James Version (KJV)

8 And the Lord, he it is that doth go before thee; he will be with thee, he will not fail thee, neither forsake thee: fear not, neither be dismayed.

When you know that God is real what else compares or can be obtained by comparison to him? 


If I tried to live my life without God or in denial of God, it would be worth nothing for in my heart I know I would be living a lie.  One way Satan tries to make us give up is the feeling we have failed God. But the truth sustains that God never fails us. When we are unfaithful he will always be faithful. How can you walk away from such a God?

[Sassy]

Bit of history: baptised as a baby, confirmed as an adult, Communicant within the CofE for ten years. Studied with the diocesan bishop, took monthly day retreats, took a foundation degree in theology with a Methodist college attached to Oxford Brookes. Served on the PCC and deanery synod. Had articles on prayer and spirituality published in Christian media. Served as parish visitor. Went forward for selection to the priesthood but withdrew when I discovered I was pregnant. Founded and ran inter-denominational services for under-fives and their parents and carers.

Then - poof - all gone.

Never give up hope.

I once knew a young priest who felt that he had lost his faith and decided to give up his priesthood.  He was touring through France with a friend in a sports car when they noticed a sign for Taize.  The priest had heard about this place, and out of curiosity he had a look inside the Church of Reconcilliation.  Inside the church he felt God's real presence for the first time in his life, and he broke down in tears.  God lead him to start a retreat centre in Skipton for teenagers, and he can relate an amazing series of events which enabled him to set up this centre with all the resources he needed.  He was then able to help many young people feel God's presence for the first time in their lives - it was a very special place where God's presence was really tangible.

(Apologies if I have repeated this story - I may have related it on another thread some time ago)

Do you know any vicars by the name of Eric Greenhalgh, now deceased?

[Rhiannon]

You are right, Sass, in that position does not equate relationship. But first you'd have to question why someone was taking those positions - in my case it was because of my relationship with God and a desire to serve him. Like you I'd felt that since childhood, which is why it was so strange when it ended - and ended very abruptly. I was happily a mum of two, feeding my younger daughter in my nursing chair when I realised God just wasn't there. Because I'd also had animist experiences as a child, and these didn't change, this is what I now go with.

My family and I, have been through an awful lot of heartache and sad time.
But if I am honest those times do not erase God and do not make God any less real.
I cannot deny God because life gives us hard blows...

I could live my life as if not a believer but how could it be sincere.
As the psalm says:

King James Bible
If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.

Living for self, does not make God any less real.

Deuteronomy 31:8King James Version (KJV)

8 And the Lord, he it is that doth go before thee; he will be with thee, he will not fail thee, neither forsake thee: fear not, neither be dismayed.

When you know that God is real what else compares or can be obtained by comparison to him? 


If I tried to live my life without God or in denial of God, it would be worth nothing for in my heart I know I would be living a lie.  One way Satan tries to make us give up is the feeling we have failed God. But the truth sustains that God never fails us. When we are unfaithful he will always be faithful. How can you walk away from such a God?

But Sass, I wasn't in a bad place when I lost God's presence - I was in a very good one. Later when the bad stuff started to happen, I asked God, please come back, please make yourself known to me again, please get me through this.

And there was nothing. So eventually - after two years of soul searching and heartache - I decided that living a lie meant living as though there was anything left to carry on believing in.

[Leonard James]

But Sass, I wasn't in a bad place when I lost God's presence - I was in a very good one. Later when the bad stuff started to happen, I asked God, please come back, please make yourself known to me again, please get me through this.

And there was nothing. So eventually - after two years of soul searching and heartache - I decided that living a lie meant living as though there was anything left to carry on believing in.

But you weren't chosen, Rhi ... Sass was. Just your bad luck. 

[ippy]

Maybe I am wrong, but I thought the point of the OP was to discuss whether "there is no health in us" (as meant by the authors of the BCP) rather than prove the existence of God. Perhaps Rhiannon would comment.

I don't see how the latter can be separated from the former given that the text in question in the OP is a Christian text (the word 'health' in this particular context is a specifically Christian one which is not going to be recognised by the average GP, for example), and Christians are I'm told given to believing in God for some reason.

So which questions about Christianity would not need us to first prove the existence of God?

A bit like if you or anyone else might like to discuss the inns and outs of the Harry Potter books as though they are stories of real events that actually happened.

If it was the Harry Potter books that were asserted as actual events, you might expect to see some white coated figures hovering about in the background; had you proved the Harry Potter books, to be stories about actual events that had really happened the white coated figures wouldn't have any other choice than to quietly back away.

I think that illustrates how a lot of atheists might see what it is you're saying Ailen.

ippy

Please answer my question. Which questions about Christianity would not need us to first prove the existence of God?

There are certainly some, such as establishing whether there was a historical Jesus at all, and ascertaining what he may reasonably supposed to have said and did if such as figure did exist (this is quite different from the point ippy appeared to be making, claiming an exact parallel between Jesus and Harry Potter - for as far as I'm aware, no one is arguing that Harry Potter ever existed).
Now a lot of Christians may insist that the historical existence of Jesus can in no way be separated from his supposed divinity, or his having performed miracles, or there being a spiritual dimension to life at all. I don't see why that has to be.
Conversely, atheists like ippy seem to accept the same view of the matter as some Christians - namely that the historical Jesus cannot be separated from supernatural claims he made or are made about him - which of course they do not believe in. I find such an approach inherently boring and repetitive, just as I find the former fantastical and totally unbelievable.

There is also the question of whether some of Jesus moral teaching has any true relevance for the present day, and that also can quite easily be separated from supernatural claims.

In other words - a plague on both your houses!

Well what do you expect religion is nonsense until some way of confirming its veracity is found, which is unlikely, the mystical magic supernatural can be ruled out.

I live a reaasonably moral and ethical life like most people do the only difference between non-religios people and the religious is that we behave decently without the imaginary carrot and stick.

ippy

[ippy]

Maybe I am wrong, but I thought the point of the OP was to discuss whether "there is no health in us" (as meant by the authors of the BCP) rather than prove the existence of God. Perhaps Rhiannon would comment.

I don't see how the latter can be separated from the former given that the text in question in the OP is a Christian text (the word 'health' in this particular context is a specifically Christian one which is not going to be recognised by the average GP, for example), and Christians are I'm told given to believing in God for some reason.

So which questions about Christianity would not need us to first prove the existence of God?

A bit like if you or anyone else might like to discuss the inns and outs of the Harry Potter books as though they are stories of real events that actually happened.

If it was the Harry Potter books that were asserted as actual events, you might expect to see some white coated figures hovering about in the background; had you proved the Harry Potter books, to be stories about actual events that had really happened the white coated figures wouldn't have any other choice than to quietly back away.

I think that illustrates how a lot of atheists might see what it is you're saying Ailen.

ippy

Please answer my question. Which questions about Christianity would not need us to first prove the existence of God?

I have answered you Alien.

ippy

No, you have not. Which questions about Christianity would not need us to first prove the existence of God? Do I have to prove the existence of God to explain why the Orthodox Church and Roman Catholic Church split? Presumably not. Do I have to prove the existence of God to explain why Arminians have a different understanding of predestination to Calvinists? If not, why do I have to prove the existence of God to answer the OP? Does not the OP assume, for the sake of the OP, that God exists?

All based on one kind of god belief or another, no one has been able to establish whether the god thing at the root of all you're referring to exsists or not; what is the point having any kind of dispute, fall out or argument unless there is some kind of confirmation about this god thing you keep referring to is an actual part of reality, in the unlikely event you were able nail this god idea as a going concern, well there might well be some point to further discussion, without the said confirmation, why bother?

ippy

[BashfulAnthony]

Maybe I am wrong, but I thought the point of the OP was to discuss whether "there is no health in us" (as meant by the authors of the BCP) rather than prove the existence of God. Perhaps Rhiannon would comment.

I don't see how the latter can be separated from the former given that the text in question in the OP is a Christian text (the word 'health' in this particular context is a specifically Christian one which is not going to be recognised by the average GP, for example), and Christians are I'm told given to believing in God for some reason.

So which questions about Christianity would not need us to first prove the existence of God?

A bit like if you or anyone else might like to discuss the inns and outs of the Harry Potter books as though they are stories of real events that actually happened.

If it was the Harry Potter books that were asserted as actual events, you might expect to see some white coated figures hovering about in the background; had you proved the Harry Potter books, to be stories about actual events that had really happened the white coated figures wouldn't have any other choice than to quietly back away.

I think that illustrates how a lot of atheists might see what it is you're saying Ailen.

ippy

Please answer my question. Which questions about Christianity would not need us to first prove the existence of God?

There are certainly some, such as establishing whether there was a historical Jesus at all, and ascertaining what he may reasonably supposed to have said and did if such as figure did exist (this is quite different from the point ippy appeared to be making, claiming an exact parallel between Jesus and Harry Potter - for as far as I'm aware, no one is arguing that Harry Potter ever existed).
Now a lot of Christians may insist that the historical existence of Jesus can in no way be separated from his supposed divinity, or his having performed miracles, or there being a spiritual dimension to life at all. I don't see why that has to be.
Conversely, atheists like ippy seem to accept the same view of the matter as some Christians - namely that the historical Jesus cannot be separated from supernatural claims he made or are made about him - which of course they do not believe in. I find such an approach inherently boring and repetitive, just as I find the former fantastical and totally unbelievable.

There is also the question of whether some of Jesus moral teaching has any true relevance for the present day, and that also can quite easily be separated from supernatural claims.

In other words - a plague on both your houses!

Well what do you expect religion is nonsense until some way of confirming its veracity is found, which is unlikely, the mystical magic supernatural can be ruled out.

I live a reaasonably moral and ethical life like most people do the only difference between non-religios people and the religious is that we behave decently without the imaginary carrot and stick.

ippy

Reasonably!!  Well that leaves the mind boggling!

[ippy]

Maybe I am wrong, but I thought the point of the OP was to discuss whether "there is no health in us" (as meant by the authors of the BCP) rather than prove the existence of God. Perhaps Rhiannon would comment.

I don't see how the latter can be separated from the former given that the text in question in the OP is a Christian text (the word 'health' in this particular context is a specifically Christian one which is not going to be recognised by the average GP, for example), and Christians are I'm told given to believing in God for some reason.

So which questions about Christianity would not need us to first prove the existence of God?

A bit like if you or anyone else might like to discuss the inns and outs of the Harry Potter books as though they are stories of real events that actually happened.

If it was the Harry Potter books that were asserted as actual events, you might expect to see some white coated figures hovering about in the background; had you proved the Harry Potter books, to be stories about actual events that had really happened the white coated figures wouldn't have any other choice than to quietly back away.

I think that illustrates how a lot of atheists might see what it is you're saying Ailen.

ippy

Please answer my question. Which questions about Christianity would not need us to first prove the existence of God?

There are certainly some, such as establishing whether there was a historical Jesus at all, and ascertaining what he may reasonably supposed to have said and did if such as figure did exist (this is quite different from the point ippy appeared to be making, claiming an exact parallel between Jesus and Harry Potter - for as far as I'm aware, no one is arguing that Harry Potter ever existed).
Now a lot of Christians may insist that the historical existence of Jesus can in no way be separated from his supposed divinity, or his having performed miracles, or there being a spiritual dimension to life at all. I don't see why that has to be.
Conversely, atheists like ippy seem to accept the same view of the matter as some Christians - namely that the historical Jesus cannot be separated from supernatural claims he made or are made about him - which of course they do not believe in. I find such an approach inherently boring and repetitive, just as I find the former fantastical and totally unbelievable.

There is also the question of whether some of Jesus moral teaching has any true relevance for the present day, and that also can quite easily be separated from supernatural claims.

In other words - a plague on both your houses!

Well what do you expect religion is nonsense until some way of confirming its veracity is found, which is unlikely, the mystical magic supernatural can be ruled out.

I live a reaasonably moral and ethical life like most people do the only difference between non-religios people and the religious is that we behave decently without the imaginary carrot and stick.

ippy

Reasonably!!  Well that leaves the mind boggling!

Is that the best you can come up with BA.

ippy

[BashfulAnthony]

"Is that the best you can come up with BA.

ippy"


No, but it leaves so much to the imagination!  If you really want me to have a go, then I'd be happy to oblige.

[ippy]

"Is that the best you can come up with BA.

ippy"


No, but it leaves so much to the imagination!  If you really want me to have a go, then I'd be happy to oblige.

Most people would concede that although reasonable can be stretched from here to forever, most people would understand where it is reasonable to use this term reasonably.

ippy

[BashfulAnthony]

"Is that the best you can come up with BA.

ippy"


No, but it leaves so much to the imagination!  If you really want me to have a go, then I'd be happy to oblige.

Most people would concede that although reasonable can be stretched from here to forever, most people would understand where it is reasonable to use this term reasonably.

ippy

It's reasonable to ask what you mean by reasonable, and whether it is, in fact, reasonable.

[ippy]

"Is that the best you can come up with BA.

ippy"


No, but it leaves so much to the imagination!  If you really want me to have a go, then I'd be happy to oblige.

Most people would concede that although reasonable can be stretched from here to forever, most people would understand where it is reasonable to use this term reasonably.

ippy

It's reasonable to ask what you mean by reasonable, and whether it is, in fact, reasonable.

"reasonable can be stretched from here to forever", most reasonable people would be able to understand enough as in this case due to its context, it is loose but near enough without having to write a treatise; I will not be writing a treatise about my use the word reasonable, at any time.

ippy 

[Sassy]

You are right, Sass, in that position does not equate relationship. But first you'd have to question why someone was taking those positions - in my case it was because of my relationship with God and a desire to serve him. Like you I'd felt that since childhood, which is why it was so strange when it ended - and ended very abruptly. I was happily a mum of two, feeding my younger daughter in my nursing chair when I realised God just wasn't there. Because I'd also had animist experiences as a child, and these didn't change, this is what I now go with.

My family and I, have been through an awful lot of heartache and sad time.
But if I am honest those times do not erase God and do not make God any less real.
I cannot deny God because life gives us hard blows...

I could live my life as if not a believer but how could it be sincere.
As the psalm says:

King James Bible
If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.

Living for self, does not make God any less real.

Deuteronomy 31:8King James Version (KJV)

8 And the Lord, he it is that doth go before thee; he will be with thee, he will not fail thee, neither forsake thee: fear not, neither be dismayed.

When you know that God is real what else compares or can be obtained by comparison to him? 


If I tried to live my life without God or in denial of God, it would be worth nothing for in my heart I know I would be living a lie.  One way Satan tries to make us give up is the feeling we have failed God. But the truth sustains that God never fails us. When we are unfaithful he will always be faithful. How can you walk away from such a God?

But Sass, I wasn't in a bad place when I lost God's presence - I was in a very good one.

So what would be a bad place? Surely any place you lose Gods presence is a bad place to be...

Later when the bad stuff started to happen, I asked God, please come back, please make yourself known to me again, please get me through this.

I am sure Job is an example of how bad things can get and how God is still there listening even when Job felt he wasn't.
Because God never went away how can you ask him to come back.
If you felt separated from God then you moved... He never went away. Maybe the faith you needed was not really mature enough then to realise. But God never went away... You needed to just accept his presence and seek through his word.

And there was nothing. So eventually - after two years of soul searching and heartache - I decided that living a lie meant living as though there was anything left to carry on believing in.

The truth appears to be you did not know God or his word.
Your search should always be from a position of faith.
Abraham believed what God had said and God accounted that unto him as righteousness...

Had you sought God in faith then you would have realised he was there and found him....

[Sassy]

But Sass, I wasn't in a bad place when I lost God's presence - I was in a very good one. Later when the bad stuff started to happen, I asked God, please come back, please make yourself known to me again, please get me through this.

And there was nothing. So eventually - after two years of soul searching and heartache - I decided that living a lie meant living as though there was anything left to carry on believing in.

But you weren't chosen, Rhi ... Sass was. Just your bad luck. 

Matthew 22:14King James Version (KJV)

14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

Leonard,

So where do you think you get your misdirected reasoning from.

How hard did it get for you before you walked away?

[Leonard James]

Matthew 22:14King James Version (KJV)

14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

Why is that then? Is there so little room in heaven that "God" has to whittle us down?

Leonard,

So where do you think you get your misdirected reasoning from.

My ability to reason derives from evolution, as does your lack of it. Luck of the draw, Sass.

How hard did it get for you before you walked away?

Very hard, which is why I prayed for help ... but answer can there none.

[floo]

You are right, Sass, in that position does not equate relationship. But first you'd have to question why someone was taking those positions - in my case it was because of my relationship with God and a desire to serve him. Like you I'd felt that since childhood, which is why it was so strange when it ended - and ended very abruptly. I was happily a mum of two, feeding my younger daughter in my nursing chair when I realised God just wasn't there. Because I'd also had animist experiences as a child, and these didn't change, this is what I now go with.

My family and I, have been through an awful lot of heartache and sad time.
But if I am honest those times do not erase God and do not make God any less real.
I cannot deny God because life gives us hard blows...

I could live my life as if not a believer but how could it be sincere.
As the psalm says:

King James Bible
If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.

Living for self, does not make God any less real.

Deuteronomy 31:8King James Version (KJV)

8 And the Lord, he it is that doth go before thee; he will be with thee, he will not fail thee, neither forsake thee: fear not, neither be dismayed.

When you know that God is real what else compares or can be obtained by comparison to him? 


If I tried to live my life without God or in denial of God, it would be worth nothing for in my heart I know I would be living a lie.  One way Satan tries to make us give up is the feeling we have failed God. But the truth sustains that God never fails us. When we are unfaithful he will always be faithful. How can you walk away from such a God?

But Sass, I wasn't in a bad place when I lost God's presence - I was in a very good one.

So what would be a bad place? Surely any place you lose Gods presence is a bad place to be...

Later when the bad stuff started to happen, I asked God, please come back, please make yourself known to me again, please get me through this.

I am sure Job is an example of how bad things can get and how God is still there listening even when Job felt he wasn't.
Because God never went away how can you ask him to come back.
If you felt separated from God then you moved... He never went away. Maybe the faith you needed was not really mature enough then to realise. But God never went away... You needed to just accept his presence and seek through his word.

And there was nothing. So eventually - after two years of soul searching and heartache - I decided that living a lie meant living as though there was anything left to carry on believing in.

The truth appears to be you did not know God or his word.
Your search should always be from a position of faith.
Abraham believed what God had said and God accounted that unto him as righteousness...

Had you sought God in faith then you would have realised he was there and found him....

And you know all that for a fact do you? GET REAL , Sass!

[BashfulAnthony]

You are right, Sass, in that position does not equate relationship. But first you'd have to question why someone was taking those positions - in my case it was because of my relationship with God and a desire to serve him. Like you I'd felt that since childhood, which is why it was so strange when it ended - and ended very abruptly. I was happily a mum of two, feeding my younger daughter in my nursing chair when I realised God just wasn't there. Because I'd also had animist experiences as a child, and these didn't change, this is what I now go with.

My family and I, have been through an awful lot of heartache and sad time.
But if I am honest those times do not erase God and do not make God any less real.
I cannot deny God because life gives us hard blows...

I could live my life as if not a believer but how could it be sincere.
As the psalm says:

King James Bible
If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.

Living for self, does not make God any less real.

Deuteronomy 31:8King James Version (KJV)

8 And the Lord, he it is that doth go before thee; he will be with thee, he will not fail thee, neither forsake thee: fear not, neither be dismayed.

When you know that God is real what else compares or can be obtained by comparison to him? 


If I tried to live my life without God or in denial of God, it would be worth nothing for in my heart I know I would be living a lie.  One way Satan tries to make us give up is the feeling we have failed God. But the truth sustains that God never fails us. When we are unfaithful he will always be faithful. How can you walk away from such a God?

But Sass, I wasn't in a bad place when I lost God's presence - I was in a very good one.

So what would be a bad place? Surely any place you lose Gods presence is a bad place to be...

Later when the bad stuff started to happen, I asked God, please come back, please make yourself known to me again, please get me through this.

I am sure Job is an example of how bad things can get and how God is still there listening even when Job felt he wasn't.
Because God never went away how can you ask him to come back.
If you felt separated from God then you moved... He never went away. Maybe the faith you needed was not really mature enough then to realise. But God never went away... You needed to just accept his presence and seek through his word.

And there was nothing. So eventually - after two years of soul searching and heartache - I decided that living a lie meant living as though there was anything left to carry on believing in.

The truth appears to be you did not know God or his word.
Your search should always be from a position of faith.
Abraham believed what God had said and God accounted that unto him as righteousness...

Had you sought God in faith then you would have realised he was there and found him....

And you know all that for a fact do you? GET REAL , Sass!

Do you realise how depressing it is to read your perpetual gloom and derision?  Call it a day, and get back to the painting.

[Dicky Underpants]

]No, you have not. Which questions about Christianity would not need us to first prove the existence of God? Do I have to prove the existence of God to explain why the Orthodox Church and Roman Catholic Church split? Presumably not. Do I have to prove the existence of God to explain why Arminians have a different understanding of predestination to Calvinists? If not, why do I have to prove the existence of God to answer the OP? Does not the OP assume, for the sake of the OP, that God exists?

All based on one kind of god belief or another, no one has been able to establish whether the god thing at the root of all you're referring to exsists or not; what is the point having any kind of dispute, fall out or argument unless there is some kind of confirmation about this god thing you keep referring to is an actual part of reality, in the unlikely event you were able nail this god idea as a going concern, well there might well be some point to further discussion, without the said confirmation, why bother?

ippy

You miss the point yet again. Alan refers to the Great Schism - the split between the Catholic and the Orthodox church - in his post. Now, I freely admit that the cause of this great division in Christendom was based on the most laughably pedantic mystic mumbo-jumbo, as well as the more immediate socio-religious consequences of whether the Roman Pontiff had ultimate authority. It does not matter whether all this pother had any roots in ultimate religious truth or not. But the Great Schism remains an event of immense significance in European history and religion, whose repercussions had reverberations down the ages.
For historians, such phenomena remain a rich source for discussion, and most of them do not spend their time arguing about whether the mystic imponderables involved are ultimately true or not. They observe that such things have occurred, and attempt to unravel their implications.
You seem to wish to completely dissociate yourself from European history, and believe that we could all make a new world if only everything could be reduced to "Belief in God is bollocks - next question".
Belief in God may indeed may be a load of bollocks, but in matters of history, religion and politics, nothing is ever quite that simplistic.

[Sassy]

Matthew 22:14King James Version (KJV)

14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

Why is that then? Is there so little room in heaven that "God" has to whittle us down?

Why do you ask such a question? The OT shows the Jews were chosen and  the NT shows the Gentiles were called. But all equal in Christ... I guess your definition by way of thought is incorrect.

Leonard,

So where do you think you get your misdirected reasoning from.

My ability to reason derives from evolution, as does your lack of it. Luck of the draw, Sass.

Again your reasoning misleading you. The things of God are now known but you cannot fathom the simplest thing out. I suppose when so lost your insulting is your last resort because you cannot really make any comment about what was being said, could you?
Do you really think that showed any prowess when it comes to defending your power of reasoning in this matter? Shame on you, Leonard...

How hard did it get for you before you walked away?

Very hard, which is why I prayed for help ... but answer can there none.

WHAT answers did you want?