Home | Community | Message Board


Avalon Magic Plants
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Amazon Shop for: Scales

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next >  [ show all ]
OfflineSensismoker
Ganja Guru
Registered: 05/23/04
Posts: 28
Last seen: 11 years, 1 month
Truth or Trash>
    #3665390 - 01/23/05 01:22 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

-Christianity, the religion that thousands if not millions of people have been persecuted for.
-I, being raised in a Christian family since day 1 have full faith in the teachings of the Holy Bible. Of course this kind of faith comes much easier when you've been exposed to it that long(I'm 18).
-My question is, HOW CANT YOU BELIVE IN GOD? :confused:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineMixomatosis
great ape

Registered: 10/28/03
Posts: 1,306
Loc: cipherland
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: Sensismoker]
    #3665466 - 01/23/05 01:38 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

why would you?

that's a rhetorical question


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineSensismoker
Ganja Guru
Registered: 05/23/04
Posts: 28
Last seen: 11 years, 1 month
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: Mixomatosis]
    #3665495 - 01/23/05 01:43 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

God's existence is made evident by everything in existence.

Every aspect of everything in existence has a "God" but they are all one in the same.

No God=No Existence

This world does exist therefore the God of this must exist.

-It's so simple that its complicated. :shocked:


Edited by Sensismoker (01/23/05 02:25 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineblaze2
The Witness
Male

Registered: 12/20/02
Posts: 1,883
Loc: San Antonio, TX
Last seen: 4 years, 4 months
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: Sensismoker]
    #3666723 - 01/23/05 06:14 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

You believe that without a God nothing could exist, but there is no proof of this. Just because something is in a book, an old book admittidly, does not make it true. If the bible had been written today it would be considered historical fiction. It takes events that actually happened and adds a bit of supernatural to them, but just because some parts of the bible are true does not mean that others are.

I'm not trying to crush your faith here(and i doubt i could, since youve been brainwashed by it for so long), but try to imagine if you had never heard a word about god or the bible and grown up went to school learned about science and things that are real, and then on your 18th birthday been given the bible, what would you think? Well you would in all likely hood think it was crazy, if you read it at all.

Now think about this If there is a higher power at work in the universe how do you know that bible got it right? What about the numerous other religions that have come and gone throughout the ages, or the many others still in existance?

What makes you believe that you were raised worshiping the "right" God? All teh other religions in the world are sure they have it right, and there is no way for one to prove to another that their way is right other than blind faith.

So you see if you really want to get simple like you said. Lets look at the facts.

There is no proof that there is a god.
There is no proof that any of the supernatural events in the bible actually happened.
And for a logical person there is no reason to put blind faith in somethign that only has around a 1% chance of being right among the many religions that have existed on this world.

So the "simple" answer is obvious here, and it raises a new question.

How can you believe in something that has less proof going for it than that horrible Alexander movie Oliver Stone stole my money with?

Now all that said I don't know that there isn't a god either. There very well could be. I guess i'll find that out when I die. Until then im going to live like i want without worrying about what comes next.

What's the point in living if all you are doing is waiting to die?


--------------------
"Religion without science is blind, Science without religion is lame." Albert Einstein

"peace is not maintained through force it is acheived through intelligence." Albert Einstein

"Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."
Thomas Jefferson

"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleAdden
Saprotrophic Specimen
I'm a teapot User Gallery

Registered: 06/04/03
Posts: 34,124
Loc: Amongst the Dunes
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: Sensismoker]
    #3666779 - 01/23/05 06:46 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

-My question is, HOW CANT YOU BELIVE IN GOD?




1. No scientific evidence.
2. A religion of the book.. where parts were written ~500 years after Christ.
3. Um, all the other religions not believing in the Christian god?
4. I haven't seen him/her/it or talked to him/her/it and could not prove it.
5. I'd rather believe the Big Bang theory and evolution.
6. The vast abuse and corruption (pre and post child molestors) of the religion - god would not allow it.



TRASH

Welcome to the machine. You've been brainwashed. Put the bible down and get ready for the RFID implant. It only stings for a second.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineskystone
stop the motion
Registered: 11/08/04
Posts: 465
Loc: state,country,etc.
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: Adden]
    #3666963 - 01/23/05 09:31 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

s2dope said:
Quote:

-My question is, HOW CANT YOU BELIVE IN GOD?




1. No scientific evidence.
2. A religion of the book.. where parts were written ~500 years after Christ.
3. Um, all the other religions not believing in the Christian god?
4. I haven't seen him/her/it or talked to him/her/it and could not prove it.
5. I'd rather believe the Big Bang theory and evolution.
6. The vast abuse and corruption (pre and post child molestors) of the religion - god would not allow it.



TRASH

Welcome to the machine. You've been brainwashed. Put the bible down and get ready for the RFID implant. It only stings for a second.




1. you are looking for evidence in the wrong place, you are thinking science will one day find a living entity much like us that controls things. God is much to abstract for science to have evidence of it.
It's like trying to find evidence of words like "irony" "justice" etc.

2. God is not mentioned only in the bible, every religion has some concept of one-ness, unity, universe etc.

3.like I said a lot of religions, if not all worship the universe, the one-ness in one way or another.

4. You see him everyday, you are him, he is you, every thing in existence is him

5. big bang theory speaks nothing against god

6. You are making it sound like god is a general and we are the army.
God is not above us, he is within us. We are god as much as the trees and stones are.


--------------------
"..and suddenly it began to rain"


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblevampirism
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 8,120
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: blaze2]
    #3666971 - 01/23/05 09:39 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

"bing bang theory and evolution" are not beliefs. One is a theory for why there is radiation spread out everywhere in the Universe and the other is a theory for how new speicies and onward can arise.


Sensismoker- do you mean just *any* God, or the Christian God? Most here are not atheist- they either have their own concept of God or are unwilling to make a decision in that respect.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGomp
¡(Bound to·(O))be free!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 09/11/04
Posts: 10,866
Loc: I re·side [primarily] in...
Last seen: 2 months, 1 day
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: vampirism]
    #3667021 - 01/23/05 10:17 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

""HOW CANT YOU BELIEVE IN GOD?""

By saying you do not?
:confused: :thumbup:


--------------------


--------------------
Disclaimer!?


Edited by Gomp (01/23/05 10:17 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleClark
Bar RoomSuperman

Registered: 11/15/00
Posts: 179
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: Gomp]
    #3667113 - 01/23/05 11:19 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

Three reasons I don't believe in the biblical God:

1) This universe does not strike me as an efficient design for executing God's plan as delineated in the Bible. It is 99.99+ % uninhabitable waste -- hot gas, hard radiation sources and rocks, seperated by vast expanses of vacuum energy. It seems a very wasteful design for sustaining living things, let alone humans. Wastefulness on such a scale implies a non-intelligent process (unless the creator was laboring under design constraints, in which case he is not omnipotent).

2) Starvation, predation, disease, and other sources of arbitrary suffering seem to have been hard-wired into the very cycle of nature for hundreds of millions of years now. They don't appear to be a byproduct of "original sin" after all, so the blame for them would have to fall on any hypothetical creator (unless we assume that he is not benevalent).

3) The Genesis account of the world's history is demonstrably false.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineDroz
Love of Life
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/16/00
Posts: 2,746
Loc: Floorida
Last seen: 1 year, 4 months
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: Sensismoker]
    #3667153 - 01/23/05 11:38 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

Sensismoker - Though God doesn't exist to many, they still too are bound in his footsteps. God is not word, God is pure thought. "Words are like a virus, can't change the way i feel." When one is so easily manipulated by words, one can be easily thrown down from power. God is the thing that in our minds control us that most are not aware of. But as seeing you are visiting the great shroomery website. Most here have experienced God. The inner God. Not someone who stands up in front of the class and speaks over everyone else. May each in his own have his turn. You too should have the chance to speak in front of everyone. Make your words more powerful then mine. "Seeing believing and hearing in the power struggle"

Truth - Silence is the power.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineincubaby_421
half naked andfull witted
 User Gallery

Registered: 08/14/04
Posts: 2,629
Loc: the center of the univers...
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: Droz]
    #3667169 - 01/23/05 11:43 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

i dont believe in your god becuase that is not what i choose to believe, like the others said, i could very easily ask you the transverse of the same question, i dont understand how people could so easily give themselves to an organization which obviously(to myself) only supports greed and power, i guess it is all just a personal preference thing.


--------------------
"yet the more i dig, the more i consume, the more i unfold... the less protected i feel.
i am the spit on the hair of the son of an electron, swimming around the nucleus of a cell inside the sperm of a killer bee, and my purpose is as nebulous as why weve been bestowed with the capacity to give a shit" Brandon Boyd



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineskystone
stop the motion
Registered: 11/08/04
Posts: 465
Loc: state,country,etc.
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: Clark]
    #3667222 - 01/23/05 12:06 PM (11 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Clark said:
Three reasons I don't believe in the biblical God:

1) This universe does not strike me as an efficient design for executing God's plan as delineated in the Bible. It is 99.99+ % uninhabitable waste -- hot gas, hard radiation sources and rocks, seperated by vast expanses of vacuum energy. It seems a very wasteful design for sustaining living things, let alone humans. Wastefulness on such a scale implies a non-intelligent process (unless the creator was laboring under design constraints, in which case he is not omnipotent).

2) Starvation, predation, disease, and other sources of arbitrary suffering seem to have been hard-wired into the very cycle of nature for hundreds of millions of years now. They don't appear to be a byproduct of "original sin" after all, so the blame for them would have to fall on any hypothetical creator (unless we assume that he is not benevalent).

3) The Genesis account of the world's history is demonstrably false.




Why does everyone keep tying god to that old book and it's metaphores?

Old testament is a human interpretations and simplification of things people couldn't understand at that time, and many things we can't understand still today.

So when reading old testament, one should see it through the eyes of a primitive human being. Old testament is like a childs drawing..
When you look at childs drawing, and try to indentifie why is on the picture, you don't look for specific shapes because a child is usually a terrible painter, instred you try to see it through childs eyes and try to find out what objects did the child paint.

A childs drawing of a car does not speak of cars limitations and illogic of design, it speaks of limitations of the child.

People interpreted god the only way they could at that time, they knew nothing but hate and violence, so their god had to be violent,
simple, man-like, seeking revenge, emotional, limited in mind...
That god is an image of the human of that time, not of god.




--------------------
"..and suddenly it began to rain"


Edited by skystone (01/23/05 12:16 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineSensismoker
Ganja Guru
Registered: 05/23/04
Posts: 28
Last seen: 11 years, 1 month
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: Clark]
    #3667252 - 01/23/05 12:16 PM (11 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Clark said:
Three reasons I don't believe in the biblical God:

1) This universe does not strike me as an efficient design for executing God's plan as delineated in the Bible. It is 99.99+ % uninhabitable waste -- hot gas, hard radiation sources and rocks, seperated by vast expanses of vacuum energy. It seems a very wasteful design for sustaining living things, let alone humans. Wastefulness on such a scale implies a non-intelligent process (unless the creator was laboring under design constraints, in which case he is not omnipotent).

2) Starvation, predation, disease, and other sources of arbitrary suffering seem to have been hard-wired into the very cycle of nature for hundreds of millions of years now. They don't appear to be a byproduct of "original sin" after all, so the blame for them would have to fall on any hypothetical creator (unless we assume that he is not benevalent).

3) The Genesis account of the world's history is demonstrably false.




-this universe might not be efficient, but it is sufficient, the very fact that this universe is 99.9% uninhabitable is a demonstration of God in and of itself. IF this world was efficient, it had perfect living conditions, and there was no 'wastefullness' in design, we would be living in the Garden Of Eden. This is impossible since humans are imperfect.

-suffering is hard-wired into nature.it became natural when sin entered into the world. God is benevolent, hope you dont mind my scripture quotin'. It tends to be a little hard to disprove(hehehehe).

-"God is love."- Fisrt John 4:16


- SOME THINGS WHICH MUST BE TRUE IF 'GOD IS LOVE.'



I. What is the meaning of the words of the text.

1. By the assertion that 'God is love,' I do not understand the Apostle to teach that the nature, that is, the essence or substance of God is love, for this would be an absurd proposition--nor that God is love in the sense of fondness for his creatures: that is, that his love is merely an emotion, belonging rather to the sensibility, than to the voluntary faculty of his mind.

2. I do understand the text as teaching that God is benevolent--supremely devoted to doing good--that all his powers are consecrated to the promotion of the highest good of sentient being. The Apostle, by the strong language of the text, surely does not mean to affirm that the nature or substance of God is love, but that his character or voluntary state is benevolent, and that it is infinitely so, that benevolence constitutes the whole disposition or state of his will, and that his character is constantly and eternally benevolent--not benevolent at one time, and selfish at another, but forever, and without change benevolent. But not to dwell on this division of the subject, I shall,

II. State some things which must be true if 'God is love.'

1. If it is true that 'God is love,' it follows that He has been eternally so, else his character is mutable, which is impossible.

2. If 'God is love,' He has but one intention or subjective motive for his conduct; that is, He aims at but one thing--consequently, his character is simple. In other words, if his ultimate end in acting is a benevolent one, it necessarily follows, that He always acts in view of one great consideration, which is, the promotion of the objects of benevolence, or the good of universal being.

3. If 'God is love,' He never has done, and never will do any thing, but in execution of his benevolent intention. There is a difference between the benevolence, and the executive volitions of God. His benevolence is one thing, and the action which He puts forth in execution of his benevolence, is another. God was benevolent from eternity, but He has not acted in execution of his benevolent designs from eternity--He has not eternally put forth creative power, for if He had done so, there would be created things as old as Himself, which is impossible. As just remarked, the will of God has forever been in a benevolent state; the developing, or acting out of that benevolence, is his actions or doings. Now, I say, that He never has done, and never will do, any thing which will not tend to realize the objects of his benevolence, or to accomplish that on which his heart is set. In other words, all the actions of God have been, and will continue to be, in execution of his grand design, which is, the promotion of the highest good of being.

4. If 'God is love,' it follows, that while He remains benevolent, He can do nothing but in execution of a benevolent intention. He will only do what necessarily results from such a state of mind. Every man knows from his own consciousness that this must be true. Action is caused by design or intention; therefore, it can never be inconsistent with intention. If I design to go directly home, I cannot go in an opposite direction, or loiter by the way. I can relinquish my intention, but so long as the design continues, I must act in obedience to that design. Now, while God remains benevolent, He can only act in obedience to a benevolent design--He must act in execution of a benevolent purpose. As He is a free agent, He can, of course, cease to be benevolent: but while He remains benevolent, He cannot cease to act benevolently.

5. If 'God is love,' it follows that He has omitted nothing, and can omit nothing, the performance of which, would, upon the whole, result in the highest good of being. God is infinitely wise. He can, therefore, make no mistakes. Good men being benevolent, cannot act inconsistently with a benevolent design; but having finite intellects, they may make mistakes and err in the path of duty. While intending the highest good of the universe, they may be mistaken as to the means for promoting this end, and so accomplish only mischief by their actions. But not so with God. His infinite wisdom permits Him to make no mistakes. While He remains benevolent, He will, and can do nothing inconsistent with his grand design. Hence it follows, that He never has, that He never will, and that while He remains benevolent, He never can, omit to do any thing which would conduce to the highest good of being--it is naturally impossible for Him to do so. He must cease to be benevolent, or else He can do nothing inconsistent with the highest good of being, or leave undone any thing which universal good requires.

6. If 'God is love,' He has suffered, and will suffer nothing to occur that would be injurious to the universe, that can be prevented by the attributes of Jehovah. This ought to be perfectly understood. I say, then, that if almighty power, under the control of infinite wisdom, and infinite love, can prevent the existence of any thing which will harm the universe, it will, of course, do so. If God is love, it follows as a self evident truth, that He has prevented, and will prevent, so far as He wisely can, the existence of every thing which would work ultimate injury to being.

7. God, being love, has created the universe in obedience to the law of benevolence; for his creative acts result from his benevolence--they are only effects of the benevolent state of his heart. Hence--

8. He created the universe as early as He wisely could. It would have been a natural impossibility for Him to create from eternity, for then his creatures would have been as old as Himself. But He did put forth creative power as soon as He benevolently could, taking into the account his own character and designs, and the prospective character of those whom He was to create. And,

9. He created the universe as rapidly as He could, consistently with his benevolent design. Not only did He begin his work as early as He wisely could, but when commenced, He carried it on as rapidly as benevolence would permit.

10. If 'God is love,' He has created as many worlds as benevolence demanded. He has omitted to create none, and has made no more and no less than the law of benevolence required.

11. He has created just such orders of beings, and endowed them with just such capacities as his infinite wisdom saw to be consistent with the accomplishment of his benevolent designs.

12. If 'God is love,' He has done, and will do, as much to promote the happiness of his creatures as He possibly can. Had He done, or should He do, more or less for the happiness of his subjects, than He has done, and will do, He could not be a benevolent being--He would become a wicked one. But being love, no one can accuse Him of neglecting his duty to his creatures. Hence--

13. He has done, and will do, as much to prevent the misery of his subjects, as the good of being will allow. This follows of course, if He is a benevolent being, or a 'God of love.' Many persons seem jealous, if any limit is put to the power of God; while they manifest little concern, whether or not his moral attributes, his justice and benevolence are limited. They seem to think that God might, if He pleased, prevent all misery, regardless of its cause. Now this is a false notion, for if God is a benevolent being, it would have been a natural impossibility for Him not to have done all that He could consistently do to prevent the misery of his creatures. It was, and is, impossible for Him not to do this, and remain a God of benevolence, a God of love. If He had fallen short of it, He would not have been benevolent at all. How can a man be benevolent and not do all the good he can? What is benevolence, but willing to accomplish all the good that lies in our power?

14. If 'God is love,' He has done, and will do, all that He can to prevent the sins of moral beings. He never has suffered a sin to be committed, which He could wisely or benevolently prevent--which He could prevent without sinning Himself. Do you think this a strange assertion? But is it not true? And is it not better that God should suffer some one else to sin, rather than sin Himself? Moreover, God has never suffered any thing inconsistent with the perfect holiness of his subjects, to exist, which He could wisely prevent. He has never allowed any temptation to draw his creatures from the path of duty, which He could prevent without an infraction of the law of benevolence. Now is not this self evident? If God is love, is it not certain that no sin or temptation ever existed which He could wisely prevent? Under existing circumstances, if God had done more than He has done to prevent sin, He would have sinned Himself. This is self evident; for if God is a benevolent being, He never could have omitted any exertion to prevent sin, which would be consistent with the good of the universe. Therefore, if He had done more than He has done to prevent it, He would no longer be a sinless being.

15. God is love; and therefore, He has made every sacrifice on his part, which He could benevolently make, for the promotion of the highest good of being. 'Herein is love: not that we loved God, but that He loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.' Yes, God did not even hesitate to give his Son, his only Son, to die for us. He had no daughters, no other children, but one only Son. You who are parents, know how strongly a father becomes attached to an only child; while, if he has several children, he does not concentrate his affections with so great intensity upon any one of them. But if he has an only child, he prizes it as his greatest earthly treasure; he will see his property swept away, his buildings torn down, and all his earthly goods destroyed, before he will consent to give up his darling child. Now observe. God did not hesitate to give up his only Son to be a ransom for many; and after He has gone so far, will He not be ready to make any reasonable sacrifice for the good of his creatures? I tell you, yea. If it would be wise, He would willingly send his Son to earth, to die for us every year. He would Himself die a thousand times, if it were possible, and benevolence demanded it. When He sees that a sacrifice on his part, however great, will be the less of two evils, He will not hesitate to make it.

16. If 'God is love,' He has created all things as well as He possibly could. The question is often agitated--how could God have made such and such a thing, and why did He make it just as He did? Now observe. If God is love, He has done the best He could in the creation of the universe. He has established the best relations and founded the best laws which He possibly could have made, for the government of his creatures. We have a beautiful illustration of this truth in our own persons. God made us in the very best way; and if we are ever disposed to find fault with our physical or mental construction--if we will only examine ourselves, we shall be compelled to grant that God has done his best in our creation, and has placed all our organs and faculties in just the right place. And if we look away from ourselves, we shall see, that in giving laws to the universe, in directing all its movements, in ordering the succession of seasons, of day and night, God has done as wisely and well as He possibly could. He does not half do his work, nor does He do it slothfully; whatever He sets Himself about, He does in the best possible manner.

17. God has governed the universe as well as He possibly could. Not only has He created moral beings well, but He has governed them well. Not a single hour, since He first put forth creative power, has He ceased to control the universe in the best possible manner.

18. It does not follow from the fact that God is love, that there will not be great, but incidental evil always existing in the universe. Where there is sin, there must of necessity be misery; and there are also many natural evils, which are consequent on the arrangement of the universe, but this misery, and these evils, do not invalidate, nor are they inconsistent with the character of God; they are only incidental evils, resulting from the accomplishment of his great plans of benevolence--the plans, in pursuance of which, He created the universe, and affixed to it laws for the regulation of its movements. I say that certain incidental evils have resulted from the creation of the universe, which God made in the best possible manner. But mark. They are only incidental to a benevolent plan. It does not follow, then, that because God is love, great and incidental evils may not exist in the universe, nor that they will not exist through eternity, nor that new forms of evil, unknown to us, but known to God, will not make their appearance. But,

19. It does follow from the fact that God is love, that as a whole, creation will result in greater good than evil. God was infinitely wise from the beginning. Now had He seen that creation would result in more evil than good, He could not have ordered it; therefore, we may be certain, that the evil will never equal the good which will result from creation, but that it will fall indefinitely short of it.

20. It is also certain, that a majority of his creatures will be happy--that the number of those who are happy, will greatly overbalance the number of those who are miserable.

21. It is not at all probable that the majority of the inhabitants of any world, except the place of torment, will be finally miserable. I say that it is unreasonable, to suppose that more evil than good will result to any world, where God has placed moral beings on trial. If it was not true, that in every world which God has created, the amount of good resulting, will equal or exceed the amount of evil, how, I ask, could God be a benevolent being, and what tokens of his benevolence could we have in such a creation.

22. If 'God is love,' it follows that He abhors whatever is inconsistent with the highest good of being. He of course abhors all sin, and all sinners, and is opposed to all the selfishness in the universe, and to whatever is forbidden by his law. If He is benevolent, He is manifestly sincere when He commands his subjects to be holy; and He commands this, with all his heart, and soul, and mind, and strength. As a necessity of his character, He is better pleased with holiness than with sin.

23. It follows that He will exercise any degree of needed severity on rebels against his law. He will not hesitate to execute vengeance on the doers of iniquity. We have myriads of instances in this world, of the sternness with which God carries out the principles of His government. How often are men and families, yea, even nations, overwhelmed and crushed beneath the mighty wheels of this vast machine--with such firmness does God carry out his benevolent plans. His government of the universe will go on, and whoever stands in the way of it, will be ground to powder, no matter whether he be an angel from heaven, or a fiend from hell. So too, in the moral world. If an individual will throw himself in the way of the execution of God's plans, He is sure to let him fall, though he is a great and mighty king of Israel, though his fall will be the occasion of dire ruin to the church and the world. Yes, God could and did let even David fall. It was better that He should suffer the King of Israel to fall and the tale of his crime be told from Dan to Beersheba, through heaven and through hell,--I say it was better that he should let the wheels roll over and crush his chosen king, rather than that the car of his moral government should be for a moment stopped. And what God did to David, He does in a thousand other instances in the administration of his moral government. Yes, He will let Peter even deny his master, and the whole church apostatize from the true faith, rather than alter the plans of his moral government--and the reason why He does this, is because He is infinitely benevolent--because He is firm in the execution of His wise plans, and because He is moving on the great concerns of his government on a vast scale. God will not shrink from sending the wicked to hell, any more than from taking the righteous to heaven, for both acts are parts of the same great plan. It is indispensable to his peace of mind that He should do this. I repeat, that God could never be satisfied with His own conduct, if He did not send the wicked to hell, as well as take the righteous to heaven. Both acts result from the same great principle of love to being--a principle, which seated in the breast of God, like an infinite volcano, bursts forth on every side--on the one hand scattering death and damnation among the inhabitants of hell, and on the other, casting the smiles of love over the dwellers in heaven. Yes, it is the same thing heaving up from the very depths of Infinite mind. It is the carrying out of the same benevolent design, which on the one hand consigns the wicked to hell, and on the other, takes the righteous to heaven.

24. If 'God is love,' He is equally good and equally deserving of praise, whatever He does. If there are any cases in which He is more virtuous than in others, they are those in which He is obliged to sacrifice his own feelings--the strong affections of his nature, in order to inflict merited punishment on the wicked. But being a benevolent being, He always has one intention, and that a benevolent one; and He is always guided by the same infinite wisdom, therefore his virtue is always one and the same; it is never diminished and can never be increased. Strictly speaking, virtue cannot be predicated of his executive volitions, but only of his one eternal consecration to the good of being. It is evident then, that God is equally worthy of praise at all times, and for every thing that He does. Hence He requires us to give thanks at all times. "In every thing give thanks," the apostle says, "for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you." They greatly mistake, who think that God must be praised when He performs certain acts, and only tolerated when He performs others. For instance, that he is more merciful under the gospel than He was under the legal dispensation, and therefore more worthy to be praised now than He was then.

This false notion arises from an ignorance of the fact that God exercises all the attributes of his character in every action, and therefore the different phases of his executive volitions, all have the same moral character, for his character belongs solely to his intention, and that results in all his acts, his mercy, justice, &c. His virtue lies back of his executive actions. It is only the flowing out of the vast fountain of benevolence within Himself.

25. If 'God is love,' it follows that He will do for every individual of his creatures, all that He can wisely do. He will not only do this for the universe at large, but He will also do it for each one of us. Yes, He will do just as much for every individual creature in his universe, as, under existing circumstances, He possibly can. He has done this, and He will continue to do it; and should He do any more or any less for our good, than He is doing and will do , He would commit sin. This follows as self-evident, if it is true that 'God is love.[']

26. If God is benevolent, He will do all the good by us that He wisely can. He will not let a single hair of our head fall to the ground, for want of doing all the good by us that He possibly can, under existing circumstances. What do you think of that? I tell you that not a sinner will go to hell, if God can wisely and benevolently employ our instrumentality to save him.

27. What God can wisely do for us and by us, must depend mainly on the course we pursue. I did not mean by the preceding remarks, that God could not do more for us and by us, if the circumstances were different. I merely meant to affirm that He has done all that He could, considering the course we have taken, and do take. If we had acted differently, He would have acted differently. If we had done better than we have, God would have made us wiser and better than we are. So the amount of good which is to be done by us, must depend entirely on the course we pursue. God may have done far less for each one of us, than He would have done, had we acted differently towards Him.

28. God is always doing the best for us and all around us, that, under the circumstances He possibly can; but by the exercise of our agency, we may so vary the circumstances, that He will be compelled to change his conduct, or cease to be benevolent. This is evidently true. It is manifest that God must act differently towards us in the different circumstances in which we place ourselves. Now take the case of a sinner. He repents and believes on the Lord Jesus Christ. Will not God at once change his conduct towards him? Suppose that he lays himself out to do good to others; will not God assist him and make him the instrument of doing infinitely more good, than he would have done if he had remained a rebel? The fact is, we may limit the goodness of God to others, in a thousand ways; for what He does for the individual subjects of his moral government, depends, in a great measure, on the voluntary agency of other free beings.

- The Genesis account is True, basically proven above.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineSensismoker
Ganja Guru
Registered: 05/23/04
Posts: 28
Last seen: 11 years, 1 month
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: incubaby_421]
    #3667291 - 01/23/05 12:25 PM (11 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

incubaby_421 said:
i dont believe in your god becuase that is not what i choose to believe, like the others said, i could very easily ask you the transverse of the same question, i dont understand how people could so easily give themselves to an organization which obviously(to myself) only supports greed and power, i guess it is all just a personal preference thing.




-just to let ya know you said you dont believe because you dont believe. that's not logically or gramatically correct.

- I have NOT given myself to any organization of this world. I prefer to give myself to an organization of God. In this there is no greed or power thirst.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineincubaby_421
half naked andfull witted
 User Gallery

Registered: 08/14/04
Posts: 2,629
Loc: the center of the univers...
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: Sensismoker]
    #3667323 - 01/23/05 12:41 PM (11 years, 10 months ago)

trust me my fickle freind i could right a fucking book on the reasons why i have chosen not to believe in god as you percieve god, but i dont have the time,energy,or care at the moment, so i simplified, and dont take any of what i said personally, in time you will figure that out though, everybody else has, and i wasnt trying to push my beliefs on you, but it seems to me that you are doing the same, dont ask for peoples opinions if your going to get pissed off when you read them.

and get something straight right now, we are not here to pick apart the english of others, trust me i could do the same to you, and it is grammatically correct, becuase i fucking said it is,
now
if you are going to sit there and tell me i am wrong i will do the same to you, there is so much greed and powerlust in organized religion it is not even funny, if you cant recognize that i am very sorry for you.


--------------------
"yet the more i dig, the more i consume, the more i unfold... the less protected i feel.
i am the spit on the hair of the son of an electron, swimming around the nucleus of a cell inside the sperm of a killer bee, and my purpose is as nebulous as why weve been bestowed with the capacity to give a shit" Brandon Boyd



Edited by incubaby_421 (01/23/05 12:45 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleshroomydan
exshroomerite
 User Gallery

Registered: 07/04/04
Posts: 4,126
Loc: In the woods
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: Sensismoker]
    #3667353 - 01/23/05 12:53 PM (11 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

My question is, HOW CANT YOU BELIVE IN GOD?




I'm with you man. The presence of God is evident to me everywhere. Judging from what people have been saying, about various religions and old books, it seems to me that those who do not believe in God don't know who he is. This is part of the modern problem.

God traditionally has been known by philosophers as the absolute being, The backdrop and horizon of existence, the necessary being, simple, infinite and unchanging, eternal and omnipresent, the first cause and sustainer of all that is. This is the God of the philosophers, who's existence can be arrived at by pure reason, independent of religion.

The real modern problem started when Nietzsche declared God dead. Last night I was reading some work by philosopher who came after him which I believe shows the idiocy of atheism. Heidegger says that the ground of existence is not necessary being, rather it is nothing. He says that everything comes from nothing and goes back to nothing. I really don't know what to say about that; its so absurd. Nothing doesn't exist, how can it be the ground of being? It reminds me of a buddy who didn't believe in dinosaurs; I figured that after seeing the bones, if he still didn't believe, then there was nothing I could say to make him change his mind. This is the way it is with atheists; no amount of logic or evidence will convince them that God is real.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineSensismoker
Ganja Guru
Registered: 05/23/04
Posts: 28
Last seen: 11 years, 1 month
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: incubaby_421]
    #3667410 - 01/23/05 01:13 PM (11 years, 10 months ago)

- hey man, I'm not trying to 'push' anything, just defend my answers.

- I wasnt trying to make you look stupid,and I'm not at all pissed off, I dont take these types of conversations personally, as I answer your questions with as much biblical connection as possible.

- there may be greed and powerlust in parts of organized religion,ill give you that, but that's not the point.

-The point is that God's plan is perfect.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineincubaby_421
half naked andfull witted
 User Gallery

Registered: 08/14/04
Posts: 2,629
Loc: the center of the univers...
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: Sensismoker]
    #3667420 - 01/23/05 01:17 PM (11 years, 10 months ago)

good good
now that we are on the same page
you think "gods plan is perfect" i think "gods plan is bullshit"
you will encounter this much if you continue to ask this question, both sides will drop pages of evidence and proofs to support their answers, but the only answer is, that there is no answer, believe what you fell to be true, believe in what gives you your love for life, and i will do the same, and we can then be all harmonious like.


--------------------
"yet the more i dig, the more i consume, the more i unfold... the less protected i feel.
i am the spit on the hair of the son of an electron, swimming around the nucleus of a cell inside the sperm of a killer bee, and my purpose is as nebulous as why weve been bestowed with the capacity to give a shit" Brandon Boyd



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineSensismoker
Ganja Guru
Registered: 05/23/04
Posts: 28
Last seen: 11 years, 1 month
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: incubaby_421]
    #3667456 - 01/23/05 01:24 PM (11 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

incubaby_421 said:

you will encounter this much if you continue to ask this question, both sides will drop pages of evidence and proofs to support their answers




- as far as I've seen, God is the only one with pages of evidence and truths to support them.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSkorpivoMusterion
Livin in theTwilight Zone...
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 9,944
Loc: You can't spell fungus wi...
Re: Truth or Trash> [Re: Sensismoker]
    #3667484 - 01/23/05 01:33 PM (11 years, 10 months ago)

There is no god in the sense of a cosmic father or mother who will provide all things to their children. Nor is there some heavenly bureaucracy to petition. These models are not descriptions of a divine order, but are projections from archetypal templates. If we believe in the divine as cosmic family, we relegate ourselves to perpetual adolescence. If we regard the divine as supreme government, we are forever victims of unfathomable officialdom.

Those who follow Tao declare that there is no evidence that a god created our world. They have not found any empirical proof, and they cannot accept the idea philosophically. They reason that god must be absolute and this means oneness, omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence. Naturally, anything separate and distinct would not satisfy this criterion. If there was a god and a world that god created, then there would be two things ? and god could not then be considered absolute. If there were an absolute god, there could not be anything separate from god.

Everything is god. We are also god. However, we fail to realize this. Why? Because we look for god outside of ourselves. We make the mistake of taking ourselves as the viewer and then seek god as the object of our examinations. Unfortunately, everything we perceive is tainted by our subjectivity, and anything that we define as god ?out there? cannot be god because it is not absolute. All you?ve found is something that exists in relation to your perceptions.

You are god. The only way to confirm this is to remove the barrier of subjectivity that prevents you from realizing your essential oneness with all things.

?Who is God? I can think of no better answer than, He who is. Nothing is more appropriate to the eternity which God is. If you call God good, or great, or blessed, or wise or anything else of this sort, it is included in these words, namely, He is.? ? St. Bernard.

The Universal-Mind, or ?No-Mind? as it is called in the East [Zen], is the centered state of Being that lies within the middle-way of all that is. I am, This is, He/She is. All these are existent prior to all subjective mind-made labels, ideologies, and dualities. This is the Mind of God that has primacy to all that exists subjectively. It is essentially nothing, and yet paradoxically, it is everything; infinity & totality... The Infinite Mind of God.

We can understand something of what lies beyond our experience by considering analogous cases lying within our experience.

The ground in which the multifarious and time-bound psyche is rooted is a simple, timeless awareness. By making ourselves pure in heart and poor in egoic-spirit we can discover and be identified with this awareness. In the spirit we not only have, but are, the unitive knowledge of the divine Ground.

Analogously, God in time is grounded in the eternal Now of the modeless Godhead. It is in the Godhead that things, lives and minds have their being; it is through God that they have their becoming ? a becoming whose goal and purpose is to return to the eternity of the Ground.

In teachings such as Meister Eckhart?s, God is equated with nothing? And in a certain sense the equation is exact; for God is certainly no thing. God is not a what; He is a That. In other words, the Ground can be denoted as being there, but not defined as having qualities. This means that discursive knowledge about the Ground is not merely, like all inferential knowledge, a thing at one remove, or even at several removes, from the reality of immediate acquaintance; it is and, because of the very nature of our language and our standard patterns of thought, it must be, paradoxical knowledge. Direct knowledge of the Ground cannot be had except by union, and union can be achieved only by annihilation of the self-regarding ego, which is the barrier separating the ?thou? from the ?That.?




--------------------
Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next >  [ show all ]

Amazon Shop for: Scales

General Interest >> Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Absolute Truth Revistited (First Philosophy)
( 1 2 3 all )
shroomydan 2,911 44 05/01/05 01:29 AM
by Psychoactive1984
* absolute truth fearfect 1,022 17 11/12/05 01:04 AM
by Amber_Glow
* An ontological argument for absolute truth. shroomydan 1,731 13 02/11/07 11:55 AM
by shroomydan
* Objective Truth
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Huehuecoyotl 4,538 72 09/15/05 01:10 AM
by falcon
* Say something Truthful about your real feelings concerning yourself and other posters on this board
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )
Booby 7,519 139 04/23/07 09:35 AM
by fireworks_god
* The Truth
( 1 2 all )
cybrbeast 1,370 21 08/22/04 11:03 AM
by cybrbeast
* Truth the_phoenix 935 18 12/25/04 09:39 AM
by the_phoenix
* The Official Truth Thread - No jokes please!
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 all )
World Spirit 10,061 178 10/31/02 02:23 AM
by Strumpling

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, CosmicJoke, Diploid, DividedQuantum
3,947 topic views. 1 members, 5 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Marijuana Demystified
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.173 seconds spending 0.003 seconds on 16 queries.