It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Does God need redefining?

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 09:07 PM
a reply to: borntowatch

What is the law? Can you tell us?

posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 09:09 PM
a reply to: feygan

...yet at the same time I have become ashamed to openly voice disbelief due to the immature militant wing of atheism that seems to grow almost as fast as a new religion itself.

Atheism is still finding it's voice - it didn't really have a voice or a choice in this world until very recently

It's going to come on pretty strong for a variety of reasons - not the least of which is shaking off the shackles of oppression

That's right - I said it: shackles of oppression :-)

And feygan - that wasn't directed at you

There's all kinds of atheists - pretty much like you'd expect. But - this ain't over 'til it's over, and until we're allowed to live out our beliefs with the same amount of freedom and respect as anyone else - there's going to be some pushing and some shoving. Religion still wants to call all the shots - and until some people (let's be clear - not all people - it's definitely a specific few) learn that no means no - there's going to be some resistance

Militant is a loaded word - let's just call it righteous indignation

posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 09:23 PM
a reply to: Willtell

Certainly. Another idea is the sealing of himself to experience his own Creation, as a part of it, not above it. In secret. To simply dwell with those in his Creation.. and enjoy it with them. In peace, tranquility, and love.

Look around. He certainly is a God of beauty. Look at comets, nebula's, galaxies, etc. Flowers, animal life, insects. Everything, even deep sea creatures, have haunting beauty. It has purpose. That cannot be an accident. And this is just one world, out of hundreds of billions. Imagine all the unique beauty out in the Universe as well. From the macroscopic, to the microscopic.

If he did not enjoy beauty, he would not have created it. It was meant to be shared.

It saddens me. It hurts my soul. That gift is being thrown away without a second thought or consideration. All for their own selfish desires, wants of power over another being, and lawlessness.

The only law, not religion, that needed to be followed all along, was the Golden Rule.
edit on 23-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 09:24 PM
a reply to: NthOther

Ah. Thanks for clarifying. Yes, language seems to be an obstacle everywhere. An idea may exist without definition, but then it is not a fact. And in the interest of maintaining a factual basis for our understanding and discussion, the edges of this squares ought to be my opinion. And if need be, redefined. I'm sure that it would be educational at least.

posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 09:39 PM
The answer to the thread title is yes...

I believe that the real agenda behind religion is to make it appear that God is actually the one behind it all.

End result?

God has been painted as a hateful monster that wants to smash everyone like a bug on a sidewalk.

Satan has used used religion as a weapon to masquerade as God all through history.

The reason... to cause people to hate God and to counterfeit everything that God does.

Religion is a huge mind control tool designed to steer people away from the truth.

All religion does is drive people AWAY from God, this is Satan's real agenda.

Darren Wilson created a documentary to specifically dispel these myths:

I went into making this film by asking the simple question: who is God? I wanted to know His character, His personality, and who He truly is. To answer this question, we had to peel back the many layers of religious garbage that has been passed onto him through generations. That He is angry. Vengeful. Wrathful. And in general, that He doesn’t like you very much.

The first trailer below is the short version...

edit on 23-8-2014 by Murgatroid because: I felt like it..

posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 09:42 PM
a reply to: Not Authorized

Like the story about the egg. In some ways, it makes an astounding amount of sense. Like its something I would do if I owned a universe. I would much rather play in the sandbox than stand guard over the ants.

posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 09:55 PM
a reply to: TzarChasm

You are made in the express image of God. That is why you would do the same thing, if you owned a universe. It is what he is doing.

posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 10:19 PM
There never was a definition of god beyond subjective terms and biased interpretations to begin with. This is why ignostics exist. Not to be confused with agnostics an ignostic wont claim to belive or disbeleive in god without proper definitions on what a god is.

posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 10:22 PM

originally posted by: RoScoLaz4

god is too well established a template for any new interpretation of him/her/it/them.


posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 10:26 PM

originally posted by: Not Authorized
a reply to: borntowatch

What is the law? Can you tell us?

It wouldn't do any good for you now. Didn't you get that memo before you joined the revolution? Now you are fallen and cant get up. Well ok you can flap around a little bit.

posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 10:33 PM
a reply to: feygan

My opinion only.

If you had a personal relationship with God (meaning faith) then you wouldn't need to ask the question.

Anyone who does have faith has no need to redefine God.

But if it helps you on a personal level, then consider him/her/it whatever you want, however you want.

YOUR definition does not change MY faith.

posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 10:51 PM
a reply to: feygan

For me the notion is a simple question "What is (insert deity name)?" I don't mean this in a spiritual or theological sense but in a full physical and scientific way.

How helpful that is to the discussion! (I'm lying) Nothing is as likely to prevent a conversation from even getting started as that question. I don't know whether you're speaking from a lack of experience on this question, or what your situation might be, but think about it for a minute. Your asking someone "Tell me about your all-powerful God, with infinite existence and knowledge, but tell me about Him in such a way as I can measure him in a test tube, put Him on my scales, and look at this eternal creature through my electron microscope."

you simply cannot have a good argument with someone who refuses to believe factual science.
Are you just starting out on Life's Journey? "Factual Science" has not and can not make any statement at all about God. Scientists know that.

In reading your last paragraph, I see that your entire purpose is "the breaking down of religious organizations."

Your headline, "Does God Need Redefining," does not accurately describe your post. A more accurate title would be "Bringing Confusion to the God Discussion in Order to Destroy Religion." You were dishonest in your choice. Perhaps you believe a moral wrong in the service of a greater good is perfectly fine. But, if so, why would anybody want to talk with you about God or morals?

posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 10:51 PM
Anselm: Ontological Argument for God’s Existence

More formally, the argument is this:

By definition, God is a being than which none greater can be imagined.
A being that necessarily exists in reality is greater than a being that does not necessarily exist.
Thus, by definition, if God exists as an idea in the mind but does not necessarily exist in reality, then we can imagine something that is greater than God.
But we cannot imagine something that is greater than God.
Thus, if God exists in the mind as an idea, then God necessarily exists in reality.
God exists in the mind as an idea.
Therefore, God necessarily exists in reality.

There have been several posts which imply Religion and God are synonymous.
In my opinion this simply can not be the case .Surely the ' concept ' of a God
real or imagined predates Religion .
If one can define the concept of God it would hold no validity.
We can define a toaster etc. however it would be unworthy of the concept.
Although Saint Anselm has many noteworthy Philosophers who contend false logic.
I find his argument worthy of serious consideration which must be read several times
to truly understand his position.

Regardless the 'concept' of God ( There can only be one ) it offers me and billions before me comfort.
This is all I desire

posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 11:03 PM
a reply to: Logarock

I wasn't aware of any so-called revolution. Please, elaborate. :-) I'd love to hear this.

Edit: Nevermind. *sits down, waits, smiles, and starts humming its a small world afterall*. :-)

edit on 24-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 11:37 PM

originally posted by: RoScoLaz4

god is too well established a template for any new interpretation of him/her/it/them.

now if the question had been 'does god need dismissing?' i would say a resounding yes.

enough with this god crap. whichever god, whatever it's called. it is a monumental fail.

IMHO of course.

Replace the word 'god' each time you used it with the word 'religion' and your post makes perfect sense.

Religion IS a monumental fail.

You are blaming mans failures on God when in fact He has nothing to do with it.

posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 11:48 PM
a reply to: Murgatroid

I've stated this so often I should get a t-shirt with this on it. . . .

Religion is nothing more than the vehicle that propels faith through society.

I think we can all find a thing or two to say about religion, but the core issue at hand with this thread appears to be redefining an individuals faith.

And I find that disturbing.

posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 02:31 AM

originally posted by: RodNasty
I think the term Heavenly Father, instead of God. A number of religious people see God as word that can be thrown around for any simple reason. It by no means is, but by some means is not the absolute wrong. Gods have existed in the most ancient accounts of humanity. Some humans have claimed to be Gods.

Here is the difference: Be it Hades, Zeus, Thor, Ra, Isis, Mars, Any of mythology really, Some accounted for the creation of man, while others were just there to play a role.

This is why "God" inherently loses meaning in education and experience. Using the lords name in vain is a trend in this generation, and I have to ask myself why? If so many were to displease the clear God in this in many more ways, why would we even still be allowed tongues?

Our Heavenly Father means only one thing.. be it in any area or religion, any space on the desolate, thinly inhabited regions of the earth, it means only one thing. Perhaps this could provide a road to unity?

Huh? Perhaps you're unaware of religions that don't believe in Heaven or a "Heavenly Father". What does Heavenly Father mean to an animist or a Wiccan or a Celtic polytheist, for example?

posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 02:34 AM

originally posted by: Willtell
People will believe what reality (experience) points them towards until they know the truth through experience. This has been the case since man first experienced thought and then created faith, so, imo, there is no need to redefine what humans don’t really know.

Faith is a substitute for experience it’s not the final level.

You believe the medicine will work but you won’t know until you take it.

They say there are three degrees of faith:
The Lore of Certainty: Holy books, stories, theories, fables.
The Eye of Certainty: intuition, cognition.
The Truth of Certainty: Direct experience of God or reality.

We are all practically at only the 1st and 2nd level
And a select few at the final level were they have had some direct experience of God…and can go beyond faith, theory and intuition.

Which select few are at the final level. Can you name any of them? If they're dead, how do you know they have a direct experience of God which, by the way, you can't prove exists?

posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 05:08 AM

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: borntowatch

I am a god to all the little creatures whose lives are at my mercy. Volcanoes do not give birth to people, but the Greeks worshipped hephaestus. Thunder storms do not create planets, but Thor was venerated for hundreds of years. Athena was neither all knowing or all powerful, yet people worship her as a goddess even today. Your parameters for identifying and qualifying deities seem to ignore such history.

I guess all those animals or organisms worship you, what do you think.
Their lives are at your mercy and they worship you? Or they come to you for food and attention, take away their supplier and you wont exist any more.

God has taken everything from me and He is still my God and I His servant.

I dont serve God for what He gives me, I serve Him for Jesus, what He has given me.

your creatures will desert you, I may well one day desert God but havnt yet.

Many of Gods children havnt deserted Him in times of trial, in fact they love Him more.

You are a god, just in your own head, we all do that.

posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 05:16 AM

originally posted by: Not Authorized
a reply to: borntowatch

What is the law? Can you tell us?

Yes I can tell you what the law is, there are two, one for the non- christians and one for the Christian

The law is defined in the first five books of the bible, the Christian law is to put love first as in the New Testament.

So yes that simply means those outside of Christ will be judged by the (Torah) Jewish law.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in