It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

One way of defining the Christian God

page: 5
6
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 05:05 PM
link   
a reply to: TzarChasm
I have not said that I was "OK with" anything. The facts of life do not depend on whether we approve of them. The question of whether there is a self-conscious entity creating the universe does not depend on whether we approve of what he is doing.
When we claim to be acting as moral judges over the universe, we are the ones behaving with narcissistic self-importance.




posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 06:32 PM
link   
My belief is that there has always been God the Father. In infinity (all time and no time at once) he created his one true Son, who is in Him and the only one who truly knows Him. The Son is also the only way to the Father(will add more on that in a jiffy).

Together they created the world via the Holy Spirit and our Spirit as man and woman. When the world was on the fifth day in God's count of days they created us in their image (together they are Elohim) in paradise.

Yeshua and God the Father are YHWH and Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh (and all other names attributed in truth to them) in Heaven and the Son acts out the will of his Father throughout history of the Old Covenant period.

He then sends His Son Yeshua to His earthly realm to eradicate the grip that his enemy Satan has had on us and who has been the ruling principality on earth (and still is for those that do not accept the Son) by offering us to believe in His Son who took on flesh to die for our sins. So God the Father came in through His Son to earth to live and die for us so we would have everlasting life in Heaven with him. The New Covenant.

And in the meantime he wants us to talk to/with him at all times throughout all of our days here on earth until we die of this flesh and sleep until the resurrection to come to our one true home; Heaven, Paradise where Yeshua is the image of the Living Father and we are his brother, sister and mother, spouse and children of the Living Father. And at some unknown time he sends his image, his Son to come and judge the whole world.

This is my faith.

So I agree with DISRAELI.

God is the creator, we are the created. He is the communicator, and wants us to commune with Him.
edit on 19/3/18 by Sump3 because: (no reason given)

edit on 19/3/18 by Sump3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 06:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: DISRAELI
The ability to communicate is demonstrated by the Biblical evidence that communication has been taking place.

You lost me at "Biblical evidence."



posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift
Since the premise is "defining the Christian God", and knowledge of the specifically Christian God is derived from the contents of the Bible, it is legitimate to draw upon the contents of the Bible in framing the definition.

The Bible has accounts of the Creator God communicating with individuals; and thus indirectly communicating with the people at large. That is what I mean by "Biblical evidence".




edit on 19-3-2018 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 07:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

With all due respect, that's where we will have to disagree
I have been promised a time when all evil will be destroyed, that a time in the future a rest from all the turmoil is promised.
Freedom and peace will be the very nature of existence

Not based on a star wars, the force scenario, but a place where love is the law

That is what I believe, you may choose otherwise




Who Promised you This ? Do you Exactly Know where that Information Directly Came From ? Deduce the Possibility of a Deception , then either Except that as a Fact , or Dismiss it on Provable Grounds .
edit on 19-3-2018 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2018 @ 09:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

I have made a decision thanks
Based it on the most likely possibilities and am very happy with my decision

If I am wrong, I have just tried to be a better person than I would have been

I have seen many people deceived by some in the church, this is a big issue, your concern is valid
But many are deceived in the world as well and many people who join the church join for selfish gain



posted on Mar, 20 2018 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Other threads touching on the more "philosophical" aspects of the Biblical God;
The "Beyond God" questions
Foreknowledge is not Fixed Fate



posted on Mar, 21 2018 @ 07:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: TzarChasm
I have not said that I was "OK with" anything. The facts of life do not depend on whether we approve of them. The question of whether there is a self-conscious entity creating the universe does not depend on whether we approve of what he is doing.
When we claim to be acting as moral judges over the universe, we are the ones behaving with narcissistic self-importance.



You are dodging the issue. You basically are saying that literally anything this creator thing wants to do is absolutely permissible regardless of consequence. Zero accountability or oversight. That is dangerously naive bordering on totally asinine. Absolute power corrupts.



posted on Mar, 21 2018 @ 07:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: TzarChasm
You basically are saying that literally anything this creator thing wants to do is absolutely permissible regardless of consequence. Zero accountability or oversight. That is dangerously naive bordering on totally asinine. Absolute power corrupts.

The question of "permissability" is irrelevant, because none of us would have the power to do anything about it.
You don't seem to grasp the point that the universe is not under democratic control. You can't get rid of something just by disapproving of it. I might think that the Atlantic Ocean's power to drown me is immoral and unacceptable, but if i find myself in the middle, it will drown me anyway. Frothing up in self-righteous indignation would not help.

The issue does not affect the basic definition being offered.



posted on Mar, 21 2018 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI

You are comparing The Atlantic Ocean which drowns people without consideration of Love, to God who IS Love. The question isn't whether or not God can do something, but whether or not the action is of God's Nature (Love), because if it isn't, then that isn't The Work of God but of darkness, a wolf in sheep's clothing. You shall know them by their fruits.



1 John 4:7-8 King James Version (KJV)

7 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.

8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.



posted on Mar, 21 2018 @ 09:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: TzarChasm

You are dodging the issue. You basically are saying that literally anything this creator thing wants to do is absolutely permissible regardless of consequence. Zero accountability or oversight.


Imagine an infallible Loving Father figure that is also omniscient. This is the God that Christians read about. If the Father takes away your toys (your body, for example), this may seem like a great tragedy. A bad child would have a temper tantrum about his toys being taken away, but we are in no place to judge, especially considering our ignorance regarding our existential dilemma. Temporary suffering may be the key to eternal bliss.

There is nothing in this world that promises anything more than death. Jesus is the only liberator of this fate. You can deny him your whole life and eventually the Spirit will quit invigorating you and you will breathe your last. This world promises nothing but death and taxes, Jesus offers life and liberty. Even if Jesus's legacy is the greatest conspiracy of all time, it is better to strive for life than to be complacent waiting for death.
edit on 21-3-2018 by cooperton because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2018 @ 02:40 AM
link   
a reply to: lightofgratitude
True, but he is Love by his own definition, not by ours. We are not qualified to act as judges. Only our "narcissistic self-importance" (to borrow a phrase) makes us try.
And since I didn't use the word "love" in my proposed definition, that's another reason why I don't need to argue over it.




edit on 22-3-2018 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2018 @ 06:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: TzarChasm
You basically are saying that literally anything this creator thing wants to do is absolutely permissible regardless of consequence. Zero accountability or oversight. That is dangerously naive bordering on totally asinine. Absolute power corrupts.

The question of "permissability" is irrelevant, because none of us would have the power to do anything about it.
You don't seem to grasp the point that the universe is not under democratic control. You can't get rid of something just by disapproving of it. I might think that the Atlantic Ocean's power to drown me is immoral and unacceptable, but if i find myself in the middle, it will drown me anyway. Frothing up in self-righteous indignation would not help.

The issue does not affect the basic definition being offered.


Frothing in self righteous indignation gave me the country I was born in. Give me freedom or give me death, etc. Your spineless attitude has historically given tyrants the power they need to oppress entire nations. You compare this creator dude to an ocean which implies that it has more in common with those aliens from the independence day film. They created, communicated, came and conquered. congrats, you were a coward and now you're cream of wheat. and in the end your definition is not a definition anyway. More of a summary or a profile description than a definition. I don't see a certificate from Merriam Webster or Harvard approving your stuff. Or even the Vatican. Narrow sighted, short minded and culturally inconsiderate as it ONLY examines ONE god out of the entire history of theology. Premature much? Elon musk, bill gates, and mark zuckerberg are all gods by your "definition". They all create and communicate. All hail the deotechs. At least they try to give us a fighting chance. Your idea of peace is surrender and subservience to intergalactic terrorists and cosmic warlords. What a load.
edit on 22-3-2018 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2018 @ 06:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: TzarChasm
Frothing in self righteous indignation gave me the country I was born in. Give me freedom or give me death, etc. Your spineless attitude has historically given tyrants the power they need to oppress entire nations.

A comparison with human politics is thoroughly misleading, because human figures of authority are vulnerable, so that resistance has a plausible chance of being effective.
There is this difference; if the Creator is a tyrant, then resistance has no power of any kind to win "freedom".
So resistance becomes pointless. You can call him a tyrant as much as you like, but you are still stuck with him.
Under those conditions, resistance cannot be called "courage"; it is just a bone-headed refusal to accept realities. All this is argued out in Paradise Lost Book2.
But of course your narcissistic sense of self-importance prevents you from recognising that.

Elon musk, bill gates, and mark zuckerberg are all gods by your "definition". They all create and communicate.
Obviously not, because they don't create everything there is and bring it into existence, which is the starting point of the definition.
edit on 22-3-2018 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2018 @ 06:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: TzarChasm
Frothing in self righteous indignation gave me the country I was born in. Give me freedom or give me death, etc. Your spineless attitude has historically given tyrants the power they need to oppress entire nations.

A comparison with human politics is thoroughly misleading, because human figures of authority are vulnerable, so that resistance has a plausible chance of being effective.
There is this difference; if the Creator is a tyrant, then resistance has no power of any kind to win "freedom".
So resistance becomes pointless. You can call him a tyrant as much as you like, but you are still stuck with him.
Under those conditions, resistance cannot be called "courage"; it is just a bone-headed refusal to accept realities. All this is argued out in Paradise Lost Book2.
But of course your narcissistic sense of self-importance prevents you from recognising that.

Elon musk, bill gates, and mark zuckerberg are all gods by your "definition". They all create and communicate.
Obviously not, because they don't create everything there is and bring it into existence, which is the starting point of the definition.


" everything there is" says the person who has experienced literally 0.0001% of all time and space. Most of which escapes our direct observation and testing. Which qualifies your statements as hypothetical and borderline fiction.
edit on 22-3-2018 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2018 @ 07:09 AM
link   
a reply to: TzarChasm
I repeat the reply given to another poster;

Since the premise is "defining the Christian God", and knowledge of the specifically Christian God is derived from the contents of the Bible, it is legitimate to draw upon the contents of the Bible in framing the definition.

"Creating everything that exists" is part of that content.



posted on Mar, 22 2018 @ 07:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: TzarChasm
I repeat the reply given to another poster;

Since the premise is "defining the Christian God", and knowledge of the specifically Christian God is derived from the contents of the Bible, it is legitimate to draw upon the contents of the Bible in framing the definition.

"Creating everything that exists" is part of that content.



Short sighted and narrow minded. The Christian god is the least of historical theology. I repeat to you, you do not possess the scope to address "everything that exists". Speaking of self important, its pretty arrogant to speak of our little corner of the cosmos as though it represents the entirety of the universe. Far from it. This thread is an exercise in human hubris and I am attempting to correct it.
edit on 22-3-2018 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2018 @ 07:24 AM
link   
a reply to: TzarChasm
Nevertheless, that is the task I set myself in this thread; "Defining the Christian God".
Your comment amounts to saying that I should have written a different topic instead. I chose to do this one.


edit on 22-3-2018 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2018 @ 08:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: TzarChasm
Nevertheless, that is the task I set myself in this thread; "Defining the Christian God".
Your comment amounts to saying that I should have written a different topic instead. I chose to do this one.



My comment amounts to " really? Is that all?"

Bill Gates bless America.




top topics



 
6
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join