God Doesn't Have a Religion

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by awake_and_aware

 

to simply state God does not exist is ignorant, as there is no proof either way.

your expectation and definition can limit understanding.. by way of the images you hold of what god was/is.

when you say 'there is no proof', what you are possibly saying (consciously) is 'I have not encountered what is within the limits of what I consider to be proof'; it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

reply to post by Equinox99


Genesis flat out says that the fallen angels are out there and survived the flood. But as to how it is not clear. Did they leave the planet? Were they aliens? Were they on the boat? Who knows. They survived.

reply to post by tunist


I've seen proof. I know he exists. But that is not quantifiable nor observable. There is no direct observable scientifically backed proof that God exists or does not.

[edit on 5-8-2010 by Gorman91]

Originally posted by 11118
reply to post by Phenomium

 

Or the Creator is a jigsaw puzzle trying to figure itself out.

Thus the paradox of science, and thereon.

You see? That's what I am talking about. If he's the creator......theres nothing to figure out. As the Alpha (beginning) and the Omega (end of all)....there's nothing left after that. Even a puzzle here on earth doesn't attempt to figure itself out, it takes US to figure it out....why would the GOD of all creation be less able? GOD doesn't need US to figure him out when it is HE that created us.

(Isa 29:16 (NIV) "You turn things upside down, as if the potter were thought to be like the clay! Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, "He did not make me"? Can the pot say of the potter, "He knows nothing"?

(Isa 45:9 (NAS) "Woe to the one who quarrels with his Maker--An earthenware vessel among the vessels of earth! Will the clay say to the potter, 'What are you doing?' Or the thing you are making say, 'He has no hands'?"

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Section31

 

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

Interesting to note it says in the image he created HIM, then male and female THEM. I have no idea what to take this as. All I know is that they were created, then became male and female.

If you want to get fundamental, male was created first, and then from that female. But they are still the image of God. Gender is not in God.

I will display my quote from above, so you get a better idea of what I am saying:

Actually, you took that out of context. You present your biblical reference based upon fundamentalism, and I am not a fundamentalist. When I read the portions of scripture that says, "Let 'us' make man in 'our' image". I see something very-very different than you do. Before I go further into details, can you tell me what God is saying with that phrase?

If you were to leave the whole scripture in tact, you will notice that God said, "Let 'us' make man in 'our' image" before anything else. Even though Christian apologetics refer to this moment as an acknowledgment of the trinity, I personally do not think that is an accurate assessment. Since Adam and Eve were the first of our species to have evolved with full awareness (Darwinism), I personally believe God was referring to their souls.

One of the most common errors fundamentalists make is taking things out of context. Who is God talking to when he said, "Let 'us' make man in 'our image" is not defined (at that moment in the bible); however, I believe he was talking to 'everyone' (angels and other heavenly beings). How can this be? Because it was taken out of sequential order.

You forgot to look at the whole book of Genesis. In order to say God was only talking to himself, you will have to ignore the fact that the fall of Lucifer occurred between the Big Bang and the Garden. If Lucifer didn't fall before Adam and Eve, how did he take the form of a snake?

You have the wrong argument for the wrong Christian. As I said in my second posting in this thread, I am a Christian who accepts science as the means to define what God has done. I accept Darwinism and Einstein theories. I also keep the bible in sequential order, and I am not a fundamentalist.


[edit on 5-8-2010 by Section31]

reply to post by SunIsSon


You don't have to be mentally ill to have delusional thoughts.....

but you are a know it all....

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by awake_and_aware

 

No. There is no proof of God existing or not. It is all opinion. But if you want to get technical, somebody had to turn on and off gravity After the big bang, and differentiate the forces from their once-one form.

Could be aliens, could be God. But to simply state God does not exist is ignorant, as there is no proof either war.

Is there really no proof there is a God? A person once wisely observed: "Of course, every house is constructed by someone." According too this astute observation when you come upon a house you assume naturally that it was designed and then built by someone.

It would be quite illogical for a person rambling through a desert and who came across a perfectly built house and went inside and found air-conditioning, a stocked kitchen fool of food, and saw that the house was comfortably furnished to assume that it popped up out of no where.

In fact it has been said that if a person was walking along a mountain trail and noticed a pebble in the middle of the path that it would be natural to assume that the pebble came to be there by accident, but if a wrist-watch was found in the same place as that pebble was, it would not be logical to assume that it appeared there by chance.

That wise man quoted above that made the keen observation that when you see a house you know that it had a builder concluded his logical statement saying: " . . .but he that constructed all things is God." - Hebrews 3:4.

The world around us and the design in life and in the universe is enough for even a person who has no notion or knowledge of the true God that he exists. That is why that same person who keenly observed that every house has a builder made an even more observing statement about people who refuse to acknowledge that there is a Creator behind all of the design in the universe this way:

(Romans 1:20) . . .For his invisible [qualities] are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable.

So while God cannot be literally seen, an observing and a logical mind must come to the logical conclusion that there was a designer behind the order and design in the universe. In fact for a person to be able to acknowledge that a watch has a maker, and that a house has a maker, but that humankind does not have a maker is not just fumbling ignorance, it is inexcusable on his part to come to such a ridiculous conclusion. No wonder the Psalmist says of such people:

(Psalm 10:4) . . .The wicked one according to his superciliousness (according to the height of his nose) makes no search; All his ideas are: “There is no God.”

Superciliousness means: Feeling or showing haughty disdain.

Originally posted by SunIsSon
The whole truth of the matter is that NOBODY knows if "God" is a he, she, or it or if "God" even exists.

Of course we have the mentally ill who will come on here and state their deluded claim that "God" almighty or his magical son is real because these magical imaginary friends personally come and talk to them once in a while, but anyone with any sense knows that such claims are the result of extreme mental issues that require immediant professional help ASAP.

NOBODY knows the answers, and religion is certainly a PATHETIC, IRRATIONAL, FICTIONAL man-made bunch of NONSENSE that only confuses the issue even further.

Prove that nobody knows...

go around and ask every person on this planet....and then come back and make that statement...

Why do people think thier opinion is fact...


even though I kind of get what you are saying.....you said it in the same way others are saying that they are saying.....

reply to post by Phenomium


A point of awareness in Infinity which paradoxically that Infinity can only know itself in finite continuums, thus it seeks to know itself indefinitely just as a question is answered another question is created as we do now - a microcosm of the macrocosm.

The Creator does not properly create as much as it experiences itself.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
reply to post by prophecywatcher

 

I also don't believe in heaven and hell.

When I was a child, I used to worry about people going to hell. I made sure I and my younger siblings, whom I felt responsible for, got baptized - hoping that this would protect us!! Now, I see this as unnecessary.

I'm not sure about reincarnation. I guess it's true.

Just remember,

Because there is no "religion" doesnt mean there are no morals or ethics.

Because there is no "heaven or hell" doesnt mean you have carte blanche to do as you please without having to "pay the piper" eventually.

without these two fundamentals we'ed all be a bunch of hedonistic/nihilistic hippies in a pig stye commune.

We do have an internal barometer and compass. Its up to us to follow them....or play hell when we dont!

reply to post by Section31


Well I kind of do too. But I do consider myself a fundamentalist on some level. There's nothing wrong with evolution and fundamentalist Christianity.

Look at my reply a way back to the post you mentioned.

Lets go deeper into what you say.

After that, it says in the next line they were made in God's image. In his image. This implies that the angels and everything were also created in his image. The creator always endows a part of himself into anything he makes, be it an artiest, a sculpture, or an architect. So while he says "us", what he actually does is make it in "his" image. This means that the soul of man is in the image of God. It is commonly believed that Satan grew angry and rebelled because God told him to serve a creature of flesh. Something less than him. So he rebelled. And he and the angels like him were cast out. Later it is stated that the "fallen angels" bred with early man. So who knows what that means, It definably means that they were genetically compatible with mankind. Some say it means the sons of God bred with the daughters of men. and that this means good men bread with evil men's daughters.

Who really knows.

What we know is this. Gender was created with man. God does not have a gender because he is not of the flesh. The image of God is in man and woman. This means that their flesh is not their soul. And there is no correlation between the two.

reply to post by Calender


Everything around is came about by simple push-slot systems developing into more complex forms via evolution. That house, though complicated, has a history to it. It came from someone's knowledge of homes and their style.

Now if we go back in time, we will come to primitive man. And what did he live in? A cave. A perfectly natural formation without man's creation. We simply mobilized the cave and made it constructed of other things. We learned how to build our own homes, and over time, they got more and more complicated until they became what they are today.

The same with life.

If you want to say the vast complicated workings of the universe is proof of God I will agree with you. If you want to say that everything the universe has become, in its vastness, is proof of God, I will agree with you. I believe in God. But all of that could just as easily come about from some aliens or time travelers or inter-dimensional force.

There is no proof of God out there that can be said for certain it is God. We take it on faith. That's what I do. I no longer need proof. I've seen proof enough, yes, but holy is he who needs no proof.

reply to post by Gorman91

I am going to disagree in order to agree. I am not saying that your opinion does not have merit to you, but I am saying that it does not have merit to me.

Since its getting late here, I will have to call it a night. I will be back tomorrow, so we can have a more in depth conversation.

Thank you.


[edit on 5-8-2010 by Section31]

reply to post by Mary Rose

While I consider myself agnostic, I came to the conclusion myself also many years back, that it should not matter if there is a heaven or a hell. Is the purpose of religion only to reap the rewards of a heaven? I prefer to live my life doing good for others, without worry of if/when I get to heaven/hell. I treat people with respect because it is the right thing to do. Before i go to sleep, I don't need to pray, I reflect on if my actions that day benefited anyone. When things don't happen in my favor, I don't wonder what sin I committed, I plan on doing things differently to correct the problem.
When I die, there will be no heaven or hell. There will be only those few seconds before I die, in which I will wonder how much I have made this world a better place for anyone else.
For that, I don't need a god, religion nor heaven or hell.

reply to post by Section31


Like I said, PM me if you want to talk more in depth into science and religion. I've got bucket loads of theories and mixtures of the two that are not related to the op here. Nice talking to you. God bless your sleep and dreams and night.

Originally posted by I Want To Believe
reply to post by spy66

 

Actually you are mistaken.''Lord God''was the God of Abraham Issac and Jacob before he was the God of Moses.He was also the God of Noah and Adam and Eve and Enoch and King David and Elijah and Elisha and many many many others.He is also the God of many nations.Many many people have had encounters with ''Lord God''throughout history not just Moses and he wasnt the first.Just because something doesnt make sense to you and you dont understand it it dosent make it false.Just because someone cant prove something exsists or is real that doesnt mean it isnt.Open your eyes and your ears the proof you require is all around you.

I am laughing. Yes Lord God was a god for many. But that was not my point now was it? Why dont you wake up and learn to understand what you read?

Lord God was the God who Moses communicated with as well. READ:

I guess this is the type of answer you were asking for?



[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

Originally posted by Student X
Saying God doesn't have a religion is like saying the Self doesn't have a personal identity as we know it. This is true, but we are not the Self. We are merely the ego-consciousness, and we tend to think we run the whole show. But the ego-consciousness is not the center of the psyche. The Self is.

We must relate to the Self, and the way we humans relate is through a religious system, because we have to rely on symbolism, story, ceremony, ritual, structure. We can't reach out and touch the center of the psyche. We can interact with it through mysticism, but we only symbolize it and model it, because the language of the psyche is symbol, and a symbol must penetrate the layers of the psyche in order to communicate.

[edit on 5-8-2010 by Student X]

OOooohh, me likey. This makes a lot of sense, although I'm more inclined to believe God doesn't "have a religion." That said, what you stated is definitely a great perspective as well.

The only thing I would "argue" with is that part about ritual, tradition etc... because that's what really turns me off about most ORs. Taking your hat off in church, mumbling different praises during certain moments of a ceremony, and kneeling/standing/sitting/bowing etc... seem ENTIRELY useless to me, and I doubt God (assuming he is a separate entity from us rather than us being a fragment of his "whole") really gives two sh!ts how you move your body in order to connect with "Him." Or how all that ritual fosters a meaningful connection between Man and God.

I think A LOT can be learned from reading through this thread, but people need to start asking more QUESTION instead of providing "answers." No one knows FOR SURE the nature of God, or if there even is one, or if we're all Gods etc... so I think asking questions would be a great place to start.

Firstly, how can we relate the existence/purpose of God to something we as humans can understand? Is He simply the "developer" of this divine software, and we are "programs" meant to explore and experience it? Or IS He the software in it's entirety and we experience fragments of "the program?" Is everything we see around us just one of many conditions of God? Also, who are WE? Are we separate entities from God, or is God just ONE UNIVERSAL consciousness and we are simply fragments of that consciousness experiencing everything subjectively?

So let's ask questions before COMMITTING to a single viewpoint. Personally, the theory that we are a fragment of that One Universal Consciousness experiencing itself subjectively feels like it may have some truth. If that were the case, then concepts such as "Good" and "Evil" make a lot more sense. "Good" is simply the condition of being IN harmony with our collective One Universal Consciousness, whereas "Evil" is the absence of connectivity with it (where we live in DISHARMONY). I think humans naturally feel compelled to live in Harmony with One, but don't know exactly how to do it, which explains the existence of organized religion, as well as a plethora of other attempts at connecting with One (many people use drugs and material distractions in a desperate subconscious attempt to achieve Harmony). Perhaps EVERYTHING we do is an attempt to live in Harmony? If you break down the the most "EVIL" actions/behavior of someone, it eventually breaks down to THAT person attempting to experience HARMONY, but failing miserably.

Why would a dictator oppress millions of his fellow human beings in an attempt to maintain power? Obviously because he values POWER. But why does he value POWER so much? Because it opens doors for him to experience satisfaction to some degree. But why does he endlessly seek satisfaction in it's various forms? Because HE WANTS TO BE HAPPY (and Happiness is the feeling you get when you live in Harmony). Although his routes of connecting with Harmony are faulty and will lead him down deadend roads, he is simply desperately seeking Harmony.

reply to post by Unity_99


Thank you, Unity.

Christians (and all followers of the Abrahamic religions) have a hard time seeing that Jehova/YWHW was indeed a bloodthirsty, egotistical, angry and vengeful entity.

Like I always say, if Jehova/Yahweh did indeed create the universe, then we're screwed, because our god acts like a little baby - throwing temper tandrums when he doesn't get his way.

reply to post by impaired


Not really. He deals with people properly. Barbarians are destroyed like animals because they act like animals. Civilized people like Egypt are dealt more patiently with and in a civilized manner. And mighty nations like Rome whose' beliefs like the Stoics that are very similar to the true word of God he takes extreme mercy on and in fact helps.

That seems pretty just to me. You are treated how you act.

Well I guess we are truly created in his image because, from what I have seen in life we humans do the same thing.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Calender

 

If you want to say the vast complicated workings of the universe is proof of God I will agree with you. If you want to say that everything the universe has become, in its vastness, is proof of God, I will agree with you. I believe in God. But all of that could just as easily come about from some aliens or time travelers or inter-dimensional force.

I realized this about you already. The statement that I put down from scripture referring to people who decide there is no God was not directed at you.

But I also wanted to bring this point up now that you mentioned it. If you want to use the theory that aliens were the ones that planted life on the earth, etc. etc. The ultimate question is not answered, it just moves the question to a different planet. Ok, so aliens from Mars, or the Pleiads, or whatever seeded earth. Who made those aliens? Many try to think that by stating we were seeded by aliens from a different world they are answering the God question, when actuality all it does is move it to a different planet. It doesn't answer the God-question at all.

And those statements were not my own. I was just quoting scripture, stating what the Bible had to say on those who come to the conclusion there is no God after observing creation.

You appear to be a very observant and intelligent person. So I consider it a privilege you took the time to respond to me.

Cheers.