Either God is not Love or Yahweh is not God.

I also don't think that God is Love.

According to Robert E. Howard, creator of "Conan the Barbarian",

God is Crom, king of the gods.
It is best not to call Crom or he might doom you.
Crom for the most part does not care about people.
But Crom does breathe the desire to survive and the desire to slay into newborns.

That is Crom. Strong in his mountain.

Robert E. Howard does have a main character Belit come back as a spirit to save Conan.

Originally posted by aceto
If god is in everyone and most the world believes in god.. of course god isn't love. most of the world and the people in it are #. So how could god be love when he represents 98% of prison inmates and terrorist (abortion clinic bombers and such).. So I'm not sure how anyone could think god has anything to do with love.

This is from paper 3 of the Urantia Book:

The uncertainties of life and the vicissitudes of existence do not in any manner contradict the concept of the universal sovereignty of God. All evolutionary creature life is beset by certain inevitabilities. Consider the following:

Is courage — strength of character — desirable? Then must man be reared in an environment which necessitates grappling with hardships and reacting to disappointments.

Is altruism — service of one’s fellows — desirable? Then must life experience provide for encountering situations of social inequality.

Is hope — the grandeur of trust — desirable? Then human existence must constantly be confronted with insecurities and recurrent uncertainties.

Is faith — the supreme assertion of human thought — desirable? Then must the mind of man find itself in that troublesome predicament where it ever knows less than it can believe.

Is the love of truth and the willingness to go wherever it leads, desirable? Then must man grow up in a world where error is present and falsehood always possible.

Is idealism — the approaching concept of the divine — desirable? Then must man struggle in an environment of relative goodness and beauty, surroundings stimulative of the irrepressible reach for better things.

Is loyalty — devotion to highest duty — desirable? Then must man carry on amid the possibilities of betrayal and desertion. The valor of devotion to duty consists in the implied danger of default.

Is unselfishness — the spirit of self-forgetfulness — desirable? Then must mortal man live face to face with the incessant clamoring of an inescapable self for recognition and honor. Man could not dynamically choose the divine life if there were no self-life to forsake. Man could never lay saving hold on righteousness if there were no potential evil to exalt and differentiate the good by contrast.

Is pleasure — the satisfaction of happiness — desirable? Then must man live in a world where the alternative of pain and the likelihood of suffering are ever-present experiential possibilities.

reply to post by EspyderMan

Keeping an open mind about these sorts of things is what brings wisdom, not close-mindedness based on your own personal review of the bible. Inconsistencies don't exactly equal proof positive God does not exist. It just proves those who wrote about it might not of seen things as clearly as they would like to have.

I personally don't see the OP as close minded , and I'm sure inconsistencies in the bible aren't his only proof that God doesn't exist.

He just seems like a person,who has reviewed this topic extensively ,and has come out with his own conclusion.

He has as much right to that conclusion, as those who are agnostic, or those who are religious.
I don't see why he bothers to try and change others on their points of view though.

People of faith most likely find that just as offensive, as an atheist who has religious people constantly trying to convert him.

1 John 4:8

New International Version (NIV)

8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

God in the NT is love, God in the OT is more like hate. This is because God is everything, Alpha and Omega, Beginning and End. God is the nothing that is something, the darkness that is light. God is the OT and the NT When Jesus arrives in the NT, God is Love.

The Bible is an intriguing piece of art. Truly, God is the Bible.

Truly, in a higher dimension, we ARE God. Therefore, the Bible is also a story of our evolution. When Jesus arrives, everything will be light again. Right now we are at a crossroads. We experience dark and light. We are about to arrive or should I say create (as our higher selves (God)) at a place where we envelop our reality as the NT.

Originally posted by Soldier of God
reply to post by madnessinmysoul

 

Your name says it all... there is no madness in my soul, only peace.

This new school of holy amateur-psychologists is fascinating; taking over after the disappearance of the fire-and-brimstoners and the sugarcoaters. I have recently been diagnosed psychotic myself this way.

Well done.

reply to post by LicentiaEstVox


You wrote:

["This urge you people have to turn your back to God will not go well.Look at the universe,who are you?Who made you?Why do you think you know so much,when the truth is you don't know anything..."]

And christians feel justifed in filling out the knowledge gaps with fantasies.

Quote: [" If God demands faith wouldn't he made it that you CAN'T have solid proof of His existence so you can grow strong in faith?"]

That argument points even more in the direction of the flying spaghetti monster, which is VERY ineffeable.

Quote: ["Bible is a great book containing knowledge and power,but most important,its a guide to get to know ourselves better,to open our eyes."]

And the Mahamudra is even better for that purpose.

Quote: ["Who are you to judge what God is and wants?"]

This postulate is self-contained, it 'proves' itself.

Quote: [""For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."]

So we are pardoned for the mess Jahveh created. Geee, thanks.

Originally posted by smithjustinb
1 John 4:8

New International Version (NIV)

8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

God in the NT is love, God in the OT is more like hate. This is because God is everything, Alpha and Omega, Beginning and End. God is the nothing that is something, the darkness that is light. God is the OT and the NT When Jesus arrives in the NT, God is Love.

The Bible is an intriguing piece of art. Truly, God is the Bible.

Truly, in a higher dimension, we ARE God. Therefore, the Bible is also a story of our evolution. When Jesus arrives, everything will be light again. Right now we are at a crossroads. We experience dark and light. We are about to arrive or should I say create (as our higher selves (God)) at a place where we envelop our reality as the NT.

The latter days christian tao'ists perhaps. Or manichae'ism revived in a simplified form. It takes a bit more than stuffing things in a dark-light blender and expect a justified religion to come out.

reply to post by smithjustinb


To use an internet turn of phrase "Lol wut?"

I'm sorry, but the Bible is a contradictory book and to say that this contradiction somehow captures an all-encompassing being is...well...bizarre to say the least.

Why would an all-encompassing being change?

reply to post by UB2120


Ok, question 1: What do you believe and why?
Question 2: Where is the supporting evidence for your belief?

Originally posted by aceto
If god is in everyone and most the world believes in god..

Blatantly untrue statement. Let's just say that 'monotheism' counts as 'belief in god'. That's 3.5 billion people, about half of the world's population. That's two huge groups (Christianity and Islam) who have substantially different ideas about what this 'god' is, and then they have major internal disagreements on the nature of the being as well. Christianity alone has 30,000+ divisions.

Then there's the third largest religion: Hindus. They believe in gods. Then there's the Buddhists...and they're all over the place. Some are atheistic supernaturalists, some are atheistic materialists, some are theistic, there's a great mix in there.

There is no monolith of theism in the world.

reply to post by EspyderMan

Originally posted by EspyderMan
reply to post by madnessinmysoul

 

So because of inconsistencies, you decided God doesn't exist at all?

Nope. This is a big ol' strawman typically used against atheists. It's one that comes up so often that I could use it to create a big straw army....granted an army that is defeated by actually stating your position isn't all that effective...that and fire. Fire is pretty good against straw.

My position is that there is no good reason to accept the claim that any particular deity exists because not a single shred of credible evidence has been supported. Furthermore, the idea brings up so many necessary contradictions that it's an incredibly extraordinary claim.

That nothing in it held any truth at all?

Again, not my position. The idea of being nice to people, damn good idea. The idea of caring for others the way you care for yourself (first thought of by Confucius...) is also a good idea. Charity? Good idea.

That those who wrote it, in their times were correct but as time waned on things changed, rules changed?

...nope, they were just as incorrect then as they are now. They may have been more correct than their contemporaries, but that doesn't mean that they were right. Just like Aristotle, a philosopher I greatly admire, was pretty much wrong about all of his ideas of the natural world (except for the idea of a round Earth), yet his ideas were less wrong than the traditional ones because he at least tried to base it in empirical observation.

Keeping an open mind about these sorts of things is what brings wisdom, not close-mindedness based on your own personal review of the bible.

So logically examining ideas and then putting them through a critical review process in the same way that I would test a scientific idea is now closed minded? What's closed minded about rejecting an idea that is not supported by evidence?

I'm quite open minded. I'll accept any idea that has an adequate amount of evidence to support it proportional to the level of claim being made. If you tell me you ate toast this morning, it won't really take any evidence to convince me because it's something I frankly don't care about. If you tell me that there's an omni^3 being that exists...that's quite extraordinary.

And there's no wisdom in having your mind so open that your brain falls onto the ground.

Inconsistencies don't exactly equal proof positive God does not exist.

...and I never said they did. Thanks for addressing that argument, but it in no way reflects my own opinions. I'm just pointing out a contradiction in the Bible...

It just proves those who wrote about it might not of seen things as clearly as they would like to have.

So what, was God saying "I'm a MELODIOUS God, so don't worship other Gods"?

Atheists to me are the worst kinds of non-religious believers.

Not this mind-numbing idiocy again.

I'm going to just cut things off here and go over a few points:

Atheists are not believers. They do not believe, it's the definition of being an atheist. The opposite of believing in a deity is not believing, not believing not.
All people who do not believe in a deity are atheists. Even so-called 'agnostics'.

At least Agnostics determine that there is not enough evidence to totally prove God but realize it is still possible he exist and very possible he disliked organised religions and encourages everyone to read and learn for themselves, because the journey is what will bring you inner peace, not just being handed the answers and believing them as i suspect you have.

Um...agnostic is not an independent term. Agnostic about what? I'm agnostic on the question of free will. I find it impossible that I will ever be able to truly know if I have free will or not, though I try to act as if I do have free will.

I'm an agnostic atheist. That means I know that absolute certainty is impossible, but I do not believe in any deity regardless, though I am open to be argumentation and presentation of evidence that someone might put forth that my position is wrong.

The conception you have of atheists in your head is entirely fictional and is something that came about as a way to demonize people like Madeleine Murray O'Hare, back when atheists were finally starting to speak out.

reply to post by CaptChaos

The BIG LIE is trying to tie the Old Testament and the New Testament together. The old testament god, is a jealous and vengeful god. Says it right there. Demands sacrifice. Rejects Cain cause he grew some plants, while Abel killed some animals. This "God" liked the death and blood better. Hmmm....

So what? Who doesn't like the smell of barbeque? It's intoxicating.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by CaptChaos

 

The BIG LIE is trying to tie the Old Testament and the New Testament together. The old testament god, is a jealous and vengeful god. Says it right there. Demands sacrifice. Rejects Cain cause he grew some plants, while Abel killed some animals. This "God" liked the death and blood better. Hmmm....

So what? Who doesn't like the smell of barbeque? It's intoxicating.

???? making a really stupid joke like that as christian really doesn't help others to see you in a good light.

madnessinmymind makes so much logical sense...and some of you Christians just can't seem to handle it.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by smithjustinb

 

To use an internet turn of phrase "Lol wut?"

I'm sorry, but the Bible is a contradictory book and to say that this contradiction somehow captures an all-encompassing being is...well...bizarre to say the least.

Why would an all-encompassing being change?

Because what it is encompassing is changing.
Think about it. God is all-encompassing. He's not just encompassing everything that is good, he's encompassing the bad too. Just like the God in the bible is not always good(NT), he is bad too(OT). But God is not the God of the OT or NT, he is God of the WHOLE book.

Furthermore, since God is within, and (this is where I might lose you) we are God, I propose the theory that the Bible is also an outline of evolution.

Most people think we're about to enter the book of revelation and see a frightening end of the world scenario. I believe we are about to enter the NT. The overall mood there is uplifting versus the wrath, vengeance, and fear paradigm we have been in attributed to the OT.

When we finally merge back with the Alpha/Omega, then the revelation scenario mood may be our own as we are fixing to have to start the book over again and be back at the OT.

Originally posted by gabby2011

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by CaptChaos

 

The BIG LIE is trying to tie the Old Testament and the New Testament together. The old testament god, is a jealous and vengeful god. Says it right there. Demands sacrifice. Rejects Cain cause he grew some plants, while Abel killed some animals. This "God" liked the death and blood better. Hmmm....

So what? Who doesn't like the smell of barbeque? It's intoxicating.

???? making a really stupid joke like that as christian really doesn't help others to see you in a good light.

madnessinmymind makes so much logical sense...and some of you Christians just can't seem to handle it.

Huh? I didn't even reply to Madness.

It's not a 'joke'. Dead animals on fire..

that's called a barbeque.

It smells intoxicating does it not?

Why should I believe it doesn't smell just as good to God as it does to me?

To describe God as only love is ignoring the bulk of Scripture, there is so much more to His nature than just love. John in 1 John is telling us how to treat each other as believers, in selfless love, because God loved us enough to not wipe us from the face of the earth (yet again) and had made an extraordinary plan of redemption for all who would hear, accept and obey. He was trying to teach us to live that altruistic affection that Messiah lived as an example.

Not only is love only one of His aspects; mercy (unwarranted forgiveness), grace (unwarranted favor), patience, truth, wisdom, knowledge but also in the end--justice and right ruling. Those who hate Him and reject Him will be rejected by Him in the end.

Here is what some say about His nature:

Jeremiah 32:17&18
“You have made the heaven and earth by your great power and by your outstretched arm; there is nothing too hard for You; Who show mercy unto thousands, and recompense the iniquity of the fathers into the bosom of their children after them; the mighty El, YHWH Tzava'ot is His Name; great in counsel, and mighty in work; Who's eyes are open upon all the ways of the sons of me, to give everyone according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.”

This shows how He will treat each one by their actions towards Him:

Psalms 18:25 & 26
“With the kind you show yourself kind; with the perfect you show yourself perfect; with the clean you show yourself clean and with the crooked you show yourself twisted.”

And from His own mouth He tells us:

Deuteronomy 7:9
“And you shall know that YHWH your Elohim, He is Elohim, the trustworthy El guarding covenant and kindness for a thousand generations with those who love Him and those who guard His commands, but repaying those who hate Him to their face, to destroy them.” all quotes from 'The Scriptures' by ISR

If we love Him and we love one another with that love, then our lives will be full, He will treat us as we treat others, and we will be found worthy to attain our place in the coming Reign. If not, then we will be discarded, and no, I do not believe Scripture reveals a doctrine of eternal pain and punishment. Between death and the Final Judgment there are those who receive torment for their disobedience, and if you are not found listed in the Book of Life, after the destruction in the lake of fire and the outer darkness you will just not 'be' and never 'be' again.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


Not only is death the penalty for disobedience, God made provision to circumvent the sinner's death by the death of an innocent animal, and later by the blood of Messiah.

Not all sacrifice was for the atonement of sins, which was a whole burnt offering, but many other sacrifices were appointed that the giver of the animal participated in the eating of it, yes a big barbecue to be eaten and shared at the Temple.

It seems that we are so far removed from the fact that innocent animals die by the millions every day for our appetite that end up as tidy, anonymous cuts of flesh wrapped in plastic that the thought of taking a live animals someplace to honor God and consume it before Him is abhorrent, when the animals sacrificed at the Temple were treated with far more care and concern than our slaughterhouses do, today.

Originally posted by czygyny
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Not only is death the penalty for disobedience, God made provision to circumvent the sinner's death by the death of an innocent animal, and later by the blood of Messiah.

Not all sacrifice was for the atonement of sins, which was a whole burnt offering, but many other sacrifices were appointed that the giver of the animal participated in the eating of it, yes a big barbecue to be eaten and shared at the Temple.

It seems that we are so far removed from the fact that innocent animals die by the millions every day for our appetite that end up as tidy, anonymous cuts of flesh wrapped in plastic that the thought of taking a live animals someplace to honor God and consume it before Him is abhorrent, when the animals sacrificed at the Temple were treated with far more care and concern than our slaughterhouses do, today.

(I know)

I was mocking skeptics.

Sowiiieeees!

reply to post by czygyny

To describe God as only love is ignoring the bulk of Scripture, there is so much more to His nature than just love.

Shhhhhhh!!!!! Be quiet.

Don't point out their hasty generalization fallacy.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

(I know)

I was mocking skeptics.

Sowiiieeees!

Yes, I know you were mocking...but this popular mainstream candyland gospel has infused christianity with so much error that I, like you, have a purpose to bring to light what has been hidden from their eyes for so long.

You can't ignore the first two thirds of the 'Handbook' and expect to come to an accurate assessement of the nature of the Almighty. We're so far removed from our 'roots' that we, the branches, have no accurate concept of who He is or what He expects of us.

But, unlike you, I have no desire to attack 'heretics' since I am pretty sure you would consider me, a Torah-keeping believer of Messiah, a heretic.

I just fear, love and know my Creator and want to share that God-given insight with others.