What type of relationship do you have with God?

originally posted by: Serdgiam
This is a bit off topic, so please forgive me OP!

But, I was just curious as to what those currently debating are actually trying to accomplish? There will be no conversion from either 'side,' or anything like that..

Is it just to argue?

Theyre trying to justify Intelligent Design theory: Everything exists because it was created, thus humans are allowed to gain knowledge of it.

It's a rather pointless discussion between a believer & a non believer.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

My relationship with god is ambivalent. I don't know if he exists nor do I care.

originally posted by: Bleeeeep
a reply to: Serdgiam
We're trying to reproduce/translate the true image of love/good/truth into the light.

Thank you for the response!

I do not view it as "bad." And it has nothing to do with the content of the conversation, but the approach and delivery. Those tend to be focused on division and superiority.

Do you view it as the only approach to a discussion with different viewpoints? There are various choices, such as finding a common foundation for exploration rather than assert which lens is least limited. I take your reply to mean you view the approach as universal. However, other options will lead all parties involved to ideally learn and grow together rather than using the others to polish our own lens at the expense of scratching the others involved. That seems to perpetuate division more than anything. If you follow the Bible, you know who loves division!

Do you feel an atheist can perform God's work?

originally posted by: Eunuchorn
It's a rather pointless discussion between a believer & a non believer.

I think that all depends on the approach of the individuals involved. In most cases though, I would have to agree. I don't see such a discussion as any different than any other with opposing viewpoints.

a reply to: Serdgiam

What is Gods work?

Doing good unto others or converting them?

An atheist can most assuredly practice the first.

originally posted by: Eunuchorn
a reply to: Serdgiam

What is Gods work?

Doing good unto others or converting them?

An atheist can most assuredly practice the first.

It was a question posed to someone that is a theist. Asked in an open-ended fashion in order to hopefully learn more about their perspective on the matter.

It's not a particularly relevant question to an atheist, so I would use a different approach to explore the same content.

That said, I think atheists are capable of both the former and the latter. It's just done through a different context.

a reply to: Serdgiam

Is it relevant to an agnostic? I'm closer to that than atheist. Can only a Theist know what Gods work is?

originally posted by: Eunuchorn
a reply to: Serdgiam

Is it relevant to an agnostic? I'm closer to that than atheist.

I think that would depend on the individual. Atheism tends to be directly inverse to any theist claims, but that doesn't necessarily stand true for agnosticism, at least in my experience.

Can only a Theist know what Gods work is?

Perhaps a more accurate statement is that the term "God's work" is relevant only to theists. I see it much like different languages, where "hola" and "hello" refer to the same concept. But, if an individual has not been exposed to the other language, it simply won't be relevant until common ground is found.

In that sense, "God's work" and "being a good person " can be seen as interchangeable. If there was no spoken language, no one would be able to differentiate between the two. To me, there is much more to it, but I hope that at least roughly communicates what I am trying to say.

I don't tend to 'fit in' with any of the labeled groups in these conversations though. That seems to make both "sides" throw me into opposition, with all of the assumptions that come along with that.

a reply to: Serdgiam

A good post. It's funny actually, I reread my last post right after I said it & knew what your response would be, in regards to the term itself being relevant. Obviously if someone doesn't believe in God, then there's no such thing as Gods Work lol

I think we both clearly understood/understand each other. The interchangeable thing is what I think my mind was trying to get at with my questions.


I very clearly know what you mean in regard to the way language affects understanding of reality. It's one of those concepts that you can't really explain to people, similar to how someone who is long term conditioned cannot understand the concept of long term conditioning, or showing the ignorant person their ignorance prevents them from not being ignorant.

Life is a vicious circle.

a reply to: Eunuchorn

That's why I enjoy threads like this so much. Not only does it give an opportunity for those of opposing perspectives to learn and grow together, but it also shows how vastly different each of us perceives things even though we might agree on the surface.

I see it as a thing of beauty, but that doesn't change that it also results in an extraordinary amount of division and conflict in our society.

Something as simple as the word "house" can be perceived in as many ways as there are perspectives.

By trying to find that common ground, I think we can build a stronger foundation for society and perhaps, in time, change our cultural story.

There are so many things we can agree on, and work on together. But most of the time, we choose to battle instead.

I am hopeful that someday we will start working towards reaching our potential as a species. Using our innate differences to reach greater heights of understanding and innovation, rather than use them as the basis to tear each other down.

At least, that is the ideal I am personally working towards. I'd go into the "how," but I'm not sure this board is really the place to discuss it.

Regardless, I think we just demonstrated the concept in action. I would love to see more threads go this way. Even if it was a bit of a hijack! Thank you

a reply to: Serdgiam

As long as there is potential for an alternative statement [about something's value], then I think you are making an argument if you make a statement about something's value.

It depends on how you define God's work. If you are asking if an atheist can do God's work [that is assigned to mankind], then I would say they can do some, but they would have their limits, as spiritual death / lack of awareness of the Spirit / being spiritually asleep, would be debilitating.

eta: By doing God's work you are implying that it is of their own volition, I assume? If you do not hear the Spirit, how will you do what it asks of you? Unintentionally? I would not think that would count, so to speak.

originally posted by: Bleeeeep
a reply to: Serdgiam
It depends on how you define God's work. If you are asking if an atheist can do God's work [that is assigned to mankind], then I would say they can do some, but they would have their limits, as spiritual death / lack of awareness of the Spirit / being spiritually asleep, would be debilitating.

Indeed, like most everything, the individual interpretation can change things. I was hoping that you would go into how you see "God's work" but that's OK.

You say "yes they can, but within limits." Does this mean to imply that a theist has no limits?

eta: By doing God's work you are implying that it is of their own volition, I assume? If you do not hear the Spirit, how will you do what it asks of you? Unintentionally? I would not think that would count, so to speak.

What do you mean by "it wouldn't count?" I can see that applying to the individual in question, but not so much to the collective system as a whole.

What of an atheist that brings someone to a relationship with God? Please realize, I am asking for your perspective. Just because someone asks questions doesn't necessarily mean they don't have their own answers!

a reply to: Serdgiam

Someone who is faithful has no limits in accomplishing that which is assigned to them. Theist is whatever. What you need is God's grace.

What do you mean by "it wouldn't count?"

See here:

Revelation 20:13 (KJV)
13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

Revelation 22:12 (KJV)
12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

John 6:28-29 (KJV)
28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

And part of believing Jesus, is doing what he says. If you believe him, then he is your Lord, and if he is your Lord, you do his will...

Which takes us back to what I said above about having the Spirit in you, or rather, being spiritual awake and thus being able to hear.

To better understand what I am saying, know that your deeds/actions/thoughts come byway of your translation/interpretation of your spirit/desire/will [into the light/body]. If you cannot see Truth within you, you will not gain faith and do the works you were mentioning. (And when I say that, I do not mean that you must necessarily understand what you do, but you surely must be able to see/hear [Truth].)

Romans 10:17 (KJV)
17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Luke 8:11 (KJV)
11 Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God.

By hearing the word, you gain a seed.(You have heard/seen the Truth.)

Planting the seed is doing work.

We are to translate the Spirit into the Light / we are to do God's will / we are to be Bride/Church/children. Brides and Churches are the body/temple of the Spirit. We take in the seed and plant it/translate it into the light/body.

And that's basically Christianity...

Father is awareness/translator/soul.
Jesus is the form/light/body.
The Holy Ghost is the will/desire/spirit.

Jesus is the body of form/truth. Father is the awareness of form/truth. Holy Ghost is the Spirit of form/truth.

The way you can understand how they are one is by understanding yourself. Before you translate a thing, before you recognize it, you do not see the Truth of it. e.g. Before you knew what the number 1 was you saw only a shape, because the shape of it is all that you had interpreted, but once you knew what one was, once you knew its name, that is what you then saw (it became your awareness, literally). And like everything else, 1 was translated from the Spirit, just as my words here now, are the image/body of my awareness and my awareness of my spirit/desire.

They are One.

Hope that helps.

a reply to: Serdgiam

But, I was just curious as to what those currently debating are actually trying to accomplish?

Accomplish? I didn't know conversations always had to have a purpose, but I suppose I am merely trying to gain a better understanding of truth. Our conversation began because he said he always found people who believed in God to have circular beliefs. I am merely attempting to show him that his belief is circular because he denies a creative consciousness.

originally posted by: Bleeeeep
a reply to: Serdgiam
Theist is whatever. What you need is God's grace.

There we go!

What, or who, determines which individuals have God's grace?

Revelation 22:12 (KJV)
12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

These quotes all seem to refer to the work itself rather than individual ideology. They could actually be interpreted many ways. Do you feel the Holy Spirit has revealed to you the "true" interpretation?

Which takes us back to what I said above about having the Spirit in you, or rather, being spiritual awake and thus being able to hear.

This would seem to refer to our perception of action rather than the ability (or lack) to carry out God's will.

Would you mind clarifying a bit more from the first person?

and Churches are the body/temple of the Spirit.

Does this apply to all churches? What of the ones that disagree with your interpretation?

Before you knew what the number 1 was you saw only a shape, because the shape of it is all that you had interpreted, but once you knew what one was, once you knew its name, that is what you then saw (it became your awareness, literally).

Yes, Euni and I were discussing this earlier. Let's dive deeper.. Without knowing the whole picture, how are you certain the initial interpretation is a full understanding? This would seem to stifle any growth which may occur beyond that point.

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: Serdgiam

Accomplish? I didn't know conversations always had to have a purpose,

They don't! The question was stated in a way to reveal this:

but I suppose I am merely trying to gain a better understanding of truth.

Are you only concerned with your own path of understanding? Are you willing to deny others in order to progress your physical understanding/perception of the spirit?

a reply to: Serdgiam

Are you only concerned with your own path of understanding?

I am only concerned with the Truth.

Are you willing to deny others in order to progress your physical understanding/perception of the spirit?

Again, I am only concerned with the Truth. If by deny others, you mean tell them when I think they believe in something that is not true then yes I am very willing to do so.

He claimed to believe that my belief was circular reasoning and therefore irrational. I understand that logical fallacy(begging the question or circular reasoning) better than most, so I already know that the belief I have rationalized is at least free of that fallacy. I am also aware that a lack of belief in a creator leads one to a trap of circular reasoning.

a reply to: Serdgiam

What, or who, determines which individuals have God's grace?

You can kind of get a feel for who has received grace and/or other spiritual gifts, but you cannot be certain, and so we are warned to test the spirits.

1 Corinthians 12:4-11
John 3:8
1 John 4:1

These quotes all seem to refer to the work itself rather than individual ideology. They could actually be interpreted many ways. Do you feel the Holy Spirit has revealed to you the "true" interpretation?

I would argue that every term has a spiritual meaning, and so a better way to phrase what you’re asking me is, “Do you feel that you have a proper spiritual understanding of work?”

And to that I would say, yes. Furthermore, anyone who honestly understands Truth, does so because of the Spirit.

To grasp what I am saying there, refer back to when I told you about the light, the Truth, form, the body, the Spirit, will, desire, purpose, the Soul, awareness, interpretation, translation, conception, etc...

It is the purpose of the body to reveal/lead/shepherd you to the Awareness of the Spirit. That is, every word/form is, literally, an interpretation/awareness of a spirit/desire -- it is all ideological and the image of those ideas lead you to a spiritual understanding. e.g. Your words/formations reveal your awareness/ideas about your desire/spirit.

And so the way you’re trying to separate work, that one work relates to a task and the other to a concept, does not work.

That is, if you say that you have done work, you’re likely thinking materialistically, and see yourself as saying that you have done a specific chore or task, whereas what you’re really saying is that you have translated your awareness of a spiritual form/desire, into the body, into form.

This would seem to refer to our perception of action rather than the ability (or lack) to carry out God's will.

Would you mind clarifying a bit more from the first person?

Action is more than you think. Where you see action, there is will, or spirit. That is, no form acts without the spirit that "moves" it. Furthermore, everything that has physical form, has been translated from the Spirit [of God] into its physical form (either seen or unseen: matter or dark matter.)

So, think of action like you’re using your spirit to effect another’s spirit - one “force” (as in scientific forces) effecting another “force”. A spirit is will/action/desire/force/purpose/etc, as in your spirit is that of man and of life. What you do, whether you realize it or not, is exactly as all mankind does (within its range, of course / within its own ability/purpose).

Okay, now with that explained, that all spirits are of specific kinds, specific purposes, specific wills and desires, I can answer your question:

Action/spirit/will/purpose/desire is the same thing for all intents and purposes. My point being, if you know and see the purpose of spirits, if you learn the "language", you will get a “feel", a sense/percept, of what a spirits will/desire is...

If I say, I want ice cream, you easily recognize that I speak from my desire/spirit and you know my desire/what is in my spirit/what I am translating from my spirit (to an extent, remember you have to test spirits):

Do you follow what I’m saying here/where I'm going? :: All recognized action can be thought of as the language of a spirit, because you know that what is seen is said body’s translation of its desire...

You walking out of a store with bags, from a materialistic perspective, says just that, that you are walking out of a store with bags, but from a spiritual perspective, it says that you desired to carry something from that store - that there is purpose in your action, and that purpose is to fulfill your desire/to be good. And, yes, it sounds completely rudimentary, because it is - it is not complex, and it is not mysterious - it is just a different perspective, or perception -- one that is all about will and desire, instead of a materialistic perspective which seeks to measure the length of your stride as you walk out of the store to know what it is you’re doing.

Do you know what I mean? A materialist would try to measure the height of the number 1 to try to understand it’s purpose, and reality just doesn’t work that way - classical mechanics, cause and effect, materialism, etc is wrong.

Alright back to what I was saying before that tangent...

So, by hearing God’s word, you perceive his desire for you, his will - you have a sort of “intuitive” feeling about his Spirit, his desire, which you have taken into you.

Think of it like the example above, about the store and why “you” carried the bags, but now add in the understanding that you taking in the image of the shopper is likened unto taking in his form / body / bread, so to speak - you take in form/images/bodies so that you are able to gain spiritual conception - so that by seeing you believe - that is the purpose of seeing/eating/hearing/etc - not to just see “he is walking and he has bags”, but to see “he desires to carry those bags away.”

The best way I can describe it is that seeing is the spirit of conception, and what is conceived, is understanding of the spirit -- to see spiritual form manifest into the body - to see the form of desire. And it is just that one thing happening. Action is the will of conception - the birth of physical awareness. Does that make sense? It is this reality: "good" concept (re)production.

Does this apply to all churches? What of the ones that disagree with your interpretation?

When you see Church or Bride capitalized, it is usually in reference to all people who have the Spirit in them, and not sects, nor branches, nor the members of a congregation, nor the building in which they congregate (that is the reason it is capitalized - to show distinction/reference). Church with a capital ‘C’ is God’s temple, it is the people, themselves. Church with lower case ‘c’, is in reference to the building where people meet, or it is members of a particular congregation/assembly of Church.

To my knowledge, most Christians understand that principle and reference (the Church is the people, not the building - it is spelled out in plan words within the Bible. See also: link)

See also Ezekiel 36:22-28 for the mention of Baptism, receiving the Spirit, and becoming a New Man in the old testament. (new man is sometimes capitalized to show reference as well (to having a new spirit/a new heart -- the capitalization is in direct reference to a new spirit/becoming a new person by having a new spirit.)

Yes, Euni and I were discussing this earlier. Let's dive deeper.. Without knowing the whole picture, how are you certain the initial interpretation is a full understanding? This would seem to stifle any growth which may occur beyond that point.

How you know is the only way to know: by grace through faith / you see or hear the Truth and you have faith in it/him. It is the same as any other thing you believe in: unless you know everything about the systems being used to measure something, you cannot know, with certainty, that you have accurately measured something (that anything is a fact).

I wrote you a book, didn't I?

a reply to: Bleeeeep

Thank you for correcting my errors.