13 Dec 07
1 edit
Here is a statement made by a man named Maimonides.
"Man's love of God is identical with his knowledge of him"
Who here disagrees? Whether we believe God to be a myth or a reality we all have an mental image of what God is and we embrace this image or reject this image.
13 Dec 07
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyI must be misunderstanding what you are saying, because I have many possible images of God, some of which I like, some of which I don't like, none of which I love, and none of which I believe in.
Here is a statement made by a man named Maimonides.
"Man's love of God is identical with his knowledge of him"
Who here disagrees? Whether we believe God to be a myth or a reality we all have an mental image of what God is and we embrace this image or reject this image.
I do agree that many Christians I have talked to believe in a God because they like the image they have created and will quite readily admit it (knightmeister for example has repeatedly pointed out the utility of his image of God and said that if it is not useful to him then he will discard it).
13 Dec 07
Originally posted by twhiteheadYou are right, there are many possible images of God. However, is there none that you love? For example, a God who gives you everything you love and the very ability to love, would you love this God?
I must be misunderstanding what you are saying, because I have many possible images of God, some of which I like, some of which I don't like, none of which I love, and none of which I believe in.
I do agree that many Christians I have talked to believe in a God because they like the image they have created and will quite readily admit it (knightmeister ...[text shortened]... utility of his image of God and said that if it is not useful to him then he will discard it).
Of coarse none would serve a God they did not love. Why would they? I suppose that one could make the arguement that they serve out of fear.
13 Dec 07
Originally posted by twhiteheadWhoah there whitey! The reason why I would discard something that is not useful in anyway as being the truth is because I believe truth has to be lived and has to be functional. A God who exists is functional. Truth means nothing if it doesn't have the power to transform us or change things , it's dead truth. It's like saying that your washing machine is made of chocolate . The uselessness of it makes you wonder if it can really be a washing machine. A real washing machine would work.
I must be misunderstanding what you are saying, because I have many possible images of God, some of which I like, some of which I don't like, none of which I love, and none of which I believe in.
I do agree that many Christians I have talked to believe in a God because they like the image they have created and will quite readily admit it (knightmeister ...[text shortened]... utility of his image of God and said that if it is not useful to him then he will discard it).
If you want to portray others faith as being a matter of whim or fancy because that is comforting to you then just own it for yourself instead of projecting it onto others.
13 Dec 07
Originally posted by knightmeisterYou clearly have a rather warped concept of what truth is. Essentially you seem to be claiming that if something is not functional for you then it isn't true and doesn't exist. That can easily be proved wrong and you know it.
Whoah there whitey! The reason why I would discard something that is not useful in anyway as being the truth is because I believe truth has to be lived and has to be functional. A God who exists is functional. Truth means nothing if it doesn't have the power to transform us or change things , it's dead truth. It's like saying that your washing machine ...[text shortened]... it makes you wonder if it can really be a washing machine. A real washing machine would work.
13 Dec 07
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyI don't really see how one can love an image of God. I guess it would be like loving your favorite painting? I would say I like some of the images but then some of the images of the devil are rather pleasing too (happy guy with forked tail and horns).
You are right, there are many possible images of God. However, is there none that you love? For example, a God who gives you everything you love and the very ability to love, would you love this God?
Of coarse none would serve a God they did not love. Why would they? I suppose that one could make the arguement that they serve out of fear.
A very significant proportion of theists do not serve God because they love him (or his image). In fact, when it really comes down to it, almost all Christians I know will admit that they serve God because they are selfish and want to get themselves into heaven. Can you honestly say that that is nor your own key motive?
My favorite question for Christians is:
If God came to you and offered to let someone else into heaven in your place, would you be loving enough to agree.
13 Dec 07
Originally posted by twhiteheadI didn't say that something doesn't exist if it is not functional. Clearly , there may well be some idiot in Los Angeles who has a chocolate washing machine but I'm not going to be that interested in it.
You clearly have a rather warped concept of what truth is. Essentially you seem to be claiming that if something is not functional for you then it isn't true and doesn't exist. That can easily be proved wrong and you know it.
If one's ideas about God make no difference at all in your life or have a destructive influence , what's the point? You tell me.
13 Dec 07
Originally posted by twhiteheadMy favorite question for Christians is:
I don't really see how one can love an image of God. I guess it would be like loving your favorite painting? I would say I like some of the images but then some of the images of the devil are rather pleasing too (happy guy with forked tail and horns).
A very significant proportion of theists do not serve God because they love him (or his image). In fac ...[text shortened]... and offered to let someone else into heaven in your place, would you be loving enough to agree.
If God came to you and offered to let someone else into heaven in your place, would you be loving enough to agree.----whitey--
The problem with this question is that if you were self sacrificing enough to engage in such an act of self denying love then you would be incredibly christ like. One would only be able to do such a thing if one had surrendered utterly to the Holy Spirit . But if one had done this one would end up in heaven anyway.
Also , we are commanded to love others AS ourselves not at the expense of ourselves .
13 Dec 07
Originally posted by knightmeisterThe point is that it has no bearing whatsoever on the validity of the ideas or the actual existence of said God. You however claim that genesis is not factual because it has no bearing on your life whereas the new testament is factual because it does. How egoistic of you to think that your desires can affect the existence of Jesus 2000 years ago!
If one's ideas about God make no difference at all in your life or have a destructive influence , what's the point? You tell me.
13 Dec 07
Originally posted by knightmeisterYou are clearly trying to get out of the question. The question clearly points out that you already have a place in heaven and God is suggesting you give it up. I have noticed that almost all Christians do the same as you - avoid the question - I suppose it is too touchy a subject.
The problem with this question is that if you were self sacrificing enough to engage in such an act of self denying love then you would be incredibly christ like. One would only be able to do such a thing if one had surrendered utterly to the Holy Spirit . But if one had done this one would end up in heaven anyway.
Also, we are commanded to love others AS ourselves not at the expense of ourselves.
So essentially if your love may lead to harm to yourself you are not required to go ahead with it? Does the same apply to loving God? If it is painful to do what God says (harm to self) then do you not need to do it?
13 Dec 07
the fundamental problem with theists is that you all talk like you know god.
In actuality, what you know are stories you read or heard from another human. That is distinctly not god.
Most philosophers and theologists agree there is not enough evidence to deny some kind of god(s) existence. So, an atheistic perspective is logically as faith based as any specific-god perspective.
Then we have religions that are generally who are both ignorant and arrogant enough to fill in all the blanks after that about god's "personality".
Christianity is no different in this field.
So, a thread about how much we all know god individually...
Just a statement of how much you've believe in what you've been told without thinking and educating yourself.
Let's have a discussion about our personal spiritual experiences without trying to pretend we know/comprehend the what/why/how's of those experiences, and just talk about what it meant to us as real human beings.
13 Dec 07
Originally posted by whodeyI disagree. One could just as well say that man's love of Mars is identical with knowledge about him, or talk about leprechauns, or benevolent aliens...
Here is a statement made by a man named Maimonides.
"Man's love of God is identical with his knowledge of him"
Who here disagrees? Whether we believe God to be a myth or a reality we all have an mental image of what God is and we embrace this image or reject this image.
Love is not equivalent to knowledge.