Is God Mute?

Originally posted by nicknomo
No offense, but that argument doesn't hold water. As an atheist I've surveyed a few religions for educational purposes... I frequently take part in discussions like this, so it is rather helpful.

No religions present a better case th ...[text shortened]... h? For all you know, Allah could be pretty pissed off right now...

Now you are getting into epistemology- how do we know. And if some people have not worked out what they believe, fewer have worked out how they know. But faith is a form of epistemology.

One theory that I tend to agree with is: If we can know anything for certain, God would have to gives us that knowledge. If there is no God, then knowledge is only perception, and no two people share any certain knowledge.

Faith is believe in propositional truths of scripture that we know because that knowledge has been given to those who believe.

True, that may be straying a tad...

But its an important part of the question... Does your god does not want us to know? Does your god not care what moral guidelines you follow? People usually answer "yes he does" to this question

But that DOES lead us back to:

Well why doesn't he just speak up then.

I think most people are half-heatedly religious (save a few). They don't really follow the religion very well... mostly because they've considered it an unknown, but are playing it safe. As someone in this thread stated "God yelling down from the heavens" would change that scenario quite a bit.

If god existed, and exists in the way current religion portrays him, I'd see no reason for him not to be active.. Of course, this is far from any proof.. I know.. but wouldn't a loving caring god be involved? What would you call a father who never spoke to his son?

Originally posted by nicknomo
True, that may be straying a tad...

But its an important part of the question... Does your god does not want us to know? Does your god not care what moral guidelines you follow? People usually answer "yes he does" to this question

But that DOES lead us back to:

Well why doesn't he just speak up then.

I think most people are half-heatedly ...[text shortened]... dn't a loving caring god be involved? What would you call a father who never spoke to his son?

Of course I believe He does speak to His children. But I don't believe he intends to adopt everyone in the world.

Originally posted by kirksey957
That would explain why some seem to be sitting in God's lap with his hand moving their mouths.

How did you manage to say that , without using the word dummies?

Originally posted by nicknomo
Maybe some people can field this one for me...

We have an omnipotent being, who can do anything.. yet it never speaks (verbally).

If you have this all powerfuly being, realistically, you'd expect it to talk in a way we can understand.

Now I've heard people say "god speaks through others", and you need to "listen before you can hear him". To ...[text shortened]... erbally instill a level of doubt about his existence?

Just curious, let me know your thoughts

Well, to an eternal being like god, 2000 years would be a relatively short period of time. I reckon he's just popped to the fridge for a beer.

Or maybe he's just sitting in stunned silence, awed by how wrong people have got it.

Originally posted by jimmyb270
Well, to an eternal being like god, 2000 years would be a relatively short period of time. I reckon he's just popped to the fridge for a beer.

Or maybe he's just sitting in stunned silence, awed by how wrong people have got it.

That's great!

It's amazing to see how the relationship between God and man is somtimes analogies to that between a parent and child.

"I take my eyes off of you for 5-minutes and look what you have done!"

Also, consider the behavior of Adam and Eve. God comes into the garden (like a parent entering the kitchen) and the little'ns hide in plain site. God asks little Adam if he took a bite of the cake - and Adam says "well it's your fault for giving me a sister who made me eat the cake!." Adam blames God and Eve at the same time for his mistakes.

Originally posted by nicknomo
Maybe some people can field this one for me...

We have an omnipotent being, who can do anything.. yet it never speaks (verbally).

If you have this all powerfuly being, realistically, you'd expect it to talk in a way we can understand.

Now I've heard people say "god speaks through others", and you need to "listen before you can hear him". To ...[text shortened]... erbally instill a level of doubt about his existence?

Just curious, let me know your thoughts

GOD speaks to those that believe in HIM. HE speaks to the heart.

Originally posted by blindfaith101
GOD speaks to those that believe in HIM. HE speaks to the heart.

I challenge that notion.

Has he ever spoken to you verbally?

Originally posted by nicknomo
I challenge that notion.

Has he ever spoken to you verbally?

I do too. I think the idea that He speaks to your heart is too vague and potentially misleading.

God speaks verbally through the written word.

Heart and mind really mean the same thing in Scripture - they are used together for emphasis. So God speaks to the heart/mind verbally through the written Word. The Holy Spirit removes some of the confusion that believers had when we were unbelievers, not by making the the illogical logical, but by making the logic that is there clearer (understanding) - and giving us saving faith (accent to the true knowledge). That is not to say perfectly clear - even believers do not get it perfect since we are still imperfect sinners - and we'd all agree on everything. But believers do understand and believe the fundamental truths.

Originally posted by Coletti
I do too. I think the idea that He speaks to your heart is too vague and potentially misleading.

God speaks verbally through the written word.

Heart and mind really mean the same thing in Scripture - they are used together for emphasis. So God speaks to the heart/mind verbally through the written Word. The Holy Spirit removes some of the confusion t ...[text shortened]... 'd all agree on everything. But believers do understand and believe the fundamental truths.

So the logic is unclear unless you believe illogically first? That seems to be what you're suggesting.

I don't know why the various deities maintain silence toward humans.

But there is this fellow named Hank, who, according to the website I am linking to, talks to people. Well, he used to talk to people. As the site puts it, "Not now, but years ago He would talk to some people."

http://www.jhuger.com/kisshankbutt.php

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
So the logic is unclear unless you believe illogically first? That seems to be what you're suggesting.

I'm saying that logic is not equivalent to "clear and easy". And some things in the Bible are not clear. I said "not by making the the illogical logical." Analogically, not all math is as easy as 2+2. But the basics are easy - things like to doctrine of the Trinity are more difficult to understand.

Originally posted by Coletti
Also, consider the behavior of Adam and Eve. God comes into the garden (like a parent entering the kitchen) and the little'ns hide in plain site. God asks little Adam if he took a bite of the cake - and Adam says "well it's your fault for giving me a sister who made me eat the cake!." Adam blames God and Eve at the same time for his mistakes.

This explanation is one of the reasons I think it is at best odd to think of the
'Fall' story as a literal story.

First of all, as far as I know, Christians believe that God is omniscient. As
such, He knew that Eve was talking with the serpent, He knew that she took
the apple, He knew that she ate a bite and gave some to Adam. The parent
wouldn't permit their child to get a chair, push it to the counter, climb up,
get a bite of cake, give it to his sister and watch her eat it.

Second of all, if God is omniscient, He knew about the 'Fall' from the moment
of Creation. He knew, even while He was telling Adam and Eve not to eat from
the Tree, exactly when they would and under what circumstances.

That is, He intentionally made flawed creatures and gave them commands that
He knew they couldn't and wouldn't obey. This strikes me as bizarre.

If you take the Fall metaphorically, and you understand that the 'eating of the
fruit (pomegranate)' is a metaphor for humankind's becoming 'sexually aware'
(they noticed that they were naked), it makes a lot more sense (to me).

I read an interesting interpretation where humankind was a creation of Satan and
God was the serpent. The Garden of Eden was a 'Venusburg' kind of place and
he kept humankind ignorant. God (as the serpent) came and 'tempted' humankind
into opening their minds to the true knowledge of the world. However, I can't
remember the details nor where I found this interpretation (it might have been Gnostic,
but I don't know for sure).

Nemesio

Originally posted by Nemesio

I read an interesting interpretation where humankind was a creation of Satan and
God was the serpent. The Garden of Eden was a 'Venusburg' kind of place and
he kept humankind ignorant. God (as the serpent) came and 'tempted' human ...[text shortened]... ation (it might have been Gnostic,
but I don't know for sure).

That is interesting. I'd appreciate a reference if you ever come across it again.
Hopefully the essence of the interpretation is more than just switching the names
of God and Satan, for in the traditional interpretation, the essense of Satan's
character is to enlighten man about knowledge that God is hoarding for himself,
which sounds a lot like the God described in this alternate interpretation.

Would believers and non-believers of this alternate interpreation call each other Satanists?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
That is interesting. I'd appreciate a reference if you ever come across it again.
Hopefully the essence of the interpretation is more than just switching the names
of God and Satan, for in the traditional interpretation, the essense of Satan's
character is to enlighten man about knowledge that God is hoarding for himself,
which sounds a lot li ...[text shortened]...

Would believers and non-believers of this alternate interpreation call each other Satanists?

It was an entirely different reading of the events, not a mere
switching of names. I would describe it as an 'exegetical midrash'
or something like that. I've been utterly unable to find it, but I
know I didn't imagine it either 🙁

Nemesio