151–160 of 194 posts
The 3 meals a day rhetoric has been widespread (some even advocating even more than that), but it seems a bit overblown.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does insecurity come into play? Couldn't there be other reasons for God being adamant about what a person believes (i.e., worships)? What if man's nature really is best nurtured by and finds its completion in (his telos ) the Being called God? If your kids insist on eating cotton candy (which works against their health) amid a veritable feast (that is delightful and nutritious), wouldn't your ire be justified?
Disclaimer: This is my personal belief, it seems it seems to offended some passionate dissenters. I understand, I've been there before too. God is often depicted as moody and chronically concerned with what we think of him. I think that's a ridiculous projection of our own human insecurities. If a creator like God existed, he would be billions of orders of magnitude more intelligent than us. Why would he care if we w…
Moodiness? I can give you human examples of this trait; but what specifically do you have in mind about God that portrays Him as such? This way I know we are communicating about the same thing.
"Overly worried" - I know of no text in all of the Bible that portrays God as anxious about anything. Maybe you mean to say "chronically concerned with" what people think?
The categories of love and hate as you are discussing seem to require a little work. Whenever we see God's unchanging love discussed, at least Scripturally, to what does it refer? And if God chose not to love, would that make Him less than divine somehow?
I'm asking these questions (not attacking! I value your response!) because whenever we go into the "my personal belief is..." it seems prudent to examine whether such beliefs have rational warrant, or are they simply another way of wishing the world worked that way?
"Humans are arrogant and we project our own humanness onto everything" -- that is utterly true. Thank you for acknowledging it. But could it be you are projecting your own preferences of what God would be like if He existed? How do you escape this human flaw while the rest of us can't or won't?
By the way, if God turns out to be real and He is preeminently concerned with what you think about Him, what grounds would have to object to His preoccupation with making you see how ultimate and satisfying He is?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disclaimer: This is my personal belief, it seems it seems to offended some passionate dissenters. I understand, I've been there before too. God is often depicted as moody and chronically concerned with what we think of him. I think that's a ridiculous projection of our own human insecurities. If a creator like God existed, he would be billions of orders of magnitude more intelligent than us. Why would he care if we w…
"God is often depicted as moody and overly worried about what we think of him." Moodiness? I can give you human examples of this trait; but what specifically do you have in mind about God that portrays Him as such? This way I know we are communicating about the same thing. "Overly worried" - I know of no text in all of the Bible that portrays God as anxious about anything. Maybe you mean to say "chronically concerned…
God throws a few temper tantrums in the Old Testament. Either way the Christian God is not the God I might believe in. I sometimes believe in a creator who, for the purposes of familiarity, I call God.
> "Overly worried" - I know of no text in all of the Bible that portrays God as anxious about anything. Maybe you mean to say "chronically concerned with" what people think?
Yeah, that is what I meant. I will change that, thanks.
> The categories of love and hate as you are discussing seem to require a little work. Whenever we see God's unchanging love discussed, at least Scripturally, to what does it refer? And if God chose not to love, would that make Him less than divine somehow?
I don't personally believe the scriptures are anything but contradictory pseudo-history combined with fiction, so I cannot answer your question.
> "Humans are arrogant and we project our own humanness onto everything" -- that is utterly true. Thank you for acknowledging it. But could it be you are projecting your own preferences of what God would be like if He existed? How do you escape this human flaw while the rest of us can't or won't?
Of course, I am. I can only maybe accept that there was a creator. Everything else is just pure speculation. I'd like to think that this creator is unfathomable to mankind. That being said, I often doubt that this creator exists at all.
> By the way, if God turns out to be real and He is preeminently concerned with what you think about Him, what grounds would have to object to His preoccupation with making you see how ultimate and satisfying He is?
Well if he was right in front of me I would obviously admit I was wrong. If he cares as much as you say I'm sure he'd be pretty upset at me. At that point he would either have to understand where I was coming from, or send me to hell.
Either way, I'm willing to take that risk.
I recognize this as completely empirical evidence, so take it as that. I am a Mormon. As part of our religious observance, we fast for 2 meals on the first Sunday of every month. Also, I have fasted for the entire duration of the Muslim month of Ramadan twice now. For Mormons, food and drink is abstained starting Saturday night after dinner until Sunday night's dinner. By the time dinner rolls around Sunday night, I…
I have Crohn's disease, have therefore been exposed to numerous doubtful stories about 'boosting the immune' system. With my illness, a 'boost' would actually make me sicker, whereas I find that fasting for a couple of days results in improvement of symptoms for me. Why? Obviously because my digestive system becomes empty, and there is less irritation of damaged intestinal lining. Going by this study, an increased pr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's nothing inherently better about a "non-drug" method.
It tends to be cheaper?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"God is often depicted as moody and overly worried about what we think of him." Moodiness? I can give you human examples of this trait; but what specifically do you have in mind about God that portrays Him as such? This way I know we are communicating about the same thing. "Overly worried" - I know of no text in all of the Bible that portrays God as anxious about anything. Maybe you mean to say "chronically concerned…
> Moodiness? I can give you human examples of this trait; but what specifically do you have in mind about God that portrays Him as such? This way I know we are communicating about the same thing. God throws a few temper tantrums in the Old Testament. Either way the Christian God is not the God I might believe in. I sometimes believe in a creator who, for the purposes of familiarity, I call God. > "Overly worried" - I…
Clearly there are descriptions of God's kindled wrath that is admittedly frightful and overwhelming. Do these eruptions of anger and fury and wrath somehow militate against a standard above or outside God Himself? What's the origin of this standard? How does it (or can it?) apply to Him? Objections, it seems, are either rooted in taste ("I prefer this because of something about my personal predilections.") or in an understanding of the world as it is or ought to be ("Reason clearly shows that...")
"Either way the Christian God is not the God I might believe in." You very well might not believe in such a God. But what psychology is at work here? I can't read your mind, but if you indeed resist such a notion of a God who can erupt in wrath or even treasure up wrath against anyone who rejects Him, would this rejection be a product of mere taste? Should things of ultimate importance be considered on something as (I would consider) fickle as taste?
My point of bringing up the idea of God's love in the context of the Bible wasn't meant to say you accepted the text as true or inspired, only that if we are objecting to the historical Christian concept of God, we should at least try to deal with the source of its self-understanding since the defects of Christianity stems either from its faithfulness to its sources or its deviation from its sources.
"I can only maybe accept that there was a creator." -- Happy to hear you are not out and out closed out to the idea of a Creator. "Everything else is just pure speculation," which is an interesting claim in itself, but it seems to be an implicit admission that the hard work of metaphysics is an indispensable part of our dialogue. Your rejection of Christian scripture may be warranted, but I'd be curious as to how you concluded it is a "contradictory pseudo-history combined with fiction." Is this based on your own reading? You don't owe me an explanation, but so much seems to hang on this point. Even if it were demonstrably not a hodge-podge mess of history, fiction, poetry, and teaching, would that even sway your seeming pre-commitment to the words you wrote: "Either way the Christian God is not the God I might believe in?"
"Well if he was right in front of me I would obviously admit I was wrong." -- that seems to be the a realistic response. Scripture certainly paints that picture.
"If he cares as much as you say I'm sure he'd be pretty upset at me. At that point he would either have to understand where I was coming from, or send me to hell." -- An infinitely wise God would clearly understand your own mind on this. The ultimate question is whether hell is ever justified even in the case of those who claim a degree of ignorance? That's another discussion, but I am glad you are thinking about it at least hypothetically.
"Either way, I'm willing to take that risk." -- Blaise Pascal would love to discuss with you what constitutes a rational risk on this count. Risk-taking is a good thing, wouldn't you agree, if it is eminently grounded in reason?
Thank you so much for this exchange. I don't have all the answers, but like you I am happy to hang my hat on anything that has the ring of truth. I am openly a traditional, classical Christian, but I'm always willing to dialogue and calibrate my beliefs in the light of the Truth, the Good, and the Beautiful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> i.e. blood atonement for sins of the world That was never a christian belief to begin with. The atonement was (supposedly) because of God's own incarnation as Christ, our of love, not because of some blood offering to God (i.e. the crucifixion, which was not even meant as such, anyway).
I realize modern religion has tried to blunt the concept (it's all about love etc)... but blood atonement figures very prominently in the doctrine presented in the bible... Romans3:25, Hebrews9:22, Rev1:5 for instance. There are plenty more. Very prominent concept. Which is why up until recently there was plenty of talk about being "washed in the blood" in Christian churches. (I believe the manifest brutal cruelty an…
Initially, it was quite difficult but over time became much easier. Over time I lost some weight (although that was not an objective) and generally began feeling healthier and more energetic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I realize modern religion has tried to blunt the concept (it's all about love etc)... but blood atonement figures very prominently in the doctrine presented in the bible... Romans3:25, Hebrews9:22, Rev1:5 for instance. There are plenty more. Very prominent concept. Which is why up until recently there was plenty of talk about being "washed in the blood" in Christian churches. (I believe the manifest brutal cruelty an…
I think you have it backwards. The 'brutal cruelty and outright ridiculousness' of blood sacrifice is the whole point of Christianity. I realise Judaism has changed a lot, but in Jesus' time it was an unforgiving system. The death of Jesus was supposed to supplant all other kinds of sacrifice, and bring in a new system whereby you didn't need to atone for sins any more - you simply had to ask for forgiveness. When yo…
I believe the Biblical narrative describing the significance of Jesus' sacrifice was about past sins, that which humans bore without actually committing. I do not believe the death of Jesus in any way suggests, in Christian folklore, that you don't need to atone for sins.
FWIW, I think the Catholic Church (which didn't exist until hundreds of years after the whole Jesus thing) considers things like rosary prayers as atonement.