not brainwashed

DivineOb I have no problem being a disbeliever because there were two question no one could ever attempt to answer for me.

"how can a priest claim to believe in God (who supposedly guides him and judges him) while he indecently deals with young boys who put their trust in him"?

"how can a muslim father kill his own daughter because she was raped by her brother-inlaw and believe in a God who would see no problem with this?" <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

Tercel

Good point. We have to remember that there are different parts to the body of Christ. I am certainly guilty of forgetting this one, so often I judge people on the basis that they're not good at the things I'm good at...

I feel a bit hypocritical making the point, as I know I am every bit as guilty of having my own politics, pet vices and emphasises in the gospel as anyone else.

Well put.

Tercel

It reminds us of what our nature is supposed to be like. God is interested in changing our human natures into spiritual ones.

Tercel

Jesus constantly prayed to God. Whether God answered back except on occaisions such as the Transfigeration is far from clear.
I am inclined to think that Jesus isn't quite the stereotypical example of the average believer either: Jesus' had a somewhat special mission and relationship with God after all.

They are probably doing so to some extent. No one's perfect though. It's possible that they trick themselves into thinking they are more godly than they are - spiritual pride is a tempting sin.

If they say they feel it, who am I to say they don't?

The Bible addresses this issue several times. What it comes down to is: Do the persons actions reflect what they say is their relationship with God? Jesus called it "fruit":
"By their fruit you will recognize them... every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit" Matt 7:16-17
"No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit." Luke 6:43
John wrote "Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates his brother is still in the darkness." 1 John 2:9
It is by their actions that we see what they are on the inside. James put it bluntly:
"I will show you my faith by my actions" 2:18

I think God has made certain things he cares about very clear. We just don't like carrying them out, so instead of revealing new truths for our delight God simply reminds us of the truths we have yet to grasp.

It is extremely important we compare our personal revelations to what the Bible says and what the Church universal says.

I am inclined to think that God made a special dispensation for the early Church and gave it the power necessary to spread rapidly.
The main difference though is, I think, that the people in Acts were significantly further advanced than us in terms of their spiritual character. Acts records that:
"All the believers continued together in close fellowship and shared their belongings with one another... Day after day they met as a group in the Temple, and they had their meals together in their homes, eating with glad and humble hearts, praising God, and enjoying the good will of all the people....
The group of believers was one in mind and heart. No one said that any of his belongings was his own, but they all shared with one another everything they had.... There was no one in the group who was in need." Acts 2:43-47; 4:32-34
Paul wrote:
"Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ" 1 Cor 11:1
What Christians today could say that they have followed the example of Christ without qualification? Mother Theresa, perhaps... though I doubt she would have agreed.

If we could master the basics of love for one another and transformation of our natures, perhaps then we could use the blessings of the Spirit in the same way as the apostles.

Tercel

HelenM

Vorkosigan

Your posts on this thread have been extremely moving, Tercel, for their honesty and sharing. I have enjoyed reading them very much. It took courage to post them here. That I salute.

I cannot agree with your assessment of Acts. A couple of people die at the hands of Christians for reasons that do not strike me as very convincing.

Vorkosigan

sighhswolf

So, through all of the New Testament there is the message for people, mankind, to love each other.
To react with kindness when faced with adversity.
To assist those who for whatever reason suffer, from poverty, unsanitary living conditions, starvation, to avoid murderous intent, to live within your means not seeking wealth above learning and humility and instead seek contentment and joy in your life by service to others.
To live by Spock's rule. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one."
So the message is akin to not seeking rewards for service on behalf of your fellow man.
Unselfishly giving of your self and your time and whatever resources you may have for the betterment of your brothers and sisters...correct?

So if that is the case, and if that encompasses
a brief look at the role of christians in our society as laid out by Jesus and carried on by his followers and disciples, then why do christians not give up their homes, quit their jobs, dispense with wealth, and dedicate themselves to the principles listed above? (and I am not refering to the clergy)
Why are there so many homeless people sleeping in the streets who are passed by everyday by thousands of so-called christians without a thought of helping these poor displaced people?

Why have christians historically tried their best to wipe out any and all opposition to their doctrines?
How many great societies have been destroyed by forced conversions?
Putting aside all of the admonitions, there is absolutely, positively, people who are NOT christians who have tried to pattern their lives using the same group of goals/ideas/concepts that christians espouse, but they dont believe in a supreme being nor in a divine saviour.
I think the word is "Humanist", a term very much despised by fundamentalist christianity.

It is possible for the attributes above to be manifest in simple non-christian people who are
"good" and live by a code of conduct that would rival any and all christians.
Yet if those people live in such a manner, and constantly think of the welfare of others, and live without malace or forethought of harming anyone or anything, they can be shut out of the christian ldeal of everlasting life and an eternity in paradise, simply because they did not accept this Jesus person as their lord.
Christians cant even decide what traits and specifically what course of action is required for a person to be "saved".
Which ideal are we supposed to follow? Faith without works....or faith with works to gain the promised salvation? And why must there be a reward and punishment system if the almighty already knows who is saved and who is not?
Do christians know exactly what is required?
Are there any christians in direct contact with this divine being? (please dont start naming all the snake handlers and money grubbers that have a strangle hold on christianity in this country).
And why should there be any confusion on anyones part about the conditions and prerequisites for salvation?
It would seem that the most important and relevent issue of christianity would be spelled out with such crystal clearity that would preclude even the remotest possibility of getting it wrong.
Those character traits listed above, unselfishness, charity, love for your fellow man, the love of the earth that we inhabit and all the creatures who share it with us.........these are not "christian traits" nor do christians have a monopoly on those particular characteristics.
You can quote verse after verse of NT scripture that espouses the "love your fellow man" concept.
That is not uniquely original within the framework of christian doctrine and/or philosophy.
In my half century here, I have learned one very important thing, the are NO ABSOLUTES...the only real absolute is that everything changes.

Love, compassion, understanding, a willingness to share with those who have less materially, and a deep reverence for our earth and for ALL it's lifeforms is the way I want to live the rest of my life here.........and I dont see evidence of the existence of the christian god, nor do I see anything special about the man refered to as Jesus in the scriptures.
What I do see is a figure that tried to reunite the Jewish population and bring them all back to their holy text the Torah.
And a person who wanted to free the Jews from the bonds of roman oppression and by parables explain to his audience who was almost totally Jewish how to fight the Romans without dying in the process.
But that is just an opinion, just as everyone of you all have.
Wolf

HelenM

So, why can't we? Any ideas?

love (in Christ)
Helen

luvluv

Helen, we can. We just don't.

Philosoft:

"Why would God bother invading your head and asking you to do something he knows is against your nature?"

Not against your nature, necessarily, but against your preferences, politics, or self-interest. God has a hard time, for instance, getting me to fast. I've done it before and to good results (spirtually and physically) but whenever I feel God telling me to fast, I generally supress it for a few days because regardless of the long term benefits I don't enjoy doing it.

Beyond that, it is sometimes good for people to do things that are against their nature if their natures are twisted. It would be good for God to ask a racist man to spend time with people of another race, even though it would be against that man's "nature". But I think it's obvious why a racist man, who lives in a racist society in which there are severe repurcussions to crossing racial lines, might choose to convince himself that God never told Him any such thing. Generally speaking when Christians disobey God they do so by convincing themselves that He never told them to do what they are avoiding doing. Very few of us ever have the temerity to just face our disobedience head on, we explain it away. Human nature and all.

DivineOb:

"If two people ask God whether women should be allowed to be pastors, how could God give each person a different answer? Both answers can't be right, and it is very difficult for me to think of a way in which it benefits the church to have two groups holding different opinions on this issue."

Well, again, if one of the pastors is sexist, or he knows that there is a particular woman pastor in his flock who is better educated than him, then he might have petty, personal, political, or selfish interests that compete with the Holy Spirit's claim. Even in the heart of the most spiritual Christian, the claims of the Holy Spirit do not go unchallenged. Our own desires, our own ambition, our own prejudices, often shout down the voice of conscience. The fault lies not with God but with people, and with their own choices, and with the temporal consequences that occasionally attend "doing the right thing".

Again, just because God tells someone to do something doesn't mean that they will do it. Just because God tells someone to believe something doesn't mean that they will believe it. You can interpret very little about God from what people do, because people are free to do what they want to do.

jj

I have yet to meet an atheist who inf act espouses that as a reason for atheism. It is, however, entirely legitimate, and not at all a "false delimma" (that's dilemma, btw) to point out that the teachings of "god" as written down by man are, well, utterly inconsistant, nearly random, and most would appear to be self-serving for the human who wrote them down.

This is not an argument that god does not exist, and in that I think you're creating a pure, spiteful straw man. I don't know anyone, personally, who uses that argument as a basis for their atheism.

I know many people will mention the logical absurdities of "scripture", but I think you're the one who's decided to insert the fallacy here.

Simply put, there is no evidence. Until you show me extraordinary evidence for your extraordinary assertion that a god exists, I don't believe you.

Ciao.