Epitome

Mel: An omnipotent, perfect God would not be such a poor communicator. This part is not a problem for me because I don't believe God is omnipotent.

Perhaps there is another alternative… There is something to be developed in our character that only us learning to communicate as HE communicates can do.

I believe that since we are made in God's image we can learn a lot about him through looking at ourselves. A child can communicate without learning language, but if said child is to learn a better form of communication- speech, the parents must speak to the child- and the child must listen and try to understand. It's not a bad thing or incompetence on the part of the parents that the child doesn't 'get it'. It's a learning process to help the child grow.

Mel: I don't agree with option 4 because there is no way to know who is hearing God's communication correctly.

Not a way to know that is definitive, but I contend there is a way to know that is most probable. Perhaps you are looking at poor examples rather than reasoning this out…

If we were to try to communicate with, say aliens… how would we go about figuring out if a signal was from an intelligent being and what that signal was saying? Trial and error. Repeating the process of listening, hearing, talking about what you hear (or visualize) and trying to make sense of it. The more sense that is made and the more we are able to put it together as being valid the better we can understand the language and know if what we are hearing is our imagination or from somewhere else.


Mel: This puts God in a rather interesting position. It's like God saying "These inferior humans! I communicate and communicate, but they just cannot hear me properly. What am I going to do with them?"

*L* A bit cynical, eh? What if God is patient, kind and loving and desires to communicate with us even though he knows we struggle? Can we not then expect, if we sincerely try to listen and get it right, putting our own wishes of what we want to hear aside, that he will continue to speak even if we flub it up from time to time?

Like teaching my 14 month old to talk... I don't expect him to get it right or to know what I mean all the time. When he does it's wonderful and I'm overjoyed.. as is he.

Confirming with others what we think we are hearing from God is problematic. They might not be right. Sheer numbers in agreement mean nothing as far as being correct is concerned.

True… but take this scenario, which is hypothetical, but reflects actual circumstances I have witnessed and have experienced.

During ministry time someone thinks they hear God saying there is someone who has pain in their eye… another person confirms it because they thought they saw a vision of an infection or red spot… Then, someone with that malady steps forward, gets prayer and in a day or two is healed. If this happens once, maybe it can be dismissed as coincidence. But what if it happens often and with more consistency with those who are confirming such experiences with each other?

The more I hear God and confirm what he is saying, the more in tune I am to what his speaking sounds like, feels like, or looks like. I still hold back and pose what I'm hearing as a question, but am more likely to know, based on past experiences, when something is God and when it's just my imagination.

Of course it doesn't mean we will get it all the time… it's obviously not science… Assume this is done with people you trust who are being sincere and open, don't you think this is a reasonable way to go about listening to God, if only to see if it is possible?

Consider the 33,000 Christian denominations or the other world religions. They each have numbers, but they all cannot be hearing God correctly. How do we know who's right, if any are right?

I would say we can only know what we know and we can't know what others know or don't know. We must go forward with what we have experienced and do our best, humbly and in sincerity to hear God the best we can for ourselves and our community.

Two or more people in agreement with a supposed message from God simply means their interpretation of the message gets imposed or stated to another person as the correct message. The other person's interpretation is thus considered incorrect, and he/she has to submit to the former's message. Yet the former message may be wrong, so who's to say which message has been understood correctly. There is a lot of room for abuse with this.

Yes, there are. But I believe communication with God is worth the risk… In a community of loving, humble people who are sensitive to the possibility of abuse we can try to head off the abuses before they take over.

Though, I have to say I completely understand your apprehension to the abuses… One can loose faith and trust in people quite easily.

But having witnessed first hand the amazing and often radical life changing effect communicating with God can have on people, I can't see not at least trying to do it right.

Epitome

Primal

Excuse me, but I think you completely side stepped Mel's point: seeing as an omnipotent God would likely find a way to get around the barriers you just described and communicate quite clearly. Are you saying an omnipotent God is limited in what He can do by our own limitations?

emur

But still, if it is up to us to hear God "better", God is not omnipotent.

But, human parents don't have the power or ability to overcome this problem as God supposedly does. If God does not have this ability, that's no problem for me.

I disagree. Because there are so many poor examples, there is no most probable way of knowing. I am reasoning it out. I have been doing so over the last several years. My experiences plus the fact that millions and millions of people cannot agree on what God has said/is saying show me there is no "most probable".

A perfect, omnipotent God cannot be compared to aliens in the way you are using them. If God were this way, there would be no need for our trying this and trying that to figure out what he is saying to us.

It take it from your illustration that you are charismatic. I'm agnostic on this sort of thing. It may be God, it may be the power of the group.
But, such experiences leave many questions unanswered. Is God's communication limited to healings? Is some sort of unexplainable event the best test of whether God is being heard correctly?If it is possible to figure out what God is communicating, why are there 33,000 different Christian denominations with their different doctrines? How about the other religions of the world? They are all different. Are there some people in those religions who have worked at it and hear God well?

Is the same true for people of other religions beside Christianity?

I believe this is a good way for religious people to see things, as long as hearing God for the community doesn't involve dictating someone's "message" from God to the community.

My view 3 allows for this. Encountering the divine can change lives under such a view. Your View 4 isn't necessary for it.

Of course these life changes occur in all religions, so Christian views of God aren't the only explanation.

Mel

Epitome

Primal:Excuse me, but I think you completely side stepped Mel's point: seeing as an omnipotent God would likely find a way to get around the barriers you just described and communicate quite clearly. Are you saying an omnipotent God is limited in what He can do by our own limitations?

Mel:But still, if it is up to us to hear God "better", God is not omnipotent.

Mel:But, human parents don't have the power or ability to overcome this problem as God supposedly does. If God does not have this ability, that's no problem for me.

No, I didn't intend to side-step, but I obviously wasn't clear in what I said...

You both are assuming that if God can communicate and wants us to hear him that he would. And you are further assuming that because God does not communicate that either he doesn't want to or cannot.

What I am saying is that there is another option.

God CAN communicate despite our limitations, but chooses not to, and not because he doesn't want us to hear him... But rather because there is something more that he wants and his using his powers to overcome our weaknesses would inhibit us growing stronger.

Kind of like a baby bird trying to break its way out of it's own egg or a butterfly out of it's cacoon... You can help but in helping you also inhibit needed growth.

Perhaps God wants us to mature more than he wants to communicate... and us learning to hear him produces in us the character he desires.

Mel: It take it from your illustration that you are charismatic.

Somewhat... but I (and my church) don't exactly fit into that mold.

Mel:But, such experiences leave many questions unanswered.

Of course! I'm not saying doing things this way allows you to walk around 'knowing' the mind of God... I've been doing this for years and still, each time I think I hear something, I feel that twing of risk when I speak up about it...

Mel: Is God's communication limited to healings?

While I do look to God for direction in life decisions and our pastor looks for direction and confirmation from others on things like a church building and what not, most of the time my experiences happen during ministry, and it's not always physical healing. For instance an actual case, while I was praying for a friend of mine I 'heard' the word 'father'. That could have meant any number of things... I spoke it and he thought it was in regards to his view of his father or his relationship to God as father... when he said that, it didn't 'feel' right to me. I kept silent and prayed for clarification and got the impression of my friend as a father... He was married without children and the last thing I wanted to do was make them feel pressure to have children... but I couldn't get over the idea while we were praying... so I risked it and asked him if he wanted to be a father. His eyes got huge and he looked at his wife... they had just gone to fertility treatment that day... they weren't going to tell anyone.

We prayed for them to have children... that the fertility treatment would work... I just heard last week that his wife is pregnant.

I believe the word I got was about increasing their faith that God knows what's going on in their lives and cares about them.

In Christianity, our relationship to God is paramount... knowing his love for us inspires us to be faithful to him and fills us with joy.

Personal experiences are great, but there is something to be said for community experiences.

Mel:Is some sort of unexplainable event the best test of whether God is being heard correctly?

No... It's not something you can just qualify through a formula or rules... anymore than praying is like shopping at a vending machine where you put the right stuff in and you get the right stuff out.

It's an individual relationship we each have with him and we must develop it...

Mel:If it is possible to figure out what God is communicating, why are there 33,000 different Christian denominations with their different doctrines?

God is not just speaking on a PA system where everyone can 'tune in'. *LOL* Different churches practicing differently does not mean they are not hearing right. Perhaps God is saying different things to different people.

Mel: How about the other religions of the world? They are all different. Are there some people in those religions who have worked at it and hear God well?

You are asking me to hear God for other people. All I can do is listen for what he is saying to me and follow the best I can...

Mel:My view 3 allows for this. Encountering the divine can change lives under such a view. Your View 4 isn't necessary for it.

I have to reemphasize that while individually we can hear God, when we can confirm what we have heard with a spouse or other party the faith level is increased as well as helping us to refine our hearing...

I can see your experiences have turned you off to listening for God in the way I've described...

I know you're saying you're agnostic where it's concerned, but your option 3 sounds more like you've already decided you don't believe God communicates directly.

Epitome

[ December 06, 2002: Message edited by: Epitome ]</p>

emur

So God is omnipotent theoretically, but practically he is not, at least when it comes to communication. If he is but is not revealing himself as such, for all intents and purposes God is not omnipotent. Saying he is doesn't make it so. You will have to show that he is, or better yet, he will have to show that he is.

God seeks maturity more than he seeks to communicate clearly? When I see the horror, the abuse, the suffering done to others in the name of God because he chooses not to communicate clearly, it is hard for me to believe that there is a personal God who is wise and loving, as Christianity teaches.

I'm glad for your friend. Yet how many others within Christendom are in need of that kind of encouragement and don't get it? It doesn't speak well for God if you answer that in those cases there was no one able to hear God correctly. In such cases the community ideal fails.

Well Epitome, this is wonderful for those who desire it and experience it. But what about others who desire those kinds of encouragements and don't experience them? I cannot pretend they don't exist.

Not when those things are contradictory. The baptist hears God saying immersion is the only proper mode of baptism. The presbyterian hears God saying sprinkling is the only proper mode. Both cannot be hearing right. And you know, we cannot know which one is right, or whether both are wrong.

Does God communicate doctrine and practice to others, or is his communication limited to the kinds of experiences that you shared earlier?

I wonder why you didn't answer this as you did to my comments regarding the 33,000 different denominations. From your perspective on God's communication, would it not be correct to say "different religions practicing differently does not mean they are not hearing right"? Maybe God is saying different things to different people in other religions too?

I don't believe God communicates directly. Your stories are nice, but there are too many disconnects and contradictions for your view of God's communication to make any sense to me. Stories won't overcome those for me. I have stories that show quite the opposite.

To convince me otherwise, you would have to show me a God with consistent attributes that can be observed in life. In my experiences, such a God does not exist.

Mel

[ December 06, 2002: Message edited by: emur ]</p>

brighid

Epitome,

I am sorry I have not had a chance to respond to your lastest response to me. But I would please ask your indulgence, even if you fail to presently understand the reasoning behind my thought process to PLEASE answer the original questions I posited as a fundamentalist, in some cases a non-Christian fundamentalist. I will be out for the weekend and unable to respond, but hopefully upon my return you will have had the time to answer those questions.

Thank you and have a wonderful weekend.

Brighid

emur

I have another question for you Epitome. Do you believe that God communicates directly with people in other religions in the ways you have illustrated? Or does one have to be a Christian in order to receive God's communication?

I'll be right up front with you here. I've read about people in other religions having the kind of experiences that you claim. Now, if you claim that God does not communicate directly with people of other religions, on what basis should I accept your claim that he does with people in your church?

Thank you.

Mel

Epitome

Mel, I too have read about experiences in other religions and supernatural events in non-religious circumstances... There's just too much going on in the world for me to honestly claim that only Christians can tap into the supernatural.

So, yes, I do believe God will speak to all people regardless of religion. And I fully admit to not understanding everything that God does and says…

Are you saying that you'll throw out other people's experiences based on problems with the theory they are working under?

Epitome

Epitome

Brighid: But I would please ask your indulgence, even if you fail to presently understand the reasoning behind my thought process to PLEASE answer the original questions I posited as a fundamentalist, in some cases a non-Christian fundamentalist.

The problem is I DO understand your reasoning and disagree with your premise. I understand you do not have much time to respond, neither do I… It's a busy season. That is one of the reasons why I'm not taking the hours it would take me to answer all of your questions completely without first attempting to clarify why you're asking them.

I do not agree with the definition of "more religious" in your premise:

Your premise: The more religious a society is the more moral it should be?

Your definition of 'more religious: the most fundamentalist, strict societies that follow the letter of the religious law to the T would be the best societies to live in

When you say: Lets set out to prove if you are correct. It seems that you're trying to prove wrong something that I don't believe in and never said so that you can then say that I'm wrong? It doesn't compute, so why should I indulge you? *L*

But... to show I'm a sport, I'll answer one of your questions… So long as you recognize I do not agree with your premise! *L*

Would you classify Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan and Nigeria as countries that derive the vast majority of their moral and legal values directly from laws given down by a God?

I admit I'm not completely up on the religiousness of all these countries, but here's what I understand about a few of them…

I used to work with a man from Iran and what I'm going to say is based on his account as well as what little I've read and heard about that country. Iran is a Muslim state that uses the Koran as a basis for civil law. For a brief time it was not this way, but when their school girls began hiking their skirts and people began getting drunk more often the religious among them thought the West was being to big of a negative influence and wanted to reenact the religious law…

From my friends account, they went back to the religious law in public, but NOT in private. Many people still watch western movies (satalite dishes are everywhere), get drunk and break other Muslim laws, but just not out in the open. In short… religious law is enforced and publicly practiced, but it does not mean the people are MORE religious.

I honestly don't know what happened to the crime rate in Iran over this time period, so I can't give you statistics on if the society improved in that regard... but to your point, as the freedom went down, according to my friend, so did the enjoyment of life and the ability to prosper. He and many of his countrymen would like to go back to the free society they briefly enjoyed... and not just so they can 'break Muslim law' without being punished by the government...

Compare this to Muslims in our country. People who CHOOSE to live according to the Koran. They do so of their own free will and out of dedication to belief, not out of force.

Here's where you and I differ in our definition of religious- In my mind the Muslims who choose to follow the Koran on their own are much more religious than those who are FORCED to follow it in public by law but who do not do so in their hearts.

Funny you bring up Iraq.... Iraq is run by a dictator who does not follow the Koran, but rather his own brand of Tyranny. Even other Muslim states abhor Saddam.

Afghanistan under the Taliban was brutal and violated any number of the laws in the Koran. To hear Muslims in our country talk about it, the Taliban was a perversion of Islam.

I'm not familiar enough with Nigeria to comment.

Based on things you've said, I'm going to guess that you would say Muslims in our country are only that way because they have been influenced by Secularism and Humanism? I still want to hear that argument laid out, because I don't buy it any more than 'less strict' Christian denominations are influenced more by secularism.

Rather than answer all the other questions- since I don’t have time anyway, I'll wait for your reply.

If you could include in your reply examples of Christian denominations which are less religious because of secular influence and explain how so and how they were influenced, that would be great.

Epitome

emur

I am glad to see that you realize your version of Christianity isn't the only show on earth.

As to your question, I am saying that regardless of the religion involved, I have the same issues, such as I previously posted but didn't get a response to:

Does God communicate doctrine and practice to others, or is his communication limited to the kinds of experiences that you shared earlier? If yes, then how can we know who is right - which religion and which sect within said religion?

What about others who desire the kind of encouragements that you have mentioned and don't experience them? I cannot pretend they don't exist.

Your stories are nice, but there are too many disconnects and contradictions for your view of God's communication to make any sense to me. Stories won't overcome those for me. I have stories that show quite the opposite.

To convince me otherwise, you would have to show me a God with consistent attributes and activities that can be observed in life. In my experiences, such a God does not exist.

Mel