Stephen ben Yeshua writes:
The theory in question is that this Jehovah Person is out there. Cannot be said to exist, since He asserts that He is, and is out of nothing. Thus, ex- (out of) -ist (what is).
I think this is semantic obfuscation, honestly. The universe is as equally "out of nothing" as you postulate Jehovah to be, yet it is still meaningful to speak about the existence of the universe.
He created us, and wrote this book, the Bible, to guide us to Him and to the truth about how to live prosperously. This book says that His intent in creating us was to properly manage the rest of His creation--we are formed to be sort of gardeners. He also enjoys praise and recognition for the gloriousness of what He made, so we are supposed to do that as part of our job.
I'd just like to note at this point that the above is your
interpretation of the Bible, and not necessarily the only correct one.
So, if this is true, what do we predict, that we can test, that is otherwise implausible?
When it comes to supernatural entities, nothing is objectively testable.
Let's say we get some sort of happiness, guiltlessness, brain scan. Then, let's take some people, keeping close track of where they are coming from in terms of religious backgrounds, current philosophical positions, etc. We show them inspiring photos of eagles, redwoods, and so on, and ask them to say one of two praising remarks. One remark would give Jehovah all the glory, as the creator of what as said. A qualifying addition to the statement might make it palatable to unbelievers, such as "Jehovah, if You really are out there and made that eagle, that is one heck of a sight, and You deserve the highest praise for what you have done." Believers normally wouldn't mind saying, "That is a glorious sight!"
The people say these things while their brains are being monitored, to see if they "feel blessed" of "feel good about myself." in measurable ways.
Did you know that they've actually performed a study very similar to what you've just described? It indicated that Buddhists tend to be the happiest people. Funny, that.
We would pray before the experiment, that we wanted Jehovah to confirm that He wanted praise for what He had made, and would reward those who praise Him with greater joy and well-being. We would wait for someone who was prophetic to confirm that Jehovah had signed on to the experiment.
Am I ready to write NIH?
As Orville Wright once said: Don't sell the bike shop just yet, Wilbur.
But, I can see someone deciding that "right" is my exercising my freedom to determine what is moral, and I will do right whatever it costs me. Am I understanding your stand?
More or less. The point is that my morality is primarily derived from the golden rule (don't get too excited, Speakers were preaching the golden rule long before Christ came around). Many of Jehovah's actions as described in the OT are inconsistent with it.
This was refering to your attempts to get Jehovah to talk with you.
Naturally, as a scientist who tried and succeeded, I am interested in your materials and methods. If you are a scientist, you ought to be interested in mine.
They're rather irrelevant, actually. There's no way to exclude the possibilty that your test results were frauds perpetrated by the trickster god, Loki. That said, I prayed, I humbled myself, I "knocked" on the proverbial door... Jehovah didn't answer.
My first thoughts, when He first spoke to me and confirmed His reality to me, were "Oh, no! I don't want to have to deal with this Person!" And I told Him, "I don't like You, much less love You. But I want to live, so tell me what I have to do." That was then. After I got to know Him better, it got better. And now, the ways He has that I (still!) cannot abide, I have some hope will turn out to be better than they seem to me. He didn't mind any of this. Just said, "I understand. Just do this, and stay in touch."
Good for you.
Actually, I do. Want all of the above. C'mon :ae:, outGod God.
Hardly makes him worthy of the title, IMHO, if he can be out-godded by a mere mortal.
Or am I into the "Let's you and Him fight?" amusement? No, He really likes you, hopes you pull it off.
So you say. Why don't you ask him to convince me that your statements are accurate? If you have, he has so far answered that prayer in the negative.
But, what I asked was, don't unconditionally forgive, but do ask, "Please explain yourself, sir!"
Done, and nobody answered.
Please, avoid P=1 for your opinions, and concede that there might be something you haven't thought of, that would change your mind. Something only an omniscient God could think of.
You must also concede that there might have been an alternative course of action that did not require the mass slaughter of women and children. Y'know, something only an omnipotent God could do.
The point being, ad-hoc rationalizations are not convincing, and basically beg the question.
Please remember that I am convinced that all Christian sects are the work of the devil, and that all their members are sons of Satan.
No surprise, really. They'd likely say the same about you.
I have to pray to not rejoice at the thought of their burning up. And my prayer is not always answered. One good thing, it reminds me that I am not a nice person.
It's unfortunate you feel that way about yourself. So far, I think you're a very nice person. Do your beliefs require such low self-esteem?
God saves even, actually especially, the unborn.
Then why do so many oppose a woman's right to have an abortion?Wouldn't that guarantee her child's passage to Heaven? What greater gift could a mother give her child than a guaranteed entry into Heaven?
More importantly, do you know how many people claim to have had the same direct contact from Jehovah that you have and yet report drastically different instructions with regard to his will on this matter? Are they all sons of Satan too? And how should I know that it is not YOU that is the son of Satan and rather THEY that have had the actual instruction from Jehovah?
It's why I'm politically pro-choice.
Good for you, but it seems the most reasonable stance given your beliefs should be more along the lines of abortion advocation, not just the advocation of choice.
™ Version 4.2