What is GOD?

Since this is the faith and belief section, I'm not going to ask you to verify your claims. "Believe" what you will and be happy.

---

I am going to comment on a few of your claims though. 33% of the world's population identifies themselves as Christian. Of that 1/3 (2.1 billion) 8.218 million are LDS, so you would have to subtract them out of the Xian figures,leaving you with 2,091,782. I won't even get into all those who identify as Xian but aren't "true believers."Xianity is a broad stroke that encompasses many, many people who believe many, many things. Many of these beliefs are diametrically opposed to what you believe.Scientology has 500,000 followers.Islam has 1.3 billion.Then of course there is the 43% of the world's population that doesnt' believe in any of the four listed here.Homepage - adherentsSurely a god such as you believe in could have reached more than this in the 2k years it has supposedly had.Christianity maybe the current largest "claimed" religion, but at current growth rates it won't be for long. The current growth rate for Xianity is equal to the world population growth rate, meaning that percentagewise, Christianity isn't growing. Islam, currently is the fastest growing religion in the world.Growth rates of Christianity and IslamBut hey, this is Faith and Belief. I "believe" that what you claimed is not so, and I have "faith" that I made the correct decision not to follow your religion.

---

Asgara
"Embrace the pain, spank your inner moppet, whatever....but get over it"select * from USERS where CLUE > 0http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com
http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com

I am again stunned at the lack of coherence I see in your posts. One hardly knows where to begin.I am amused that you say : and in the very next paragraph: If one is ignoring science and logic in some ill-conceived search for "truth" (as defined by Mike the Wiz) then how do you determine what is evidence and what isn't? Perhaps by taking whatever invalid approach or idea that seems on the surface to support the theistic position? You see, Mike, the "evidence" you cite is not evidence by any standard. It's not science, clearly, and it's not logical argument (You have two claims, both of which are fallacious). What does that make them? Your opinion, which is damned poor support for a position.So, throw out science and logic if you want, but you can't claim anything as evidence once you do. People relate to reality television in a major and overwhelming way. Does that mean it reflects actual reality? Of course not. The sane with Christianity. I don't understand this. You came to think Christianity was true once you started believing in it? Well, of course. Aren't those two concepts pretty much the same thing? Why not exactly? I see no reason why not. The resurrection is not documented anywhere accept in the Bible and we have gone over why that doesn't work. I can document the resurrection of Horus, Balder, and several other mythic figures right along with the mythic resurrection of Christ.Tell us what your opinion is all you want, but don't claim facts unless you can back them up. No, actually natural forces as guided by natural selection and described in the theory of evolution has produced an unfortunate need in many Homo Sapiens to explain things by personalizing them. This tendency has resulted in the formation of many, many fanciful tales of "Gods" to explain the natural world. These "Gods" also serve admirably to assuage fear of death by allowing those who accept the idea to believe they will have some sort of second, or "after", life.These ideas are so powerful and useful that most of the humans in history have accepted them to one degree or another, in spite of the objective fact that there is no evidence of any kind for such ideas.

This might need to be my new signature (attaching my current signature for your reference). How does this work exactly? You didn't suppose the Bible was true, then you believed in this untrue (to you) book, thus it is now true.This is not unlike the schizophrenic, who when he is on his medication realizes full well that his delusions are of his own creation and has the ability to show reason -- however when he goes without his medication and starts believing everything he sees, suddenly his delusions are very real and are no doubt considered truth to him.Wouldn't it be more beneficial to one's existence to be open to all sorts of world-views and not limit themselves to one religion -- putting blinders on in the process and proudly proclaiming a lack of reason and logic?

---

"Look, the Bible is VERY clear. [...] It warns repeatedly against believing what the 'world' says, what the 'wise' of the world, the philosophers or thinkers of the world say." -- Faith

Thanks for your replies Ifen. I've read them several times. I like getting a fresh viewpoint on things as I am getting tired of the same old debates here.I understand exactly what you are saying and in some ways you have said what I have felt in my head, but not been able to put into words. I will have to roll all this around in my head and try it out for a couple of weeks before I can really say anthing worth saying about it. I will surely do a little more reading of these eastern philosophies you speak of.I think the particular vocabulary used has made it difficult for me to understand the "nondual" viewpoint before. I dunno, Perhaps if Siddhartha had lived today and spoken english, he might have picked different words. Nevertheless, I understand the ideas behind the words.

---

"Words take us further from the Truth. Where can I find a man who has no use for words so that I may sit and speak with him." -- Ancient Chinese Philosopher Dude

You did misunderstand, but it's not your fault. God is behind the weather and in the weather. The weather is not God and God is not the weather, but the weather is in God and God is in the weather. Gah... words fail.Hell, Buddha says it better than I can."It is that which you see before you - begin to reason about it and you at once fall into error."All I can say is that if you want to know "what God is" you have to expand your ways of thinking.This message has been edited by Hangdawg13, 06-14-2005 12:03 AM

---

"Words take us further from the Truth. Where can I find a man who has no use for words so that I may sit and speak with him." -- Ancient Chinese Philosopher Dude

This is why I've been recommending Bernadette Roberts book The Experience of No-Self.The experience of no-self : a contemplative journey
Author: Roberts, Bernadette, 1931-
Publisher, Date: Albany, N.Y. : State University of New York, c1993. - Edition: Rev. ed.
ISBN: 0791416941 (pbk. : alk. paper) - Description: 211 p. ; 21 cm.When I read her book I was very excited because I saw that she had a very profound awakening. She herself finally found in words attributed to the Buddha an affirmation that he had experienced what she had experienced. She did not convert to Buddhism but remained Christian. She is Catholic and had spent some years as a contemplative nun and she was raised in the Los Angeles area and is of this contemporary era
So I believe her writing of her experience is more accessible than trying to understand the language of a different culture and time. It's still very difficult because the core of this lies beyond language and ordinary experience so language is used to point at something that when talked about can only sound paradoxical.Her book is short and she writes well though what she is writing about can be difficult to understand. I've reread her book several times. I know you aren't Catholic but still her faith is that of a Christian and that should make her writing more understandable to you. I really recommend her book. I check it out of the libraries here, it's in both the public library and the university library. I'd think you could get it on an inter library loan if it wasn't in your local collections.Also, from our correspondence here I really think you would dig her. Her writing is both personal, spiritual and very intelligent. I am almost positive you would find her book a very useful contribution to the kinds of thoughts and directions I see you exploring. She isn't trying to convert people to Catholicism. She is a Christian contemplative leaving a record of her path that she hopes would be helpful to other contemplatives as they seek union with God. I respect her profoundly.lfen

Dawg, I checked this out.SIDELINED-----I say, OLD CHAP! How has our discourse, particularly with Ifen, jived with your question as to WHAT God is?Hangdawg, are you on vacation from school this summer? You seem to have a bit of time for theological discourse! What--No Job??

quote:

---

All I can say is that if you want to know "what God is" you have to expand your ways of thinking.

---

I already know what God is and it's not a supreme being.I don't need to expand my ways of thinking, I just need a new vocabulary.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

I like this sentence by Mike Hager; "The sane with Christianity." It's infact my refutation so DSV's post. You see Mike, you're just opening a big can of worms here. I have a whole different perspective about evidence. Infact, science doesn't own the word evidence, Christ used the word before your scientific method did. John 14:11
Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves.Acts 11:23
When he arrived and saw the evidence of the grace of God, he was glad and encouraged them all to remain true to the Lord with all their hearts.So it seems miracles and grace can be evidence of God. Indeed, I am witness to both. 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualitieshis eternal power and divine naturehave been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.(does any other religion say such a thing? I'd like to know so you can prove your claim that they're all the same)The creation is evidence of God's qualities Mike. Furthermore, if being a witness is evidence, then there are many witnesses world over, to life changing experiences, and being vessels of the Holy Spirit, and being healed. The witnesses to my ears are in the hundreds, they can't all be liars mike. So we have a vast amount of evidence, also - we have correlating stories of how God acts. People feel the Spirit like a fire, or a burning which is not destroying nevertheless. I myself have felt this. What would you suggest? That I ignore such clear evidence?Asgara, the bible is still the first and best recognized Holy Book on earth, and has alway been. I can't believe the real God would allow the majority to be fooled.Even the majority of people, atheists and religions aswell, know that the bible is the most recognized Holy book, so that nobody is without excuse. God would not be God if he allowed so many to be fooled.Sidenote to mike hager and other chump DSV: Mike, I know very much about logic and science, I am just not under the authority of it. Get over the fact that I know it in and out yet don't accept it over God.This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 06-14-2005 08:39 AM

I agree with you Mike. Where are they though? I did see Benny Hinn live in Miami once.However I don't believe we have seen this evidence in miracles, healings and whatnot because they have not happened. I agree that if such things were to be proven, the case for a God as described in the Bible would be that much easier to accept. I suppose you're talking specifically about how God acts as per Judaism, Islam, Christianity and the Baha'i, which all originated from the God of the ancient Israelites and Abraham. As for the other areas of the world and other religions, you do not have correlating stories. Our information infrastructure is far too vast now and taints the research, so we have to look to earlier times to examine your hypothesis.What we find is that religion was molded as per the society. Asia, (native) America, Africa, Middle East -- under your theory we should have seen a common belief in God, the Holy Spirit, and possibly even the other "secrets" of the Bible as expressed through God to the believers.Since we don't, the conclusion would be that the religion of a people was shaped by the civilization they lived in, their experiences, their environment, etc. and not from the supernatural. The God of the Christian Bible would have had the same abilities He had in the land of Abraham, all over the world. Quite the opposite. I would suggest that you examine all evidence before making a decision.

You called me a chump? A chump? What am I, a bad boxer from a Rocky movie? A guy from an old murder mystery who lets a woman trick him? A chump. Please try and at least do a little better then that.You know what, Mike the Wiz? I simply don't have the patience to deal with you today. I'll reply to you in a few days, maybe. Do not make any claims that I am withdrawing because I can't reply to the very simplistic points you have made. I just don't care for your attitude.Oh, and given the rash of admin reactions lately, if any admins see this, please note that MTW has broken board rules by name calling and that I am withdrawing calmly.

What have miracles and grace got to do with Benny Hinn? I don't know him. As far as I can see he looks like some kind of pastor in a bad suit. You couldn't possibly be appealing to the steryotypical inclinations of the evo mob which screams "christian crusades, christian crusades" while all the time ignoring the millions of peaceable christians who don't make the news. I meant that our experiences are as the bible describes. Nevertheless, you make a good point - that all those false religions are just copying from the Lord God of Israel, whom I stated as God in my first post in the thread. How can these religions that come after the bible, possibly be accepted as true when they are copies?There is evidence of miracles, as I have defined evidence from the bible. I have heard and am witness to many testimonies. Have one myself.Yet you will still say I have not provided evidence according to how you define it, scientifically, not biblically. Science is another post-concoction, which has now stole "evidence" as a term of proving something objectively but without admitting it.Example of a self-righteouss evo; "erm, evolution isn't proven but there is loads of evidence"= Absolutely fine by mike. Sure, evolution hasn't been proven. So then what does loads of evidence mean?Hmmmm. how silly do you think the irrefutable one actually is?Listen, I can't prove Christ but I have lots of evidence, as the bible defines it.

Mike for pete's sake I called DSV a chump. It was just a cordial addage, a bit of a joke. Nevertheless I won't make a claim you're withdrawing, or make any arguments in favour in your absence, as you requested.ahem........*whistle whistle*......*wind blows"..........."I am unrefuted, I win I win, you cannot beat me"!!

By using the word "other" you applied the same state to us both. I know that English can be a difficult language, but with effort it can be properly learned. So, did you fail to properly communicate using what I am forced to guess is your native language or are you simply telling a lie?Fine. You didn't mean anythign other then a joke when you said "chump". I mean only humor when I say "Arrogant, ignorant, self-important ass".

You're getting close to the line.