Translation:
blah blah blah blah you’re wrong for asking for evidence blah blah blah enjoying your life as an ape, nonbeliever? blah blah blah.
Good lord, what’ve you got against a nice, healthy skeptic?
Sh*t, that wasn’t supposed to happen!
Anyways, what I wanted to ask was where, in that quote, does it say you are wrong for being a skeptic? Besides, Edlyn was just saying she agreed with the quote, not that you are wrong.
Libertarian wrote:
So long as we re-define “answering the prayers of the faithful” to mean “does what He thinks is best for the faithful, regardless of what they prayed for.”
Which is stretching the definition of “answering” a prayer a wee bit much, in my not-so-humble opinion.
I sometimes pray ‘Oh Great Cthulhu, please make that cop pass me (or something similar), grant me this request and when I am Emperor of the World I will sacrifice to you one virgin (or two or three if it’s something really important).’ I lost count of how many I have promised him over the years, but I’m pretty sure it’s under a thousand, which shouldn’t be too difficult to gather when I’m Emperor.
Czarcasm
Well, it’s clear enough why your handle is Czarcasm and not Phaith. If you think you have fooled the Living Love inside you, you are mistaken. To thine own self be true.
Tracer
Pretend you are God. (You are anyway…)
I petition you to make everyone on this board agree with me on every point I ever make, despite whatever you are doing with each in regard to their own moral journies. In your divine capacity, what is your response?
“Fooled the Living Love…”?!?
Euphamism Abuse-10 yard penalty!
I suppose that if I ask you to explain Vague Religious Term #713, you will simply replace it with an even smarmier Vague Religious Term #714, so I won’t even bother. It was said that “God” didn’t have to prove anything to us, but that we had to prove something to him. In a simple statement, I both proved my existance, and showed the level of prove I would accept. Your god is all-knowing? Then he knows what it would take, and apparently he has no interest in my believing in him.
Czar
When you are so overwhelmed by love that you die and are reborn, you will have seen Him. That will happen sometime between now and when your Spirit is liberated. You are not responsible for that which you don’t yet know. My “god” is within you even now. If you look anywhere else, you will see something else.
And here I was hoping for a nice death by gunshot :rolleyes:
That’s repulsive; get it out of me.
There is, of course, a distinction between having “no interest in [your] believing in him” and jumping when you say, “Frog!” I repeat, God is not a buck private. You don’t get to make the rules.
“Then He must not be all good, all powerful,” you say. “Otherwise, he would do what is necessary to convince me, a living soul, that He exists. It would only take a small miracle, after all.” Sorry, doesn’t follow. Proving His existence is not the greatest good. Preserving your freedom of choice, your independent will, is. (Or, rather, that is what I, and many others, deduce from the way things appear to be set up. There may be another answer. We are operating from deduction, not divine revelation. YMMV.)
I repeat what I said a while ago: this entire discussion is a wrong headed way of approaching subjects entirely divorced from prayer. Prayer is just talking with God; it works almost by definition, assuming you believe in God. It is not magic, or some New Age healing regime. The question of evil, or why God allows bad things to happen, is separate, and we seem to be mixing them up.
Ah yes, there it is - SVRT#714.
pan
Myrr21
Oh, you don’t need me for that. That’s easy enough for you to do on your own. Simply turn your heart cold and hate Love.
Kabbes
I understand. And I don’t blame you.
#715 and counting…
And I can be a wonderful, loving human without some uppity deity taking up residence in my bloodstream, thank you very much.
Libertarian wrote:
My response, as God, would of course be “That’s logically impossible, and even if it weren’t, it would violate my edict of Infinite Justice. Request denied.”
And since I wouldn’t be granting your request, I would therefore also, by definition, not be answering your prayer. Answering a prayer means granting the praying person’s requests.
So, do you admit that God does not always answer the prayers of the faithful? Or do you have a different definition of “answer the prayers” that you’d like to share with us?
I interpret this to mean that you were glad Dawson died. Or would “relieved” be better? I’m curious: If Dawson’s body had lived, would that mean God had NOT answered you? Or is any answer the right answer when you ask something of God?
When my father was stricken with a brain aneurysm, my mother prayed that he would be healed. Trust me when I say she prayed that his body would be healed so she could love and be loved by him for many more years. That’s what most people ask to happen when they pray for their stricken loved ones. My mother was disappointed (not to mention in total and complete anguish) when my father’s body died in spite of all her praying.
And no, I didn’t pray.
My mother swore my father’s spirit touched her the day after he died. Many other people have reported this same phenomenon. It could be that that’s exactly what happened.
Or maybe it’s one of the human brain’s defense/coping mechanisms. Perhaps the person’s brain recognizes, unconsciously (automatically?), that it’s enduring a toxic level of stress hormones from all the grief and anguish. It needs relief. It needs a reason to stop grieving, to stop the anguish. What would do this? Reassurance that the object of the grief (the deceased) is actually quite well. So the brain manufactures a hallucination of the sight or sound or even smell of the deceased loved one. It breaks the continuum of grief and anguish and misery and the brain stops manufacturing all those hormones and the brain’s chemistry returns to healthy levels.
No, I didn’t tell my mother any of this. At the time, I didn’t know enough to make even a half-assed guess to explain such visions. But I would not have, because I was just relieved that to see she was beginning to recover from the worst thing that had ever happened in her life.
So god is love? I dissagree, god is just a bit more than an emotion.
I also dissagree with the idea that god answers prayers in any other way than asked. IMHO when the person asking doesen’t have enough faith or the request is outside of what god said he would do he is not likely to answer it.
I’m curious as to how much faith is ‘enough’ (or how much is ‘not enough’).
Is faith something that can be quantified, or is it a boolean thing that you either have or have not?
Talk of mustard seeds and mountains springs to mind.
I tend to think of the whole issue of whether we can ask God for something that he already knows is good for us and already knows we need etc like this:
My daughter likes milk (she likes it a lot).
I know that milk is good for her.
I won’t force her to drink it though (I don’t need to).
If she asks for milk, I’ll usually give it to her (except when I know it might spoil her appetite just before a meal maybe)
Sometimes, I know she’s going to ask me for milk, so by the time she asks, I’ve already got it ready in the cup. (but it’s still the fact that she has asked for it that leads me to give it to her).
Other times, she has to wait a short time while I wash the cup first (she can’t always understand the reason for the delay)
Sometimes I give her milk without her having to ask, because I know she should have it.
Because I give her milk most times she asks, she sometimes starts to think it will work for anything and everything she wants, like sweets, but I know that would be bad for her teeth, so I often refuse (she can’t understand why).
So, if she never asked me for milk, would I give her less? Yes, it probably would work out that way.
Is that because I’m a bad parent?
Before anyone leaps to nitpick, I know that the above analogy is oversimplistic and probably full of holes, but what I think I’m trying to say is that I don’t think it’s a valid argument to say “If I were God, I wouldn’t do it like that”, when we maybe don’t have a complete view of the situation.
Hmmm
Isn’t ‘no’ also an answer? - I think so.
Myrr21
You’re welcome. But who said anything about a bloodstream? (#716)
Tracer
Really?
Then if you haven’t answered me, I would appreciate your attention to the matter. Here is the petition again for your convenience:
I petition you to make everyone on this board agree with me on every point I ever make, despite whatever you are doing with each in regard to their own moral journies.
Please don’t ignore me this time.
No.
But wait, you say that isn’t an answer.
Sterra
There are many kinds of love. A woman can love her husband in a different way than she loves her goldfish. She can love her sister in a different way than she loves her husband.
God’s perfect Love is not an emotion.
Jab
[approaching with cautious optimism…]
As you wish, but that isn’t what it means. Dawson never died. He is not his corpse.
God never chooses to give wrong answers. Perfect Love loves perfectly.
I’m saddened by your mother’s suffering. Knowing how much I love my own mother, I appreciate your concern for yours.
As an evolutionist, you can understand the matter of scope as it relates to time. You understand that man’s paltry 100,000 years or so is nothing in the scheme of evolutionary time. In like manner, when your mother has finished this blink of a lifetime, she will love and be loved by your father forever.
As it happens, from that refere…, um perspective, she already is.
Anything is possible. That would certainly be an excellent way to design a brain. Despite my own experience in knowing God, it is even possible that God does not exist, and that the brain can recognize things without its senses, that it can “need” this or that, and that it can fall in and out of psychosis with measured precision.
Your heart is beautiful. God go with you.