Science is needed

Science is good

Science is theory


Without God no science

Without God no Bible

Bible is not a theory

God is not a theory

God just is

my answer was no because i already see many things unfold just as the bible describes, so seeing more of it would not alter my opinion or perception of the bible.



i disagree somewhat with feralcatlady. science is also observation and fact and exists with or without the concept of God.

The point about ‘believing’ in a certain picture of God seems utterly ill-informed to me.

Why would God want to play guessing games?

God would surely be aware of all the different ways that humans might imagine what God is like.

Why would it be important that people ‘guess’ the right picture?

Especially with a God that plays hide and seek, and refuses to reveal himself in any way?

What’s wrong with believing in the pantheistic view of God?

Why are Christians so sure that pantheism isn’t the correct view of God?

The pantheistic view of God is absolute perfection. Anything else is a lesser picture of God.

If people have to ‘guess’ which picture is correct, why would they choose the lesser picture of God?

Wouldn’t it be an insult to God to guess that God is less than perfect?

How could God possibly be upset with anyone who guesses so highly?

That would be the ultimate compliment wouldn’t it?

It seems to me that people expect God to be really stupid.

What kind of a God would be upset that someone believes that God is perfect?

The biblical picture of God is far inferior to the pantheistic view of God, IMHO.

For me to believe in the biblical picture of God I would need to believe that God is far less than perfect.

Moreover, how could it be that I can imagine a picture of God that would be more beautiful that God actually is?

That seems like a paradox to me right there.

A mere mortal can imagine a God more perfect that God than actually is???

That would imply that my imagination is superior to God.

But how could that be????

Since I’m forced to guess, I’m going to guess the best possible picture.

And for me that’s the pantheistic view. It’s absolute perfection. I can’t imagine a more perfect God.

The biblical picture of God is extremely demented, perverted and ugly to me.

That God actually told people to stone people to death, and lots of other horrible stuff.

It’s a terrible picture of a jealous God who throws temper tantrums when he doesn’t get his way.

A God that was so incompetent that the only way he could figure out how to create Free Will was to also create Hell.

The pantheistic God is far more intelligent. She created Free Will without any need to create Hell.

She also wasn’t bothered by any rebellious angels who weren’t happy living in her ‘perfect’ heaven.

Sorry for the laugh, but really there’s just no comparison here. The biblical picture of God is a picture of a seriously inferior God.

He created a heaven that 33% of his angels were unhappy with?

That doesn’t sound like such a perfect place, now does it?

Yep, I’m guessing Pantheism all the way.

God is BEAUTIFUL! And she’s INTELLIGENT too!

(This has been a public service announcement for God’s sake)

i generally agree with you abra on this and i don't believe in a specific picture of God. there does not need to be any revelation about the nature of God however.

nothing wrong with the pantheistic view of God either - although this is also a kind of specific view...

there is no reason why the biblical god cannot also be a pantheistic god.

so there! thhhhhhup!

Isnt science a way for humanity to explain the unexplainable? The Age of Reason was all about making the world around us an understandable place, where things happened for a Reason and not just because of the whim of god.

Miracles are still all around us everyday but are dismissed because either science explains them and takes away the magic or because science cant explain them and dismisses them as "not possible".

I think the original topic was sound and a good example of what has happened to humanity as a result of reason and modernisim. We have torn ourselves away from the natural world and no longer feel connected, so we need scientific "proof" of god's existence/nonexistence. We are caught between two worlds, science and nature, and we really dont have faith in either.

Personally it doesnt matter to me whether god exists, so I dont care if god can be proven to be or not.

I agree, but the Bible Thumpers get really peeved when I suggest their daddy might be a girl.




But really, I do sincerely agree with you. When I read the Bible with a pantheistic view I see the pantheistic nature of God all though the Bible. And this allows me to see which of the authors were talking about the real God and which one's were just making crap up as they went along.

I think a lot was lost in translations too because the people who were doing the translating were thinking in terms of a deity-like Godhead rather than truly understanding that spiritual nature of God.

There are many things in the Bible that clearly referred to the pantheistic nature of God. No doubt about it.

I think one thing that so many people seem to really miss is the fact that the Bible is not a book!!!

It’s a collection of stories that were written at different times by different people and it was never intended to be a single ‘book’. King James was the one who was responsible for collecting separate stories into a single cannon and calling that his ‘holy book’.

Unfortunately King James included stories that clearly weren’t written about the real living God. And that’s a real shame, but it’s all water over the dam now.

But yes, I believe Jesus was God! I’m a pantheist! I believe everyone is God!

However, I might point out that not everyone is in harmony with the spirit. Some people are ‘closer’ to God in the sense that they are in more harmony with her. And Jesus was definitely in harmony with God, as was Buddha, and many other sages throughout history. Some of them weren’t even into ‘religion’.

God doesn’t care about religion. Religion is a manmade concept. All God cares about is everything else.

I totally agree...

I would think religion would be the last thing God would care about... except in that religion ends up effecting creation- usually in a destructive manner.

Science disproves what it can disprove, doesn't necassarily set out to just disprove one thing (in this case religion). Religion is not what science is disproving, science is trying to figure out where and how we started as a civilization within imaginable means (sorry, but Adam and Eve is hard to believe)...shame is religion always has this idea that science is attacking it in some way or for some reason and that just isn't true.

I know you believe this but this is utterly absurd.

I’ll never understand why so many people think there can only be one picture of God and the Bible has to be it. There is seriously no reason whatsoever to believe that that Bible came from God. None!

I have nothing against the biblical God, other than it simply appears to me to be an utterly stupid picture. Far to intelligent to have been the thoughts of the creator of this universe.

The pantheistic picture of God is a much more intelligent picture.

If you have to potential ways of thinking of a supposedly supernatural creator, and one of them is riddled with imperfections, and the other one is perfect, why would you choose the imperfect picture?

The Pantheistic God didn’t created an unruly devil. She didn’t have angels rebel against her in her supposedly perfect heaven. She had no need to create a hell, and her love is truly unconditional.

The biblical God had a myriad of problems with his creation. Nothing ever seemed to go right for him and it appears that all he’s interested in is becoming recognized as the king and lord of his very own creation.

I see pantheism as a perfect picture of a perfect God. I see the biblical picture as a seriously flawed invention of inept men.

I just don’ t believe that God is a bumbling idiot. My choice of how I view God is very well thought out and wasn’t driven by any kind of emotional turmoil or disappointment with God. The Bible just isn’t the word of God. Period. It’s not a matter of rejecting God. It’s a matter of rejecting mythology.

Would you suggest that the reason that people rejected Greek Religion is because they were mad at the Greek Gods? I don’t think so. You’d just recognize that they realized the story was bogus.

Well, that’s precisely the way I view the Bible. PRECISELY!

No need to bring emotion into the picture at all.

By the way, I was just joking about God having gender. But I do know that bible thumpers do quite often get really upset when people suggest that God is anything other than a fatherly figure.

As to your comments about God being a lesbian. I personally thing that’s extremely silly. If a female God wanted to make a female moral pregnant via a miracle I don’t think anyone would consider that to be a lesbian act.

I’m mean, it’s not like God came down to earth and had sex with Mary, like Zeus supposedly did with mortal women.

So you base your beliefs on what offends the most people?

Spider,

I like your question. Its fascinating that people can't bring themselves to answer if they saw with their own eyes the impossible and a direct revelation they still wouldn't believe. That is not logical at all. If you accept the premise there could only be one honest answer.

a reminder about the queestion...

it has 2 parts. part 1 is would your personal observations ever make you reject accepted science?

the answer to this is easy! yes! that is what scientists do every day! this is the definition of science.

part 2 is would your personal observations ever make you embrace the bible instead of accepted science?

this is a trick question since you can embrace the bible without rejecting science. so there is never any problem
about embracing the bible regardless of your scientific
views.

Where did you come up with that?

This is a prime example of your type of conclusion-jumping that has no basis in anything. Thank you for this perfect example of how illogical all your conclusions are.

This is true.

Plus a lot of people who reject the Bible do so for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with science.

I, for one, reject the Bible because of it's own self-inconsistencies, and because the God of the Old Testament doesn't seem to have anything in common with the God of the New Testament. They appear to have completely differnet personas to me.

So my rejection of the Bible has nothing at all to do with science. I just see it as a self-inconsistent story about a God that is supposedly all-wise, all-powerful, all-knowing, and unchanging yet he displays just the opposite of all these traits all the way though the Bible. He does really stupid things, he doesn’t seem to have much control over how anything turns out, he seems to always be surprised by the choices men make, and for someone who is supposedly unchanging he seems to be always changing his plans, his persona, and even his mood.

No need to call upon science. The whole mythology is self-destructive IMHO.

Having said that, I believe that parts of it could have been inspired by the real God, but certainly not all of it. As individual stories they may have some value, especially moral value as parables. Taken as a single all-inclusive history book it makes no sense to me at all. God would need to be suffering from multiple personality disorder.

Abra,

There is clearly a big difference between the two. The Original (old) testament was given by G-d directly to Moses at Sinai. Where the new testament to my understanding was written by disciples of Jesus years later. One is directly from G-d and the other is from humans. I wouldn't expect them to be consistent.

I have covered for you in other threads how the wars were just and based on the cruelty of the nations attacking the nation of Israel. There is nothing inconsistent in the Bible. There is great mystery and many levels of interpretation for those capable of understanding at a deeper level. G-d gave the Bible for everyone. Obviously not everyone has the same level of sophistication so He made it understandable at many different levels.

An intelligent person understands that when G-d said, "Let there be light." and Steve says, "Turn on the light" that its two very different statements even if the words are the same.

You are very quick to throw up your hands the second you come across a contradiction. Take some time to search for answers before throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

It only appears that way to you because you have not walked in my moccasins.

I’ve considered all of this in great depth for almost a half a century now. I believe that my conclusions are as sounds as they can possibly be. I make no snap judgments about anything.

The bible was never intended to be a single book. That was the work of man. To act like it is a single book is seriously ludicrous.

It is a grave misunderstanding to believe that the biblical picture of God is either complete or precise. That is my own personal conclusion. And that will never change. If the God of the Bible turns out to be true then God is a demented perverted monster. I won’t say that’s impossible, but if that’s what God is then cowering down to it just to save your own butt probably isn’t going to pan out in the end anyway. That would be like surrendering to Hitler and agreeing to forever be his slave just to avoid his wrath.

The pantheistic picture of God is absolute perfection. It’s totally harmonious and makes perfect sense.

Why should I choose a perverted sick and inconsistent picture of a God over a perfectly flawless picture of God?

What would be my motivation to do such an absurd thing? Just out of fear that God might truly be a demented monster? Worshiping a demented monster probably isn’t going to be a wise thing to do in the long run anyway.

The bottom line for me is that if God isn’t at least as nice as I am, then it isn’t a very supreme being.

On the other hand, if God is as nice as I am, then I’m headed for Seventh Heaven. No doubt about it!

The only way I could end up in a bad situation is if God is a real jerk. And if that’s the case then it’s not a God anyway but a demon.

Can you follow that logic?

And if it’s flawed logic please explain, but keep in mind that your explanation must be ego-less, because if your explanation requires an arrogant jealous God then that equates God to being lesser than me which only validates my original argument.

God can't be lesser than me.

THEREFORE GOD MUST BE SUPERIOR TO ME!

I know how nice I am!!!

God has to be more intelligent, more forgiving, wiser, and more loving than me. (i.e. God has to be nicer than me)

What more do I need to know?

If you can’t understand this logic I can only imagine that it’s because you aren’t nice and therefore you have no understanding of what nice truly is. As long as God is nicer than me I haven’t a care in the world. God loves me perfectly and there are no problems here. There’s no way that God could possibly reject me, because God would need to be lesser than me to do that.

No need to idolize any old books on mythology. God has to be nicer than me. Period. That’s a given. And as long as this is true, then I'm in great shape.

Seriously Abra,

I can't see how you are an honest truth seeker with statements like:

"If the God of the Bible turns out to be true then God is a demented perverted monster. I won't say that’s impossible, but if that’s what God is then cowering down to it just to save your own butt probably isn't going to pan out in the end anyway. That would be like surrendering to Hitler and agreeing to forever be his slave just to avoid his wrath.

...Why should I choose a perverted sick and inconsistent picture of a God over a perfectly flawless picture of God?

What would be my motivation to do such an absurd thing? Just out of fear that God might truly be a demented monster? Worshiping a demented monster probably isn't going to be a wise thing to do in the long run anyway.

The bottom line for me is that if God isn't at least as nice as I am, then it isn't a very supreme being."

How can you tell me that you actually see this in the Bible? Even people who don't believe that the Bible is divine don't have this twisted picture of G-d based on the Bible. Clearly there is an emotional component to your evaluation and I would guess that it is based on negative experiences you have had with religious folks. While I sympathize with your anguish, that is not a clear headed logical basis for seeing cruelty in the Bible or in G-d when there is none. G-d is the ultimate being of love. Like I said if you have particular questions about different things in the Bible then investigate them. Don't jump to an emotional conclusion.

If you are honestly open to seeing things with an open mind, why don't we examine things a bit closer? Pick ONE example from the original (old) testament of what you would call G-ds cruelty and I would be happy to discuss it with you and perhaps show you how its not cruel at all but an act of love.

Not it’s not clear at all. It can’t possibly be clear because it isn’t true. My reasons are pure intellectual logic, there’s no emotion involved with it at all.



Ok, fornication is considered to be a sin. I’m not going to search for any particular versus right now that say that this is God’s law, but if it isn’t God’s law than a LOT of Christians are under the wrong impression about what the law of the Bible says.

Now, first of all, don’t confuse fornication with ‘adultery’, these are two entirely differnet terms.

Let’s use the following very simple definition for fornication and if you disagree with this definition then just say so, because I’m basing my statements on nothing more than the very pure and simple definition.

Fornication - voluntary sexual intercourse between persons not married to each other.

Based on the above definition, two responsible people who genuinely care about each other and are not in any way cheating, lying, or breaking any commitments to anyone would be committing the sin of fornication if they engaged in sexual intercourse with each other for the sake of sharing purely loving intimacy.

I do not believe that God would consider such a beautiful sincere and loving act to be wrong or sinful in any way. Assuming that the people involved are indeed responsible and genuinely care about each other.

We’re not talking here about having grossly perverted orgies with strangers in a totally carefree manner just for the sake of physical indulgence. We talking about LOVE between two people who, for whatever reason, simply aren’t interested in making a life-time commitment to each other. OR,… perhaps they are considering that possibility but aren’t prepared to make it YET just for the sake of sharing physical intimacy early on.

In short, I know that there have been many times in my life when the act of fornication would have been a beautiful thing and possibly even may have led to marriage, simply because of the emotional bonds that may have grown deeper due to this level of intimacy.

When I was young I had personally rejected opportunities to commit fornication because I was taught that it was wrong in the eyes of God. Well, in hindsight, I have serious doubts that my dedication to the law of God was even the slightest bit positive. I see my desire to satisfy the law of God as having been a seriously detrimental event in my life that may well have led to my eventual status of having never married. All because sex was deemed to be a negative thing by the religion that I followed?

That kind of detrimental negativity can’t possibly be from God. Why should God frown on anything that is done with genuinely LOVE and AFFECTION?

Like I say, I’m not talking about careless insignificant perverted orgies here, I’m talking about genuinely LOVING premarital sexual intimacy.

Moreover, (and I’m not even if it actually says this in the Bible), but I was taught that having any form of sex outside of marriage is against God’s will. Even other forms of sexual release and pleasure that are not specifically intercourse are considered to be at the very least ‘ungodly’ if not actual sins.

I just personally don’t believe that God would consider such a beautiful act to be wrong. Especially when the participants are sincere and responsible and genuinely care for each other.

So, no, I don’t believe that God would make such an asinine law. I believe that ‘law’ was made up by men who had perverted minds.

I don’t believe that God has a perverted mind. I believe that God understands things like ‘innocence’, ‘genuine love’, and responsibility. God wouldn’t just make a blanket law that assumes that everyone who wants to have premarital sex is thinking in terms of perversion and a need to fulfill pure selfish lust.

In short, God would know better than the perverted idiots who wrote the Bible.

Period.

God would know that sincere well-intentional people like me are out here! And therefore he would address them.

The fact that the Bible doesn’t address decent people proves to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that it can’t possibly have been written by my creator. My creator would have had a better clue about who and what he had created.

The bible was written by perverted thinking men who were just attempting to keep the masses in line. And they didn’t want to be bothered trying to write in all the details that might be applicable to genuinely sincere and well-meaning responsible people. Instead they just address what they saw as the average tendency of Joe Blow on the street.

The Bible was written to keep perverts in line. God would have known better! God would have realized that a laws aimed at perverts would only serve to cause decent people to have unhealthy feelings of guilt and inhibitions concerting genuine acts of true love and affection.

In short, the Bible isn’t intelligent enough to have been written by God. It’s a really lame excuse for the mind of a supreme being. God wouldn’t be so lame. God would have known how to address the real issues that needed to be addressed.

Clearly the men who wrote the bible were quite limited in their ability to comprehend human nature in it’s totality. Had the book been genuinely written by the creator of humanity it would reflect the knowledge of that creator.

The Bible does not reflect that kind of knowledge, therefore it clearly wasn’t written by a Supreme Creator. The Supreme Creator would have known better.

It’s that simple.

Humanity is too complex to be reduced to laws carved in stone or written in the pages of a book. The Supreme Creator would know this and therefore wouldn’t write a book. Instead the Supreme Creator would communicate with each individual directly. And this is what I believe God actually does!

In fact, when I was growing up I never intuitively felt that there was anything wrong with fornication! That was God trying to communicate with me directly saying to me that for me there isn’t anything wrong with fornication because I will only act on it out of LOVE and with every intention of being completely responsible for any results that act might have!

God knew that my intentions were just and TRUE, and were therefore perfectly divine.

Yet, it was the LOGICAL side of me that had been taught by religion that fornication was wrong that gave me hesitation to act on my TRUE and GENUINELY SINCERE natural instincts.

Religion actually caused me to ignore God and to allow the perverted thoughts of men to rule my life!

So yes, perhaps I am a bit peeved with the religion itself. But certainly not with God!

As far as I’m concerned God has nothing to do with that disgusting perverted manmade religion.

So yes, I guess I do have some negative emotion associated with the religion itself. But to claim that this negativity is directed toward God is utterly absurd.

The negative emotion I feel toward the religion stems from the very fact that it is a LIE! It’s not the word of God. It’s nothing more than the sick demented perversions of men who can’t think deep enough to imagine what all of humanity might actually be like.

That was my ONE thing that you requested. The stupidity of just making blanket laws and claiming that they came from God.

So just as a reminder,…



Now, you tell me how making decent well-meaning sincere responsible people inhibited about sharing loving intimacy is not cruel but an act of love. It’s ludicrous that responsible sincere people should be made to feel guilty about sharing loving intimacy at the premarital level. Especially for those who may even see matrimony in their future but for whatever reason just aren’t in a position to be making a life-long commitment yet.

Go ahead and give it your best shot. I seriously doubt that you’ll convince me. I’ll probably just reply to you that your arguments are ‘petty’. And I’ll sincerely mean it. I don’t believe that God is ‘petty’.

~~~

You only asked for ONE thing, but along similar lines,….

Another thing, which I won’t buy into is the idea that ’all men are sinners’. Again this just more blaspheme that has absolutely nothing to do with reality or God. It’s just a sick perverted blanket statement that can only serve to make decent men feel guilty for no apparent reason. It belittles humanity with pre-judgments that are totally unwarranted. I don’t believe that God would make such a blanket statement. This is clearly the thoughts of men who are attempting to control the masses and want to make sure no one feels like they are above the churches authority! So it throws a blanket of pre-guilt on everyone and sets up a situation where no man can claim to have nothing to confess!

I don't believe that a Supreme Creator of this universe would be motivated to make everyone feel unduly guilty. That's an underhanded tactic of men who are attempting to get people under the thumb of their religious authority.