Why do you believe that 'your' God is the correct one?

[Ellener]

2 hours ago, Zona said:

Don't be too proud. Take some charitable assistance to get yourself over the hump.

I was too proud at first, if I'd realised I would have claimed benefits from the start. But it's only a stipend, the pandemic unemplyment assistance, less than $200 a week which doesn't cover rent most places.

In Texas there isn't Medicaid or help for most homeless people. 

1 hour ago, Allupinnit said:

 I have "peace that passes understanding."  It transcends human cognition.  

We'll see when people start getting hungry, homeless and desperate en masse! 

 

[Allupinnit]

1 minute ago, Ellener said:

I was too proud at first, if I'd realised I would have claimed benefits from the start. But it's only a stipend, the pandemic unemplyment assistance, less than $200 a week which doesn't cover rent most places.

In Texas there isn't Medicaid or help for most homeless people. 

We'll see when people start getting hungry, homeless and desperate en masse! 

 

You do know that much of the New Testament was written under just those circumstances?  From Roman prisons.  They didn't even feed you back then.  You had to rely on your friends for that.  

[Ellener]

2 minutes ago, Allupinnit said:

You do know that much of the New Testament was written under just those circumstances?  From Roman prisons.  They didn't even feed you back then.  You had to rely on your friends for that.  

I don't think I want to go back to a world which imprisons people just for believing something, or live in a country where people routinely starve to death.

 

 

[Allupinnit]

6 minutes ago, Ellener said:

I don't think I want to go back to a world which imprisons people just for believing something, or live in a country where people routinely starve to death.

 

 

Nobody does.  But this was the world before (and shortly after) Jesus.  People were routinely fed to animals for entertainment, among other atrocities against the human race we couldn't fathom today.

My point was, you assume people abandon all faith when things aren't "right" with the world and nothing could be further from the truth.  The saying "There are no atheists in foxholes" comes to mind.  In times of trouble, people have clung to a God that has brought about supernatural healing and peace.  He never said He was going to make our lives easier.  His strength is made perfect in our weakness.

[Ellener]

4 minutes ago, Allupinnit said:

"There are no atheists in foxholes"

A Christian would go to prison rather than murder others though. 'Thou shalt not kill'. 

 

[Allupinnit]

2 minutes ago, Ellener said:

A Christian would go to prison rather than murder others though. 'Thou shalt not kill'. 

 

That phrase was coined during times of war, when soldiers would sit in foxholes awaiting death.  I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make, though?  That's not why Paul was arrested.

The nature of God is still a mystery in many ways to my finite mind and I can't begin to speak for God and why His ways don't always make sense to me.  But, then again I'm not the creator of the Universe.  I do know when I wrestle with these big questions (I like apologetics) His intent is that my relationship with Him grows and my faith goes deeper.

[Ellener]

2 minutes ago, Allupinnit said:

I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make, though?  That's not why Paul was arrested.

'foxholes' are military terminology?

[Justanaverageguy]

16 minutes ago, Allupinnit said:

My point was, you assume people abandon all faith when things aren't "right" with the world and nothing could be further from the truth.  The saying "There are no atheists in foxholes" comes to mind.  In times of trouble, people have clung to a God that has brought about supernatural healing and peace.  He never said He was going to make our lives easier.  His strength is made perfect in our weakness.

Indeed and this was my point earlier regarding how faith tends to "ebb" and "flow" over time. The general rule being. People follow God and adher to his teachings. They experience prosperity and rejuvination and innovation and the society thrives and prospers. Over a generation or two they forget the difficult times - the new generation come to think God is an unecessary distraction - faith rates decline and atheism climbs and adherence to the teaching declines. The societal situation gradually begins to deteriorate - social unrest rises - negative circumstances are experienced. Plagues, famines, wars. People flock back to God. Healing is given - social unrest decreases, negative circumstance decline. Then the cycle repeats again. 

In COVID the following passage comes to mind. 

When the skies are shut and there is no rain because Your people have sinned against You, and they pray toward this place and confess Your name, and they turn from their sins because You have afflicted them then may You hear from heaven and forgive the sin of Your servants, Your people , so that You may re-teach them the good way in which they should walk. When famine or plague comes upon the land, or when their enemies besiege them in their cities, whatever plague or sickness may come then may whatever prayer or petition Your people make—each knowing his own afflictions and spreading out his hands toward this temple be heard by You from heaven And may You forgive and repay each man according to all his ways, since You know his heart—for You alone know the hearts of men. so that they may learn and walk in Your ways all the days they live.  

 

[Zona]

4 hours ago, Ellener said:

I was too proud at first, if I'd realised I would have claimed benefits from the start. But it's only a stipend, the pandemic unemplyment assistance, less than $200 a week which doesn't cover rent most places.

In Texas there isn't Medicaid or help for most homeless people. 

Sorry to hear about your circumstances. It's heartbreaking to read about people sliding into poverty because of the pandemic.

[Trail Blazer]

17 hours ago, Emilie Jolie said:

If, as you say, you are genuinely interested, you might want to think about reframing your question in a more inviting way. If your premise is that people with faith have stopped 'using their brain', why would they want to share their experience with you?

Isn't it enough that they don't force their beliefs down your throat? Faith is a personal, intimate journey; it's not a logic thing.

I've had beliefs forced down my throat for all of my adolescence.  By both Muslims and Christians.  Granted, nobody on here has.  I have invited the discussion.

I don't mean offense by stating that one stops using their brain in order to have faith, but really, that's what it comes down to.  It's all about feelings and emotion and nothing to do with logic and reason.

 

[Trail Blazer]

16 hours ago, Curious-Sam said:

So by this you haven't listened or taken in what I've written in other posts - even though I know you read them (or at least a line or two out of them because you quoted and responded to them.)

I made it very clear what Christianity teaches on this matter. That people will be judged according to their level of understanding. I posted 2 seperate comments specifically addressing this but you keep coming back and making the exact same "straw man" argument l've already answered twice. Your pushing your own preconceived understanding about the Christian teaching and Gods judgement - rather then what it actually says.

Please take the time to read the comments I already made above along with the direct scriptural references about how the Jesus taught God would judge people. Based on their level of understanding. Based on how much they were exposed to and had the chance to learn the true teaching. The teaching specifically says in multiple places that those who never receive the teaching - their wrong actions will be punished lightly and the atonement for their sin will be made by God / Jesus. This is what I pointed out when I said the real ones to be concerned about are Christans who abandon the faith an act against the teaching. Because they don't receive the same leniency in judgement. 

The one who has been given much much will be demanded. To repeat.

Conversely the one who has been given less - less will be demanded.

Here your kind of making my point for me regarding which is the true and most beneficial teaching. I honestly don't know that much about Islamic teaching - but I gather it includes the concept of Jihad and killing anyone who opposes the religion. Their martyrdom is to kill themselves to kill others.

Christianity teaches to love your enemy. Now I'm not saying Christians are perfect and always have done that. Clearly they have not. They went against the teaching and did plenty of evil things in the past. But the point is they went against the teaching.  The teaching encourages people to turn the other cheek to pray for your enemy to repent so that they may avoid judgement. Christian matrydom is the polar opposite of Islamic matrydom. It is giving your life not to takes others lives .... But to save others lives. This is the highest form of sacrifice in Christianity which Jesus represents. 

I hope you can see the difference here - one one is considered "better" then the other. One teaching is directed towards the "highest good". That's what god is.

God favours those who follow his will. That's why he wants to spread the teaching to as many people as possible. So they can follow it - do good and be blessed. It's really that simple. This is why Christians were instructed to go an make disciples of all the nations. Because huge benefits comes from receiving the true teaching and following it. Those who are closest to doing what he asks - get the most blessings. So if the Christian teaching spreads into a community and they begin to follow it. Then they will be blessed. It's that simple. God is like the wind. He doesn't change direction. People do. And your either running with the wind at your back ... Or the wind into your face. And whilst I said above he adjusts the severity of his judgement - the strength of the wind - based on your understanding - if your going against it you still can't be blessed in this life. The light judgements on those who don't have the teaching are designed to change their behaviours. To start to change their direction and push them in the right direction. You are meant to look around and go. Wait why are we not being blessed ? Why are those people over their being favoured so much ? What are they doing that we arent? Your meant to see your neighbours garden is thriving and ask what are you doing differently? Judge a tee by the fruit it bares.

This is why Christian society's are more blessed, favoured and prosperous. They are closer to following Gods will then the other societies are. If those societies changed and began following Gods teaching .... they would also be blessed. If the Christian societies stop following the teachings - their blessings will dry up. It cuts both ways.

Like I said. How long does it take a plants leaves to wilt when it stops receiving rain ? 

How do you think Islamic people should be converted if they say they don't want the teaching ? Should we forcibly concert them ? Should we invade and indoctrinate all of them by force. At the end of the day we have advantages and disadvantages in our upbringing but the individuals still have the ability to look at the "fruit" each religion has born and make a choice.

I've read this post thoroughly and I thank you for your explanation.  I can say that I have a better understanding about how God will judge on judgement day.  A seemingly sliding scale, based on one's level of aquired knowldge.

I do, however, have a major issue with God's demands that I bless and follow his teachings.  My issue is that I find the contents of, and explanations for, life as we know it, being as the bible describes it; rathe implausible.

I do not feel as though I'm being offered salvation by accepting Jesus and his/God's teachings.  Rather, I'm being coerced into believing with threats of eternal damnation.  To me, this is not salvation, but rather extortion.

Edited December 11, 2020 by Trail Blazer

[Trail Blazer]

16 hours ago, Zona said:

You don't have to explain those things if you don't want to, but then you are just ignoring an elephant in the room and not dealing with what logically follows once you claim there was no sentient creator. That amounts to living in denial. And to say one day science will explain it is a statement of faith (believing in things unseen).

In any case, I am not talking about God of the gaps.  I'm talking about having a realistic view of how unlikely it is that the universe and life came about by accident. Just take the example of how many ways the complex proteins in our bodies can be folded (astronomical), and only a few ways are useful to life. But even if such an unlikely thing happened, that protein would be useless without all the other things that need to be  in place for life to exist. Occam's razor states that the simplest explanation is usually the right one and preferable to an overly convoluted one, and I think any reasonable person would agree with that. If life looks like an engineered system, then it most likely is.

So let's say we were travelling together in space, and land on some planet where we find a watch (or cell phone or whatever). I say it was created by a sentient being because it shows all the characteristics of purposeful design. You say, ok who created that sentient being? If you can't explain that, then I won't believe it was. That makes no sense right?

So that brings us to the first cause. If there wasn't something that always existed, then we have the problem of infinite regression (who created god? X created god, who created X? Y created X, and so on). Theists believe God is the first cause, and that he has always existed and wasn't created. Time came into existence at the same point that our universe did. We are used to things coming into existence or being created, because that is the nature our universe, but there is no requirement that time exists outside of our universe. In fact, eternal things (things that always existed) can't be subject to time because it creates a contradiction (no point in time could ever be reached, because there is an infinite amount of time before that point.

 

Science doesn't have all the answers.  Science doesn't claim absolutes like a religion does.  I don't "claim" there's no sentient creator.  I state that there is zero evidence to support religion's claim that there is one.  There's a huge difference.

It takes a high form of mental gymnastics to suggest that an atheist who holds stock in scientific evidence rather than 2,000 year old superstitions is the one in denial.  Religion requires you to deny any science which runs counter to your beleifs.

I don't have all day to explain why scientist's current understanding of how the earth was formed via a Big Bang is anything other than "an accident".  I suggest you do some research on Hubble's Law and of cosmic microwave background radiation.

If you want to talk Occam's Razor, how about we not talk about in the context of religion.  Because, if you think the simplest explanation, that being that humanity was created by god fashioning Adam out of mud and creating Eve from Adam's rib, exactly how plausible does that sound?

As for your planet analogy, exactly how do you quantify "characteristics of purposeful design"?  I mean, evolution explains why things seem purposeful in the sphere they exist in.  Literally anything that cannot adapt to its ever-changing environment will not survive. 

[Trail Blazer]

9 hours ago, Allupinnit said:

Do you "think" your way into every relationship?  My faith has never been in conflict with my intellect and what I know of the world around me; quite the contrary.  God wants your heart; it's a divine romance.  

There is a difference between a relationship between a fellow human being and a "god" who is completely intangible. 

If any human had a relationship with a being other than "god", for which there was zero evidence of its existence, it would be considered that they'd be suffering from a delusion.

A delusion is how I see everyone who has a relationship with god.  Sorry, I do not mean to offend, but that's how I see it.  Unless god proves to me he exists, he simply doesn't exist as there's no evidence.

 

[major_merrick]

15 hours ago, Ellener said:

They evolved from bloodier eras too, though in a different way- the US just lost thousands of people's lives as an economic decision, though when a policeman murdered a citizen a huge protest occured.

I don't think we need to "evolve" from our bloodier eras.  And the Book of Revelation makes it pretty clear that the worst is yet to come.

15 hours ago, Ellener said:

It depends where you look; the Bible has some pretty obnoxious passages as well as encouraging or beautiful. 

I don't find them obnoxious at all.  People like to point to the slaughters of the Canaanites in the Old Testament....but those are things included in Scripture for a reason and as an illustration of what has to happen when sin gets out of hand. 

2 Timothy 3 :16-17 makes it clear, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work."  That's all of it, including the parts some people find obnoxious. 

I will also bring up Ecclesiastes 3:

1. To everything there is a season,
A time for every purpose under heaven:

2 A time to be born,
And a time to die;
A time to plant,
And a time to pluck what is planted;
3 A time to kill,
And a time to heal;
A time to break down,
And a time to build up;
4 A time to weep,
And a time to laugh;
A time to mourn,
And a time to dance;
5 A time to cast away stones,
And a time to gather stones;
A time to embrace,
And a time to refrain from embracing;
6 A time to gain,
And a time to lose;
A time to keep,
And a time to throw away;
7 A time to tear,
And a time to sew;
A time to keep silence,
And a time to speak;
8 A time to love,
And a time to hate;
A time of war,
And a time of peace.

So there is a time for every activity.  Even unpleasant activities such as killing and war have a time, so we look to Scripture for context about what/when/why/how these things are done.

15 hours ago, Ellener said:

That's the only thing I disagree with you- the biggest problem is the people think they are following teachings, but teachings can be skewed.

How anyone can think it's okay to be wealthier than their neighbours is a pretty fundamental Jesus Christian basic, yet America has more church goers than most countries.

You mention teachings being skewed.  The modern liberal adaptation of Jesus as a progressive/socialist is something I suspect is skewed, because I don't see it in the text.  Scripture speaks frequently about money and wealth, yet I don't find being wealthy to be something that Scripture condemns.  Scripture indicates that all things are given by God, and not given equally.  In turn, Scripture teaches that to those whom much is given, much will be required.  Scripture encourages wealthy people to use wealth as a tool to accomplish God's work (instead of get in the way of it, as often happens.)  Scripture explicitly states that wealth can be a stumbling block, and that when people (like the "rich young ruler") value their wealth before their relationship with God, then it would be better to be poor. 

Interestingly, the early church (documented in the book of Acts) tried some voluntary socialism.  It failed!  Note the story of Ananias and Saphira in Acts 5.  People were donating their own property for a common cause, but these two people wanted to donate in order to appear good in front of others.  Rather than condemning them for owning property, Peter affirms their right to own and do with it what they pleased!  Instead, Peter condemns their wrong motives and their lying.   

I find that overall, the teachings of Jesus are pretty difficult to put in a neat little box.  He's not a capitalist.  He's not a socialist.  He experienced poverty, although He's the owner of everything.  He institutes the Law, but forgives people like King David who are murderers and adulterers.  His companion on the cross is a thief.  He hangs out with tax collectors and sinners.  I'm still learning about the faith....after all, I'm relatively new to it.  But the complexity of it is part of what draws me in.  So much of the moral teaching is heavily reliant on context, that it becomes more difficult to make it black and white. 

[major_merrick]

41 minutes ago, Trail Blazer said:

I do not feel as though I'm being offered salvation by accepting Jesus and his/God's teachings.  Rather, I'm being coerced into believing with threats of eternal damnation.  To me, this is not salvation, but rather extortion.

I understand how you feel, as I felt this way earlier in life.  I felt that God didn't offer me any options or help, and I thought He disliked me because of what I had to do to survive.  Turns out, that was all in my head.  We often put a coat on God - our own self alters our perception of Him. 

12 minutes ago, Trail Blazer said:

There is a difference between a relationship between a fellow human being and a "god" who is completely intangible. 

If any human had a relationship with a being other than "god", for which there was zero evidence of its existence, it would be considered that they'd be suffering from a delusion.

A delusion is how I see everyone who has a relationship with god.  Sorry, I do not mean to offend, but that's how I see it.  Unless god proves to me he exists, he simply doesn't exist as there's no evidence.

You would probably find my husband to be a pretty strange guy, then.  He talks with God...and receives a response.  Thoughts, impressions, guidance.  People who have a deep relationship with God sometimes mention this...although it might make people think they are crazy.  I can't claim it for myself, but it is kind of like the wind.  You never see it, but you see the effects.  I wish it was more consistent, but that is His choice not mine.  I've seen people healed, I've experience it myself.  Enough to know there's no natural explanation....yet it isn't like a vending machine "do these steps and reach in for your item." 

I know I'm probably not explaining this very well, but God places a premium on human choice.  There's enough of God that you can find Him if you want to.  There's little enough of God that you can avoid Him if you want to.  I'm living on the "faith" side after spending most of my life with no faith.  I might be able to describe it better if I had more time doing life this way. 

[Allupinnit]

27 minutes ago, Trail Blazer said:

There is a difference between a relationship between a fellow human being and a "god" who is completely intangible. 

If any human had a relationship with a being other than "god", for which there was zero evidence of its existence, it would be considered that they'd be suffering from a delusion.

A delusion is how I see everyone who has a relationship with god.  Sorry, I do not mean to offend, but that's how I see it.  Unless god proves to me he exists, he simply doesn't exist as there's no evidence.

 

I'm not offended.  Faith is an individual journey and I once much felt the same as you, so I understand.  

 

[Zona]

2 hours ago, Trail Blazer said:

If you want to talk Occam's Razor, how about we not talk about in the context of religion.  Because, if you think the simplest explanation, that being that humanity was created by god fashioning Adam out of mud and creating Eve from Adam's rib, exactly how plausible does that sound?

I am not a fundamentalist and I know parables are a big part of the Jewish religious tradition, so I think a lot of the old testament is not to be taken literally. Even so, we are basically made out the same stuff mud is. Other religions at the time were claiming that humans were created by magic at the hands of various gods who just poofed us into existence. The old testament reference to being made out of the same material that the earth is, is actually pretty profound for a book at least 3000 years old. It's technically correct.

Edited December 11, 2020 by Zona

[Zona]

2 hours ago, Trail Blazer said:

 

 

2 hours ago, Trail Blazer said:

Science doesn't have all the answers.  Science doesn't claim absolutes like a religion does.  I don't "claim" there's no sentient creator.  I state that there is zero evidence to support religion's claim that there is one.  There's a huge difference.

I don't know if you are mathematically inclined, but in mathematics, we have something called proof  by contradiction. It's used more generally in basic logic also. You assume what you are trying to prove to be false. If it creates a contradiction (something that is always false), then you have proved it true.

Basically everything I have written is a proof by contradiction. We have two cases that are either true or false and only one can be true. 1) The universe and life were designed and created by the will of a sentient being (i.e. God, by any definition). 2) The universe and life came into existence by random forces just getting lucky.

I assumed 2 to be true, and then showed the contradictions created by that assumption. 

You saying there is zero evidence is basically just an assertion without anything to back it up, and ignores all the points I brought up that you mostly avoided dealing with.

Not that I am one to judge. I was were you are until my early to mid 20's.

 

[Trail Blazer]

1 hour ago, Zona said:

I am not a fundamentalist and I know parables are a big part of the Jewish religious tradition, so I think a lot of the old testament is not to be taken literally. Even so, we are basically made out the same stuff mud is. Other religions at the time were claiming that humans were created by magic at the hands of various gods who just poofed us into existence. The old testament reference to being made out of the same material that the earth is, is actually pretty profound for a book at least 3000 years old. It's technically correct.

It's correct in that human life (all life on earth) comprises of organic material.  However, that's hardly the point that's beindlg made. 

Human beings as we have evolved to be today, did not just materialize out of dirt.  I'm glad that you're at least not so fundamental that you take everything in the bible literally.

[Justanaverageguy]

4 hours ago, major_merrick said:

I don't think we need to "evolve" from our bloodier eras.  And the Book of Revelation makes it pretty clear that the worst is yet to come.

This may be opening up a "can of worms" that isn't really in alignment with the topic - but I find it interesting to discuss with fellow believers so hopefully its ok to post. My understanding is the vast majority of what is spoken about in the book of revelation and the other apocalypic literature that goes with it - the prophecy of Daniel and also Jesus words regarding the "end of the age" in Matthew 24 has already happened 2000 years ago. It has long since been and gone. Specifically it culminated with the Roman Siege of Jerusalem in 70AD when the second temple was destroyed (Which Jesus says will be the key sign of the fulfillment of the prophecy) and almost all jewish people alive at the time were slaughtered and killed by the Romans. 

I'm not going to force any beliefs down your throat - its up to each individual to study scripture and history and evaluate and consider what it says and I'm sure you have been taught to interpret apoccalyptic scripture differently but maybe just something to consider and look at. I was initially told something similar - then I actually read the texts closely - looked at translations - and looked at history and what happened also discussed with many other Christian teachers. 

Jesus in Matthew 24 talks about his  "second coming" and "the end of the age". Some older bibles mis-translate this passage as the "end of the world" or "end times". The original greek word used is "aion" - which doesn't mean end of the world. "Aion" means a specific span of time. Its where the word "eon" comes from in english which we use to split out geological ages when we study the earths history. Separate distinct spans of time. Its basically a bookend to one designated "Span of time" and the beginning of another. Its the same word jesus uses when he talks about blasphemy against the holy spirit. Which won't be forgiven in this "aion" or the "aion" to come. Typically now most bibles translate this as "Age".  

aión: a space of time, an age
Original Word: αἰών, ῶνος, ὁ
Phonetic Spelling: (ahee-ohn')
Definition: a space of time, an age
Usage: an age, a cycle (of time), especially of the present age as contrasted with the future age, and of one of a series of ages stretching to infinity.

Daniels prophecy, Jesus descriptions of the end of the Age and Revelation are all talking about the end of the previous age. The age Jesus came to usher and end to.  We have of course literally split time into BC/AD specifically around this time period designating the difference in the two ages. The destruction and slaughter spoken of at the end of the "aion" was the destruction of Jerusalem During the first roman Jewish war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_(70_CE)  - 3 days before passover when all the jewish people in the land had descended upon Jerusalem to celebrate the festival- The Roman army sieged the city - burnt the temple to the ground and massacred the Jewish inhabitants men women and children. Josephus a jewish man who worked as a historian for Rome states that 1.1 million Jews were killed in the sige and only 97,000 survived and were taken as prisoners to be used as slaves or gladiators in the roman Colosseum.

This is why Jesus said - this generation will not pass away before all these things come to pass.  
This is why Jesus mourned when he road into Jeruslem on a donkey. 

And when he drew near and saw the city, he wept over it, 42 saying, “Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. 43 For the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up a barricade around you and surround you and hem you in on every side 44 and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation.”

The christian teachers I've spoken with basically call this the "Day of the Lord" and that since Jesus took control of the earth these repetitive cycles of judgement repeat themselves continously every generation depending on how that generation behaves. Just looking at modern history these periods would be marked by events like  WW1 ..... WW2 .... etc. Its a cyclical and repetitive process. 

Edited December 11, 2020 by Justanaverageguy

[Justanaverageguy]

4 hours ago, major_merrick said:

You mention teachings being skewed.  The modern liberal adaptation of Jesus as a progressive/socialist is something I suspect is skewed, because I don't see it in the text.  Scripture speaks frequently about money and wealth, yet I don't find being wealthy to be something that Scripture condemns.  Scripture indicates that all things are given by God, and not given equally.  In turn, Scripture teaches that to those whom much is given, much will be required.  Scripture encourages wealthy people to use wealth as a tool to accomplish God's work (instead of get in the way of it, as often happens.)  Scripture explicitly states that wealth can be a stumbling block, and that when people (like the "rich young ruler") value their wealth before their relationship with God, then it would be better to be poor. 

Yep this is pretty close to what I was saying. Blessings and abundance including wealth and prosperity are poured out on those blessed by God. And he never says people "have to" give up all their wealth" but he does challenge them to do this and he does condemn rich people who don't give. (Parable of the Rich fool).  He primarily focuses on generosity to others and basically challenges people to go "all in".  He makes it blindingly clear that those who do will be the most rewarded. Where your treasure is - there will your heart be also. Lay not up for yourself treasures on earth. 

The path to "greatness" in gods eyes in made clear. To the one who wants to be great - they must become like a servant for others. And to the one who wants to be the first and greatest. They must become just like a slave. Just as the son of man came to serve - not to be served"

The 'ideal' or 'perfect' christian is the weird contradiction of being filthy rich and blessed beyond all measure - but acting like a slave who has nothing and devotes themselves and their entire resources towards the service of others. In a nutshell - Jesus. 

Edited December 11, 2020 by Justanaverageguy

[basil67]

2 hours ago, Justanaverageguy said:

Blessings and abundance including wealth and prosperity are poured out on those blessed by God.

hmmm... my athiest family is doing pretty well for ourselves.  I would say that this is due to hubby's hard work in a high demand job combined with riding an insane property market.    Is God also giving wealth blessings to non believers, or can people get wealthy without God?

 

[Justanaverageguy]

56 minutes ago, basil67 said:

hmmm... my athiest family is doing pretty well for ourselves.  I would say that this is due to hubby's hard work in a high demand job combined with riding an insane property market.    Is God also giving wealth blessings to non believers, or can people get wealthy without God?

Yes sure they can - but there are a few caveats I would add here.

Generally the ability of an individual to prospor is dependant on the state of the society they exist within. In my previous posts I've frequently used the metaphor of societies or countries being like "Gardens" and a good way to compare "faiths" is to compare the end results of countries were the majority of individuals followed them. Plants don't exist on their own in isolation. They are not islands unto themselves. The health of the overall garden determines to a large extent the health of the plants within it. Thus prosperity on large scales - has a lot do with the majority and past history of what people in the society did ...... more then just the individual themselves. Would your husband be as successful if he was born in Nigeria ? In Indonesia ? In Turkey ? In Russia ?

The point is to look at what the society was based around ? What is its history and traditions ? What are the ethics that were passed down from generation to generation over time and where did they come from ? What has been the majority of other people in that societies historical approach to faith, connection with God, ethics and social interactions with others in the community and how did that shape the structure of the society ? Basically how did the society reach the point it is today where people are able to thrive on a large scale.  You as an individual are a product of your culture - you are standing on the shoulders of all the people who came before you. 

I said above Atheists in the west today are to me like children of rich parents who share owned a well maintained and healthy vibrant community garden. It had been passed down from generation to generation going through droughts and storms - but surviving and continuing to thrive. Their parents handed them the keys with instructions to maintain the garden. Water and fertilize it - and follow these rules that our parents gave to us and their parents gave to them to ensure its future health and survival. 

They decided they didn't need to water and fertlize the garden. Thats a silly idea. No evidence a garden needs water - we are doing just fine without watering it. Meanwhile a huge amount of other people are going around still watering the garden they share.  

Then on the rules they were given. I love the line Jordan Peterson used when arguing with an Atheist from the USA about the existence of God. He stated simply: "You say you don't believe in the existence of the Christian God - but because of your upbringing - you still behave like you believe he exists"

The point was the ethics and behaviour that western people are taught and raised into (things which they take completely for granted - but which are a rarity in other societies) was not always present in societies and isn't normal or the "default" state. It took generations and generations to "embed" christian ethics into Western society and now they just assume these are "normal". They aren't. Go and travel the world and you will see. 

As people move away from the faith - the adherence to the traditional ethics wanes - less people are watering. Less people are following the rules as closely. You see this slow but progressive regression in the society. Political unreset. Social unrest. People are less happy and friendly. There is more controversy and attacks on people. The garden begins to show signs of "wilting". 

Edited December 11, 2020 by Justanaverageguy

[Wiseman2]

Atheism is a monotheistic belief system.  Many systems were and still are polytheistic, animistic, etc.

Ultimately the whole my God/beliefs are better than your God/beliefs have caused most of the world's pain, suffering and conflicts. 

 

[5x5]

1 hour ago, Wiseman2 said:

Atheism is a monotheistic belief system.

It isn't, atheism is simply a lack of belief in any gods.