The Official God F.A.Q.

[TrustAndObey]

The eternal consequences of choice.

Personally, I have no great respect for a god who will evaporated, dunk in a lake of fire, stick in eternal hell or what have you--anyone who isn't part of his religion.

The cruel bully guys who just happened to pick Christianity get in, that warm and kind Hindu couple down the street are out.

I see you haven't a clue about what Christianity is really about. Only what the religios self-righteous ones talk about.. Has nothing to do with picking a religion or believing one thing as opposed to another.. That all goes back to making Christianity a "works" based religion. Based on you doing this or that.. Believing this or that.. Nah.. Not according to the Christian scriptures it's not. Only the self-righteous or ill-informed ones believe such a thing..

[TrustAndObey]

Sorry, T&O and Oak, it was unintentional.

I was not trying to be sarcastic or inflammatory...really. But I would like some elaboration because I really didn't understand.

But if my query goes unanswered that is ok as well.

I am not sure I can really answer your question there... I don't use the phrase "doing the trutth", although I am sure I have heard it used before in TWI. I also did not bring the phrase up in this discussion. It wasn't until Oakspear asked me my opinion concerning the phrase that I responded..

Doing the truth is nothing more than a cliche to me.. A 'catch phrase' used by those who think they know the truth and therefore are doing what is right (mostly those who are self-righteous in some sense of the word)! Only, as Christians we would be wise to realize that the Apostle Paul said we see through a dark glass for now..

While there are some "truths" I think we can know, there are more things we believe. As most Jewish rabbi's will readily admit, there are always more questions than answers., however it is learning to rest in what God has revealed rather than being blown about trying to figure out what He has not.

[lindyhopper]

I see you haven't a clue about what Christianity is really about. Only what the religios self-righteous ones talk about.. Has nothing to do with picking a religion or believing one thing as opposed to another.. That all goes back to making Christianity a "works" based religion. Based on you doing this or that.. Believing this or that.. Nah.. Not according to the Christian scriptures it's not. Only the self-righteous or ill-informed ones believe such a thing..

I would like to think I have a pretty good understanding of what much of the Bible is talking about. I would also think that most serious Christians would think the same, in spite of their respective denominations or non-denominations.

So, if it is not about believeing one thing over another and not about doing one thing over another....then what exactly is it all about?

[cman]

so possibly some godly, selfless motives lindy?

[lindyhopper]

So it's not about believing or doing but about motives?

Selfless motives are usually attached to selfless acts or "works." The motives themselves would have to be formed from some sort of belief wouldn't it?

Just trying to figure out what you're saying here. Your one sentence answer(?) is a little vague.

[TrustAndObey]

Hosea - "I desire mercy and not sacrifice, and ackowledgment of God not burnt offerings..."

Psalms 40 - "Blessed is that man that maketh the LORD his trust, and respecteth not the proud, nor such as turn aside to lies. Many, O LORD my God, are thy wonderful works which thou hast done,and thy thoughts which are to us-ward: they cannot be reckoned up in order unto thee: if I would declare and speak of them, they are more than can be numbered. Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire;mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required. Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart. "

The law was for the lawless who continue to keep "part" of it to today,and so they may remain in their self-righteous attitude attributing their "works", even works of believing, till their dying breath.

The Jewish/Christian God is a Father, a Father who gave. A Father who cherishes and cares for His works. But like many who do want they want, those works that were made forsook their creator, and all the Father desires is they return back to Him that he may love and care for them. Mercy amd acknowledgment. Pure and simple.

[lindyhopper]

I'm sorry, I'm obviously missing something. Perhaps it is that I don't know your specific ideas of who and what God is etc.. It is hard to keep everyone's specific beliefs straight.

I see you haven't a clue about what Christianity is really about. Only what the religios self-righteous ones talk about.. Has nothing to do with picking a religion or believing one thing as opposed to another.. That all goes back to making Christianity a "works" based religion. Based on you doing this or that.. Believing this or that.. Nah.. Not according to the Christian scriptures it's not. Only the self-righteous or ill-informed ones believe such a thing..

The law was for the lawless who continue to keep "part" of it to today,and so they may remain in their self-righteous attitude attributing their "works", even works of believing, till their dying breath.

The Jewish/Christian God is a Father, a Father who gave. A Father who cherishes and cares for His works. But like many who do want they want, those works that were made forsook their creator, and all the Father desires is they return back to Him that he may love and care for them. Mercy amd acknowledgment. Pure and simple.

How is this not a believing of one thing over another and a doing of one thing over another, or a not doing one thing over another (same thing really). Mercy is a work and acknowledgment of God is a belief.

How is this any different from what Bramble described...

The cruel bully guys who just happened to pick Christianity get in, that warm and kind Hindu couple down the street are out.

Do niether of them get in, because one has mercy and not acknowledgment and the other has acknowledgement and not mercy?

Or are you saying that as long as you seek God whether it be in a Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, or Budist way, as long as you are trying to turn towards God and are merciful he will accept you into heaven? I still see that as based on belief and works.

The only way I can see it having nothing to do with works or believing is Universalism.

Honestly, I don't see humans doing much of anything else outside of believing and doing something other than thinking about what they believe or what they have done and what they will do next. Am I wrong?

[TrustAndObey]

Desire and requirement are two different things. If you mix the two up, you have works!

Universalism is the acceptance that any belief is ok, aka, believe what you want, do you what you want, call it your religion, and now were ok.. That is completely different than a heart that strives..

Edited March 26, 2007 by TrustAndObey

[lindyhopper]

Desire and requirement are two different things. If you mix the two up, you have works!

Ok, but you could have someone who desires that you fulfill a requirement. The desire and the requirement could be the same thing. This is how I see desires and requirements. A desire is something that I may have that ends without consequence. A requirement is more like an "if, then" statement. If you don't do this, then that will happen, or if you do that, then this will happen. Some desires I have for other people and for myself will also be requirements. Lets say I am in school. I may desire to get an "A", but if I get an "F" I will fail. If I continue to get A's I will be on the honor role. If I continue to get F's I will have to take the class over again. It is probably the desire of my teacher, principal, and school board that I and everyone else get A's all the time, but if we don't we will not all get on the honor role. Simple enough.

This started with Bramble bringing up what she seemed to feel was an unjust requirement to get into heaven. So if mercy and acknowledgement of God are not requirements, just a desire, are there other requirements to get into heaven? The way I understand Universalism is that God will bring everyone to heaven regardless of your beliefs or works, all will be saved. Most everyone else has a requirement. Requirements in that case are required beliefs or works to get into heaven.

So if you are not a Universalist and you believe that God only has desires for us to fulfill and not requirements, who goes to heaven and why?

[Bramble]

I see you haven't a clue about what Christianity is really about. Only what the religios self-righteous ones talk about.. Has nothing to do with picking a religion or believing one thing as opposed to another.. That all goes back to making Christianity a "works" based religion. Based on you doing this or that.. Believing this or that.. Nah.. Not according to the Christian scriptures it's not. Only the self-righteous or ill-informed ones believe such a thing..

Ahh. So, somehow, in all my years in one form of Christianity or another( I didn't 'officially' start thinking of myself as Wiccan until I was 46 or so) I either picked all the wrong Christian groups or I'm just too spiritually dull to know what you know. If only I were more special so I could figure out which of the gazillion Christian churches/groups/doctrines etc would teach me the right things that you know, T&O.

[cman]

So it's not about believing or doing but about motives?

Selfless motives are usually attached to selfless acts or "works." The motives themselves would have to be formed from some sort of belief wouldn't it?

Just trying to figure out what you're saying here. Your one sentence answer(?) is a little vague.

Selfless would be taking your self out of the picture.

Hence self-less.

Motivated by a cause or will that would benefit others, not your self.

So godly selfless motives.

The "what's in it for me" is not there.

The motives come from a source other then yourself.

Didn't say anything about believing or doing.

Take yourself out, and see what else just might be around.

Maybe a lot of us don't see too many people like that.

But they are here and there.

[Oakspear]

... I don't use the phrase "doing the trutth", although I am sure I have heard it used before in TWI. I also did not bring the phrase up in this discussion. It wasn't until Oakspear asked me my opinion concerning the phrase that I responded..

You asked, what is "doing the truth" in your opinion?.. I was actually just repeating your words.. Doing the truth..

I don't know if you're intentionally lying, forgettful, or just can't keep track of who said what and when. The first use of the phrase "doing the truth" is in your post #52

The contrast I bring up is not between those "doing the truth" and those doing what they want. I think you once again have my point mixed up in the straw you conjured up in your assumptions. The contrast is regarding those who serve themselves and those who serve others. That's all. Simplicity! No sense in conjuring up extra assumptions.

...which seems to be a response to post #40

You keep bringing up the contrast between people doing what they want to do, and this "truth", but my point is that from an objective perspective, you can't tell which is which.

in post #54 I asked you what you meant

The contrast I bring up is not between those "doing the truth" and those doing what they want.

Just so I don't make any unwarranted assumptions about your position, what is "doing the truth" in your opinion? And is "doing what you want" not "doing the truth", or something else?

You then, in the previously quoted post #54 denied using the phrase other than repeating my words...which I did not write

You asked, what is "doing the truth" in your opinion?.. I was actually just repeating your words.. Doing the truth.. One would have to know truth to do it. But it has nothing to do with any point I've made. But if one were to know THE TRUTH, then I guess it would have to be something that can be 'done" and therefore action is being taken to do it.. lol..

But again... No, my statement about serving one's self as opposed to others has nothing to do with 'DOING THE TRUTH" - whatever one views that as..

To summarize:

• You talked about "the truth";
  
• you contrasted this explicitly with those who "do what they want to do" in posts #'s 26 & 28.
  
• I commented that from an objective standpoint, you couldn't tell "the truth" from people "doing what they want to do" in post #40.
  
• You responded to post #40 in post #52 using the phrase "doing the truth", which was the first usage of that particular phrase.
  
• In post #53 I asked you what you meant by "doing the truth", including your usage of the phrase in quotes
  
• You respond in post #54 that you didn't use the phrase, but were only repeating what I said
  

This may seem like a lot of trouble for one small point, but it's one thing to misunderstand another's point, but you consistantly misrepresent my points, and then mount an attack against those phantom positions.

Edited March 27, 2007 by Oakspear

[Oakspear]

So it's not about what you do or believe (since believing is a form of works) it's about mercy and acknowledgement (themselves a form of works). This would be the opposite of the dreaded "doing what we want". This implies that the aforementioned mercy & acknowledgement are doing what the higher power (i.e. God) wants.

If one has mercy and acknowledgement of the higher power within the context of Islam or Buddhism or Wicca, is that one still "doing what they want"? Or can one only escape "doing what they want" in the Christian context?

[Sushi]

Ouch Sushi........ :blink:

What was meant ''tongue n cheek'' in response to OAK, didn't stop you from your ''self righteous dig'' into my intent.

My apologies, Bliss. However, your statements did not ring as being 'tongue in cheek' to me. It would seem I wasn't the only one.

But for you to read INTO my intent with your snide comments of judgement and arrogance, I do take offense.

But that's why I get paid the big bucks, here Bliss. On a more serious note, written communication being what it is, it is sometimes difficult to know what a person's intent is. This is the reason we have smileys, etc.

But as a believer in Christ , I sometimes have to defend my position if I am called to do so. Don't you? Isn't that what this forum is for?

Not being Christian, no. I am one of those heretical agnostics.

Why is it that NON-Christians like to scream at the ''Christians'' opinions all the time with their judgement???

I've heard it said, you reap what you sow.

This is getting a little ridiculous.

Agreed.

(my apologies for the delay in response)

[Oakspear]

Heretical agnostics? Does that mean you don't follow orthodox agnosticism?

[lindyhopper]

Selfless would be taking your self out of the picture.

Hence self-less.

Motivated by a cause or will that would benefit others, not your self.

So godly selfless motives.

The "what's in it for me" is not there.

The motives come from a source other then yourself.

Didn't say anything about believing or doing.

Take yourself out, and see what else just might be around.

Maybe a lot of us don't see too many people like that.

But they are here and there.

Personally, I don't believe that anyone can have truly selfless motives. There is always a benefit to doing good or a positive insentive. It may not be cognitively planned out that way, but whether it is just a feeling or a physical benefit, you reap what you sow. You always get something positive from doing something positive.

You may not have said anything about believing and doing , but it is there in the mix. Ok, so they're not your motives, that still requires you giving up your own motives. Taking yourself out of the equation is an act, maybe just a mental process, but it is an act. Why? Perhaps because you believe a certain thing that incourages this act? Why choose to take yourself out of the equation as apposed to not doing so? A belief.

We can not get away from believing and acting on those beliefs or acting on something else. We either use our mental faculties and act on what we believe or we don't use them and react to circumstance instinctively or automatcally or stupidly.

If I am wrong please give me an example to show otherwise.

[lindyhopper]

Heretical agnostics? Does that mean you don't follow orthodox agnosticism?

Exactly, this means that Sushi still eats kittens on Fridays.

[cman]

Personally, I don't believe that anyone can have truly selfless motives. There is always a benefit to doing good or a positive insentive. It may not be cognitively planned out that way, but whether it is just a feeling or a physical benefit, you reap what you sow. You always get something positive from doing something positive.

You may not have said anything about believing and doing , but it is there in the mix. Ok, so they're not your motives, that still requires you giving up your own motives. Taking yourself out of the equation is an act, maybe just a mental process, but it is an act. Why? Perhaps because you believe a certain thing that incourages this act? Why choose to take yourself out of the equation as apposed to not doing so? A belief.

We can not get away from believing and acting on those beliefs or acting on something else. We either use our mental faculties and act on what we believe or we don't use them and react to circumstance instinctively or automatcally or stupidly.

If I am wrong please give me an example to show otherwise.

Ok, an example would be Paul on the road getting knocked off his horse.

I usually use and like this example because there is so much in it.

Though I don't think it's the "standard" of everything.

If we are to acted upon by the Holy Spirit,

then what is it that initiats this action by something other then ourselves?

It is not us who operate the spirit, it is the spirit operating in us.

Can you see that difference?

To will and do of his good pleasure is Him working in us.

The glory that will be revealed, will be revealed in us.

Not by our doing but by His doing.

So the question could be.

What or How do things happen to get this in action?

The action of the spirit.

Humbleness, meekness, courage, love.....

All these qualities are in us and will happen, if we let them.

It's not something you do, it's something you don't do.

When one learns to quit fighting everything and let these things come, it is a brighter day.

And yes I know there are good and bad times.

But inside, deep inside this is always there.

Like a seed ready to sprout.

Either there is Christ in us or there isn't.

It is not created from outside of ourselves and put in us.

It's already there. In which we all share of it.

I of course believe we all have that seed.

However it sprouts and matures is not our call.

It will come when it is ready, no sooner, no later.

Corinthians talks about it somewhere...I'm at work or I'd post it.

So I don't think it's a thing to worry about, just investigate.

Investigate what it is we need to let go of and let happen.

So some believe one thing and some another. The problem is thinking we see it all.

That's quite impossible, it is unlimited, from life here, through eternity.

Edited March 28, 2007 by cman

[George Aar]

Well I'm appalled.

Being a long time orthodox agnostic I'm shocked to discover that Sushi has joined the ranks of the heretics!

[lindyhopper]

For some of my problems with Paul see the other thread I started.

He is not described as full of "humbleness, meekness, courage, love..etc." when Jesus supposedly knocked him on his a$$. He was not in a place where he was ready let go and let Jesus in. He was on his way to kill people who were. So his example doesn't really speak to what you are saying, unless you are saying do your own thing and maybe some day Jesus will do something to you beyond your control.

Any slightly more current examples that are undisputably non-fiction?

I get what you are saying, I just experience of it and know of no one who credibly has.

What or How do things happen to get this in action?

The action of the spirit.

Humbleness, meekness, courage, love.....

All these qualities are in us and will happen, if we let them.

It's not something you do, it's something you don't do.

When one learns to quit fighting everything and let these things come, it is a brighter day.

These are all acts of mind. Not everyone fights against these things. I can decide to be humble, meek, courageous, and loving. If we are in the habit of fighting them, then yes I would suspect that we would have to more or less let go, let go of our seemingly natural tendancies, but many of us choose to act in those positive ways. IMO, it is when we decide to act in this fashion that we really make a positive impact. When we let go of the former negative mindset fighting against these things, we simply are no longer making a negative impact. They are both good things to do, but one is more proactive and the other is just not destructive.

So some believe one thing and some another. The problem is thinking we see it all.

That's quite impossible, it is unlimited, from life here, through eternity.

That is quite impossible. Another problem is thinking we know it all or thinking we know more than we know. This is why I am agnostic. I don't think I see it all and I don't think I know it all. It is what I think has been the most honest, humble, loving, and courageous thing for me personally. I trust as little as possible in the things that I know I don't see and don't know. At times, I even question the things I think I see and know, but if you do that too much you go a little crazy.

As to the heaven question, I assume, cman, that you don't believe in the traditional idea of heaven. Am I right? If so, I guess that question really wouldn't apply to you.

Being a long time orthodox agnostic I'm shocked to discover that Sushi has joined the ranks of the heretics!

BURN HIM ON A STAKE!

[Sushi]

Heretical agnostics? Does that mean you don't follow orthodox agnosticism?

Thanks, Oak, for pointing this out. Now I'm going to get thrown out of yet another microcosm of a microcosm of society.

[cman]

Well, lindy believe what you like.

I'm all for it.

You don't see what I said I think.

You have to want to prove it to yourself I suppose.

What's wrong with a little effort?

And you don't know what Paul was thinking.

That is unlikely to happen at this time.

But you just never know till it's right in your face.

Edited March 28, 2007 by cman

[cman]

We will all change, like it or not.

[lindyhopper]

We all do change like it or not. :)

Well, lindy believe what you like.

I'm all for it.

You don't see what I said I think.

You have to want to prove it to yourself I suppose.

What's wrong with a little effort?

And you don't know what Paul was thinking.

That is unlikely to happen at this time.

But you just never know till it's right in your face

And here I was thinking you didn't see what I said. :) This whole line of discussion branched off of T&O saying that Christianity was not about works and believing. I personally think we can't get away from those two things. So I questioned him, becuase his view sounded interesting and something I don't think I have heard before. You answered the questions directed at him so I assumed you agreed with him. Perhaps you do, but a little effort is a little bit of works.

There is nothing wrong with effort, I am all for it. I am all for people believing what they want too.

I don't think it is good for all of us to not discuss what we believe openly and honestly.

I don't think it is good for people with questions to not ask them and discuss them.

I don't think it is possible for people to not believe in anything.

I don't think it is good for people to believe in something and not have works that are associated with them. (James anyone)

You have to want to prove it to yourself I suppose.

Agreed. Or to put it another way, you have to want to believe.

One day, things will change and the truth will be revealed. We will either be too dead to realise it or we will realise that Christians were right or that Muslims were right or that the crazy guy on the corner was right or that none of us were right or that the creator of the universe was just another person who unknowingly created us one day when they sneezed, or any one of the infinite number of other possiblilities.

[cman]

Or it's something bigger then you have considered.