Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I just finished an interesting little book in which the author interviewed about 30 Texans from all walks of life and simply let them describe their spiritual beliefs (FINDING GOD: AN EXPLORATION OF SPIRITUAL DIVERSITY IN AMERICA'S HEARTLAND). There were a few mainstream Christians, one Hindu, one Wiccan and one atheist.
Everyone else held idiosyncratic beliefs. Many were “sort of" Christian but “couldn’t accept” Hell, Christian exclusivity or some other problematical doctrine. Others had belief systems that were pastiches of Jesus, Buddha, Jung and Dr. Phil. They had basically invented their own personal ideas of what God could or should be like and their own personal micro-religions.
I’ve been down this path myself. I struggled with many parts of the Bible and many of the Christian doctrines and would cheerfully modify them or gravitate toward some fringe interpretation to make them more palatable to me. I wove strands from Buddhism, Hinduism and the New Age into my Christian theology. I often felt quite clever and smug about how superior my Christianity was – intellectually, emotionally and morally – to the silly stuff I’d heard at seminary and in church. I used to proudly describe myself as the pastor, congregation and janitor of the one-man Church of What I Believe.
But I finally woke up and realized what I was doing. Truth doesn’t depend on what I think about it. Truth doesn’t care what I think about it. If the “deceptive Evil Genius” of Descartes’ thought experiment was the God who actually existed (see https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/d...stemology/#3.2), that’s the unhappy Truth I’d be stuck with; I’d gain nothing by pretending it wasn’t.
I realized that any belief system I invented to please myself would never be the Truth. You may find the Truth, or at least approach it, but you won’t invent it. I realized that the path I was taking wasn’t really a search for the Truth but rather the fruit of my own arrogance and pride. I wanted a God who was the way I thought he should be, a God who was worthy of Me. My real God was Me.
So I pulled the plug and stepped back. I’d had enough experience with Christianity to believe that it was the closest to the Truth of the available options. I decided that I’d accept it as it really was and not as I might prefer it to be.
I now accept God as he has revealed himself in the OT, NT and my life, while recognizing that he ultimately remains a transcendent mystery. I accept that his ways aren’t my ways, his thoughts aren’t my thoughts (Isaiah). I accept the troubling and puzzling Bible passages and the problematical doctrines and teachings. I don’t leave my brain at the door, but I don’t insist on a God who reveals and explains himself to my satisfaction. I follow Christianity, not “Christianity as modified to suit my tastes.”
The icky-poo doctrine of Hell? Yes, it's clearly taught by Jesus and I accept it with the confidence that I’ll eventually understand how it’s worthy of the omnibenevolent Creator of the Universe. The divisive doctrine of Christian exclusivity? Yes, I accept it without claiming to understand precisely what it means or how it works.
One of the convincing (to me) aspects of Christianity is that it isn’t what anyone would be likely to invent to please herself or her neighbors. It certainly isn’t what I would’ve invented. What I would’ve invented sounds a lot like the belief systems in the book I just read and often see on this forum, which are invariably less demanding, less judgmental and less threatening than Christianity. They may get you through the night, but I don’t believe they’ll get you to the Truth.
It’s certainly possible that another belief system is closer to the Truth than Christianity. But when you start assembling a belief system as though you were ordering from a Chinese menu (a little of this, a little of that), always with one eye on what you find personally appealing or would like to be true, I believe you’re on a path of delusion that is going to take you very far indeed from the Truth.
(Some seem irked that I no longer engage on threads I start. Indeed I don't. I've finally accepted the wisdom of a popular Christian author who advised, "Say what you have to say and move on. Don't even go back and look." I try to toss out ideas that I think may be helpful or worthy of discussion as time allows and the inspiration strikes me. If they aren't helpful or worthy, so be it. Take all the snide potshots you want - I guarantee you I won't see them.)
Not good no matter how hard we try we are not good at self evaluation
Lots of slack for me not so much for you
Owning our stuff is a major setback for the do it yourself religious
That does sound like an interesting book. And I completely agree that many doctrines of Christianity are unpalatable. However, I reached a different conclusion. If I am more moral and compassionate than a Divine Being, the logical conclusion is that flawed human beings invented the alleged Divine Being.
That does sound like an interesting book. And I completely agree that many doctrines of Christianity are unpalatable. However, I reached a different conclusion. If I am more moral and compassionate than a Divine Being, the logical conclusion is that flawed human beings invented the alleged Divine Being.
Why take it further than need be. Invention is an unnecessary negation of God just because the human attributions and interpretations are flawed and barbaric. The actual logical conclusion is that the human attributions and interpretations are flawed, NOT that God does not exist. That is a bridge too far for your syllogism. Nerf also takes the notion of divine inspiration too far by assuming flawed humans are capable of receiving and interpreting divine inspirations flawlessly. It seems the desire is for a magically perfect divine revelation received by imperfect and flawed humans to be somehow still magically perfect. Nonsense.
Last edited by MysticPhD; 09-15-2018 at 04:38 PM..
I just finished an interesting little book in which the author interviewed about 30 Texans from all walks of life and simply let them describe their spiritual beliefs (FINDING GOD: AN EXPLORATION OF SPIRITUAL DIVERSITY IN AMERICA'S HEARTLAND). There were a few mainstream Christians, one Hindu, one Wiccan and one atheist.
Everyone else held idiosyncratic beliefs. Many were “sort of" Christian but “couldn’t accept” Hell, Christian exclusivity or some other problematical doctrine. Others had belief systems that were pastiches of Jesus, Buddha, Jung and Dr. Phil. They had basically invented their own personal ideas of what God could or should be like and their own personal micro-religions.
I’ve been down this path myself. I struggled with many parts of the Bible and many of the Christian doctrines and would cheerfully modify them or gravitate toward some fringe interpretation to make them more palatable to me. I wove strands from Buddhism, Hinduism and the New Age into my Christian theology. I often felt quite clever and smug about how superior my Christianity was – intellectually, emotionally and morally – to the silly stuff I’d heard at seminary and in church. I used to proudly describe myself as the pastor, congregation and janitor of the one-man Church of What I Believe.
But I finally woke up and realized what I was doing. Truth doesn’t depend on what I think about it. Truth doesn’t care what I think about it. If the “deceptive Evil Genius” of Descartes’ thought experiment was the God who actually existed (see https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/d...stemology/#3.2), that’s the unhappy Truth I’d be stuck with; I’d gain nothing by pretending it wasn’t.
I realized that any belief system I invented to please myself would never be the Truth. You may find the Truth, or at least approach it, but you won’t invent it. I realized that the path I was taking wasn’t really a search for the Truth but rather the fruit of my own arrogance and pride. I wanted a God who was the way I thought he should be, a God who was worthy of Me. My real God was Me.
So I pulled the plug and stepped back. I’d had enough experience with Christianity to believe that it was the closest to the Truth of the available options. I decided that I’d accept it as it really was and not as I might prefer it to be.
I now accept God as he has revealed himself in the OT, NT and my life, while recognizing that he ultimately remains a transcendent mystery. I accept that his ways aren’t my ways, his thoughts aren’t my thoughts (Isaiah). I accept the troubling and puzzling Bible passages and the problematical doctrines and teachings. I don’t leave my brain at the door, but I don’t insist on a God who reveals and explains himself to my satisfaction. I follow Christianity, not “Christianity as modified to suit my tastes.”
The icky-poo doctrine of Hell? Yes, it's clearly taught by Jesus and I accept it with the confidence that I’ll eventually understand how it’s worthy of the omnibenevolent Creator of the Universe. The divisive doctrine of Christian exclusivity? Yes, I accept it without claiming to understand precisely what it means or how it works.
One of the convincing (to me) aspects of Christianity is that it isn’t what anyone would be likely to invent to please herself or her neighbors. It certainly isn’t what I would’ve invented. What I would’ve invented sounds a lot like the belief systems in the book I just read and often see on this forum, which are invariably less demanding, less judgmental and less threatening than Christianity. They may get you through the night, but I don’t believe they’ll get you to the Truth.
It’s certainly possible that another belief system is closer to the Truth than Christianity. But when you start assembling a belief system as though you were ordering from a Chinese menu (a little of this, a little of that), always with one eye on what you find personally appealing or would like to be true, I believe you’re on a path of delusion that is going to take you very far indeed from the Truth.
(Some seem irked that I no longer engage on threads I start. Indeed I don't. I've finally accepted the wisdom of a popular Christian author who advised, "Say what you have to say and move on. Don't even go back and look." I try to toss out ideas that I think may be helpful or worthy of discussion as time allows and the inspiration strikes me. If they aren't helpful or worthy, so be it. Take all the snide potshots you want - I guarantee you I won't see them.)
Humans have been inventing their own gods since before the dawn of recorded history. Which is why we've had so many gods. It's just that some gods have been more popular than others.
Why take it further than need be. Invention is an unnecessary negation of God just because the human attributions and interpretations are flawed and barbaric. The actual logical conclusion is that the human attributions and interpretations are flawed, NOT that God does not exist. That is a bridge too far for your syllogism. Nerf also takes the notion of divine inspiration too far by assuming flawed humans are capable of receiving and interpreting divine inspirations flawlessly. It seems the desire is for a magically perfect divine revelation received by imperfect and flawed humans to be somehow still magically perfect. Nonsense.
I believe that God of the Bible is an invention of man and does not exist. I have no idea if a god exists or not.
So now I know to ignore posts by the OP, as he admits he is just a drive by poster . Good enough for me. I won't waste time with a poster that lacks the courage to come back and engage in a discussion about what he posts . I'm glad I learned this to save me the effort from now on.
(Some seem irked that I no longer engage on threads I start. Indeed I don't. I've finally accepted the wisdom of a popular Christian author who advised, "Say what you have to say and move on. Don't even go back and look." I try to toss out ideas that I think may be helpful or worthy of discussion as time allows and the inspiration strikes me. If they aren't helpful or worthy, so be it. Take all the snide potshots you want - I guarantee you I won't see them.)
I am that "some." And I am not surprised you won't see my potshot. You aren't the first coward to put someone who makes you uncomfortable on ignore. You won't be the last.
Arsonists - even of the internet message board variety - stay safely far away from the fires they hope to ignite. They're yellow, not stupid.
So now I know to ignore posts by the OP, as he admits he is just a drive by poster . Good enough for me. I won't waste time with a poster that lacks the courage to come back and engage in a discussion about what he posts . I'm glad I learned this to save me the effort from now on.
Posted before reading yours. Too soon etc.
He even usually starts the thread in the Christianity forum, hoping to get a chorus of amens from the sheep before the mods inevitably punt it where it belongs.
He even usually starts the thread in the Christianity forum, hoping to get a chorus of amens from the sheep before the mods inevitably punt it where it belongs.
And it's the same tired and warmed over message: don't think, you should just accept "orthodoxy." This thread should be merged with his other nonsense.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
