God Speaks To Us

[DarthOkkata]

I got into a discussion with another Christian at work.

 

While we were talking, they were telling me about how God speaks to them.

 

If god really speaks to us, why doesn't he tell us all the same thing?

 

There are lots of conflicting ideas in different sects of Christianity, they argue about different points within the religion. Whether or not women should be in clergy, the immorality of homosexuality, how literal Genesis should be taken, whether or not you're really eating the 'body and blood' of Jesus, and so on.

 

Yet, they all claim God speaks to them.

 

So, why isn't he telling them all the same things?

 

Is he intentionally setting us against each other? Don't we have enough of that within different religions?

 

What's the deal here? If the invisible all knowing all powerful sky man is talking to us, why isn't he telling us all the same thing?

 

Do we get crappy reception, and garbled responses? Like trying to get that one tv or radio station that's just outside your range?

 

He's god, shouldn't he be able to broadcast clearly to everyone?

 

This doesn't make sense. If God was really speaking to the faithful, why can't they get their story straight?

 

He wants us all to be with him, and follow his commands, right?

 

If so, wouldn't he be telling the people he speaks to the same thing? Even people within the same church who are full of his 'love and faith' and 'speak to him often' will argue over semantics about what God wants from us, tells us, and how to interpret his word.

 

If everyone hears different things from God, why shouldn't I believe it's a one way conversation?

 

It certainly makes more sense than the 'all loving and merciful' deity setting us all against each other for his own personal amusement.

 

What's the deal Christians?

 

If he was really speaking to you, it would be uniform. You'd all be getting the same orders, morals, and commands from him.

 

You really can't blame unclear reception, or personal messages, because it's pretty much across the board. If God was real, and speaking to you personally, he'd be giving you the same lines about universal topics.

 

Right?

 

Please explain how it could be otherwise. You really can't say that other faiths within Christianity aren't true, since most of them are really and honestly asking the same guy the same questions. Yet they seem to be getting different answers.

 

Either God is a vindictive prick, setting us all against each other for his own amusement, or he's not real, and all of them are making it up.

 

It's the only explanations for this I can come up with. Can someone else do better, and come up with another valid excuse for this?

[chefranden]

Either God is a vindictive prick, setting us all against each other for his own amusement, or he's not real, and all of them are making it up.

 

It's the only explanations for this I can come up with. Can someone else do better, and come up with another valid excuse for this?

 

I hate to step in for the Christians but this is a false dilemma. God could be incompetent in spite of being all knowing and powerful. It could be that God gives no messages at all. It could be that the devil gives the messages. It could be that the messages are imagined, and yet God still exists. I'm sure that you could think of some more, if you put your mind to it.

[DarthOkkata]

I hate to step in for the Christians but this is a false dilemma. God could be incompetent in spite of being all knowing and powerful. It could be that God gives no messages at all. It could be that the devil gives the messages. It could be that the messages are imagined, and yet God still exists. I'm sure that you could think of some more, if you put your mind to it.

 

I'll concede to that, but my point is still valid even with those arguments in mind. If that is the case, it's unlikely his name was Jesus, and he's not anything like any Christian church would have you believe.

 

I'm of a mind that if he does exist, he doesn't care much what I do, or whether or not I believe in him. I'm certainly not expecting any great reward for good behavior or eternal torment for evil behavior. One life is enough for me thanks, I don't need another one, no matter now nice it sounds. Florida is a nice State to visit, a great family vacation destination. Living here isn't exactly the same experience.

 

My perspective on life is 'well, I'm here, and every instruction I've ever been given was by someone else who was here too'. I don't feel a need to be acknowledged by a higher power.

 

I don't understand the mindset of 'speaking to god'. I used to believe in it, but I've forgotten why it made sense to me. I honestly can't remember a spiritual experience, and I do recall faking it a bit to avoid trouble.

 

I'm trying to get away from self delusion, and I'm starting to realize that I was pretty much faking it all the time, and telling myself I didn't always do it. I wanted to fit in, but found speaking to children my own age in the church was a grating experience, and I always came out feeling like I'd been a speed bump by someone far too sheltered to interest me. I really did try to believe, but it didn't work out with what my science books were telling me.

I'd seen the stuff written there in demonstrations, and their explanations for why their views were more correct stacked up, so I knew for a fact that it worked.

 

I'm pretty sure that Evolutionary theory was the first crack in my little shell as a believer when I was a kid. As I grew older, and learned more about dinosaurs and fossils, my resolve began to weaken.

 

I went to Catholic school, and I'm not sure if it was intentional or not, but religion class was always right after our science class. I think the desired effect backfired with me for some odd reason. Pun intended.

[Guest 7catac7]

I'm quite convinced that "God's speaking" is just people's imaginations. When I was a Xian I use to think that God was speaking to me, but then realized that I was just making it up. People probably really want to hear God, so they end up making stuff up without realizing it. Also, Xians will also say that in order to hear God you have to "have open ears at all times and make a relationship with him." That is utterly stupid if you think about this: If I don't know someone, yet I need to tell them something, do I end up not talking to the person because I realized that they don't have "open ears" or a friendship with me? Of course not, I will end up talking to them anyway.

 

Also, why do we have to be the ice breakers? What can't God be the one who begins talking and forming the relationship with us? None of it makes sense or is stupid.

[par4dcourse]

Gawd told me that Big Brown was going to win the Triple Crown yesterday.

Gawd owes me big time. Contributions to keep the no-neck guys away gratiously accepted.

[InfiniteDeist]

Gawd told me that Big Brown was going to win the Triple Crown yesterday.

Gawd owes me big time. Contributions to keep the no-neck guys away gratiously accepted.

 

Damn, I know how you feel. Part of a bigger plan perhaps? Maybe it is like Augustine said, God pulls the good out of the evil and you lost this race so you could win the lottery. : shrug :

[DarthOkkata]

Gawd told me that Big Brown was going to win the Triple Crown yesterday.

Gawd owes me big time. Contributions to keep the no-neck guys away gratiously accepted.

 

Damn, I know how you feel. Part of a bigger plan perhaps? Maybe it is like Augustine said, God pulls the good out of the evil and you lost this race so you could win the lottery. : shrug :

 

Which begs the question of why God limited the supply of good fortune?

 

I doubt he'll be winning the lottery, and why would it be connected to losing this time?

 

God has to slap me in the face a certain amount of times before I get my good fortune cookie?

 

Maybe it's like Douglas Adams said, and it is enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?

 

Stuff can suck without God's imaginary promise of future rewards can't it?

[OnceConvinced]

The Holy Spit is supposedly supposed to help people come to understanding of God's word. The fact that all these people who have the Holy Spit, who "understand" God's word can't come up with the same interpretations proves the Holy Spit is not all it's cracked up to be and that it doesn't bring understanding. It should bring the SAME understanding! I'm amazed at how they cannot see that and still go around insisting that the Holy Spit is guiding them.

[whereelse]

I think the Bible speaks clearly on the most important issues. If we read the Bible as any other piece of literature we would do better at understanding it. We err when we put our pre-conceived notions on the meaning. If we let the Bible speak for itself I think in most cases it speaks very clearly.

 

wherelse,

 

I am engaging my ability as Staff here to remove your attachments to posts. If your message is that *good* feel free to try and post intact as TEXT, in the PLAIN and OPEN.

 

Will not permit, nor allow any attempt at putting up items that may contain hazardous or malicious scripting.

 

Do NOT under any circumstances place anything but "flat, typed in characters" here at Ex-Christian dot net.

 

 

kFL

[Guest 7catac7]

I think the Bible speaks clearly on the most important issues. If we read the Bible as any other piece of literature we would do better at understanding it. We err when we put our pre-conceived notions on the meaning. If we let the Bible speak for itself I think in most cases it speaks very clearly.

 

Then why are there tons of different branches of Christianity?

[whereelse]

If I incorrectly replied earlier I am truly sorry. I don't guess I know how to. If there is a specific way I must post my comments please tell me how.

[whereelse]

The question about why there are so many christian denominations I think has a lot of reasons to answer. I will try to answer the best that I can a few. First of all, the large majority of denominations within the christian religion have differences in opinions of topics in the Bible that are not fundamental. Most Christian denominations have at there core belief system the same foundation. Now comes the question of what denominations are considered christian. That takes us to an endless argument. The truth is though that the Bible stands on its own. We must see it as something seperate from us, something that must have a meaning outside of us. If we throw in our feelings or own opinions to it we inevitably ruin its message. Maybe this seems to simplistic, but I believe this is how we take everything else we come across. We take things at face value. The Bible says what it says regardless of how I feel or what I think God is saying to me while I am reading it.

[Deva]

The truth is though that the Bible stands on its own. We must see it as something seperate from us, something that must have a meaning outside of us. If we throw in our feelings or own opinions to it we inevitably ruin its message. Maybe this seems to simplistic, but I believe this is how we take everything else we come across. We take things at face value. The Bible says what it says regardless of how I feel or what I think God is saying to me while I am reading it.

 

 

It IS simplistic. The Bible was written in a different time and a different culture and translated from the languages it was written in. You cannot simply pick it up and read it like it was today's newspaper. It requires study. In many cases I think it is impossible to determine what the original meaning and intent of was. The books of Revelation and Daniel are the shining examples of how it is not so easy to interepret and that is why there are so many different end-times scenarios developed from these two books.

 

As far as God saying something to you -- that is in your own mind.

[whereelse]

The truth is though that the Bible stands on its own. We must see it as something seperate from us, something that must have a meaning outside of us. If we throw in our feelings or own opinions to it we inevitably ruin its message. Maybe this seems to simplistic, but I believe this is how we take everything else we come across. We take things at face value. The Bible says what it says regardless of how I feel or what I think God is saying to me while I am reading it.

 

 

It IS simplistic. The Bible was written in a different time and a different culture and translated from the languages it was written in. You cannot simply pick it up and read it like it was today's newspaper. It requires study. In many cases I think it is impossible to determine what the original meaning and intent of was. The books of Revelation and Daniel are the shining examples of how it is not so easy to interepret and that is why there are so many different end-times scenarios developed from these two books.

 

As far as God saying something to you -- that is in your own mind.

 

Yes I will agree that some of the prophetic books are difficult to understand but the vast majority of the Bible can be understood with the same interpreting that we use on all other pieces of literature. As for difficult passages, such as some found in Daniel and Revelation. We must interpret the unclear in the Bible with what is clear.

[Deva]

Yes I will agree that some of the prophetic books are difficult to understand but the vast majority of the Bible can be understood with the same interpreting that we use on all other pieces of literature. As for difficult passages, such as some found in Daniel and Revelation. We must interpret the unclear in the Bible with what is clear.

 

 

I was deliberately using an extreme example with the two books in question only to make my point, but in my opinon it applies across the board-- even to the other books. I do not agree that the Bible can be interpreted with the Bible either, if that is what you mean by your last sentence.

 

More importantly, why do you believe?

[Guest eejay]

I don't believe god speaks to us in any way shape or form. I agree with Darth wholeheartedly, that if god had something to say to us that it would likely be across the board. Just doesn;t make sense any other way. I could ask 'god' a hunderd questions, and write down the answers of what he 'said' to me. Then I could have you ask god the same hundred questions. Do you think any of the answers would be the same. Hey we could try that. Put a group of people to the test who believe that god speaks to them, and without allowing them to speak to one another, have a specified set of questions.that they couldn't know the answers to, and see what they come up with. Xtians are quick to say stuff, but when it comes time to really proving anything....they can't.

[whereelse]

I am not agreeing with the notion that God speaks to us in some subjective voice. I believe God has spoken in His Word. Since God is unchanging, He thinks the same then as He does now. I know when I find something certain in the Bible God still thinks that way today.

[Guest 7catac7]

I am not agreeing with the notion that God speaks to us in some subjective voice. I believe God has spoken in His Word. Since God is unchanging, He thinks the same then as He does now. I know when I find something certain in the Bible God still thinks that way today.

 

So, you're saying that we should all, say, kill everyone that works on the sabbath. That was one of God's laws, and so that shouldn't change, right?

[whereelse]

In reply to the question of why do I believe: I will have to give a multi-faceted answer. There are subjective personal reasons why I believe in the God of the Bible, and there are objective reasons. One subjective reason I believe in the God of the Bible is because of the personal impact He has made in my life. I would love to go into detail with anyone who would like to talk about that. Yet my subjective experiences are validated (I think) by objective truth. I do not blindly believe. As a matter of fact I have had periods of time where I had some big questions. However most of the questions I have had that seemed to contradict the Bible I have found to answered by history. There are some however I still have no answers for. Yet I have found no other theory that gives concrete evidence either. So I have found that given the objective facts I do have and the personal experience I have had with God, I believe in the God of the Bible.

[whereelse]

In reply to the question of why do I believe: I will have to give a multi-faceted answer. There are subjective personal reasons why I believe in the God of the Bible, and there are objective reasons. One subjective reason I believe in the God of the Bible is because of the personal impact He has made in my life. I would love to go into detail with anyone who would like to talk about that. Yet my subjective experiences are validated (I think) by objective truth. I do not blindly believe. As a matter of fact I have had periods of time where I had some big questions. However most of the questions I have had that seemed to contradict the Bible I have found to answered by history. There are some however I still have no answers for. Yet I have found no other theory that gives concrete evidence either. So I have found that given the objective facts I do have and the personal experience I have had with God, I believe in the God of the Bible.

 

 

In response to the sabbath question: there were certain laws given to the nation of Israel that do not apply to the world.

[Antlerman]

I think the Bible speaks clearly on the most important issues. If we read the Bible as any other piece of literature we would do better at understanding it. We err when we put our pre-conceived notions on the meaning. If we let the Bible speak for itself I think in most cases it speaks very clearly.

 

The truth is though that the Bible stands on its own. We must see it as something seperate from us, something that must have a meaning outside of us. If we throw in our feelings or own opinions to it we inevitably ruin its message. Maybe this seems to simplistic, but I believe this is how we take everything else we come across. We take things at face value. The Bible says what it says regardless of how I feel or what I think God is saying to me while I am reading it.

 

Hi. I'd like to point something out to you. Notice what I have highlighted in red from your two posts?

 

You said in the first post that we shouldn't approach reading the Bible with any preconceived ideas. Yet in the second post, you're telling us to read it with a preconceived idea that, "We must see it as something separate from us, something that must have a meaning outside of us.". That is a preconceived idea. You have just invalidated how you approach the Bible. You have laid a preconceived condition for interpretation that will allow it to escape objective examination as a point of reference.

 

That's the problem with faith in how you've just stated it. It invalidates objectivity, because you've thrown it out the window by removing the Bible from open interpretation. You have set the conditions that it has to be right, and by default when contradiction is encountered, the error must be ours. That is hardly objective. I do believe you are reasonable enough to recognize this.

 

 

Yes I will agree that some of the prophetic books are difficult to understand but the vast majority of the Bible can be understood with the same interpreting that we use on all other pieces of literature. As for difficult passages, such as some found in Daniel and Revelation. We must interpret the unclear in the Bible with what is clear.

 

If you agree that we should interpret the Bible the same as all other pieces of literature (let's qualify that as "ancient literature", which it is), then you first of all must set aside your above preconceived idea that it "must have a meaning outside us". No scholar looks at ancient literature with a presumption like that. So then, you must allow for the tools of modern methods to examine it in the same fashion as it does all other works of ancient texts.

 

Therefore, you have to allow for higher criticism to apply the same as all other literature. In which case, you should rapidly find the romantic idea of it being a direct revelation from a god to be just that, a romantic idea of a religious faith - not reality. The first thing, you can abandon the idea that Moses wrote the Pentateuch. And so then when a NT writer references that "Moses" wrote it, we can assume they were speaking as human beings, and not divinely inspired dictators writing down God's direct words.

 

Agreed?

 

I am not agreeing with the notion that God speaks to us in some subjective voice. I believe God has spoken in His Word. Since God is unchanging, He thinks the same then as He does now. I know when I find something certain in the Bible God still thinks that way today.

Not entirely related to the above, but I want to point something out that stood out to me. "God still thinks". I'm shaking my head in puzzlement. Allowing for the idea that God exists for a moment, isn't "thinking" a human thing?? I would tend to see God as Thought itself. Not some thinking being, that looks like a great big human being.

 

You have heard of anthropomorphizing and what it means, correct? How limiting an idea really, and frankly why I find these ideas of some supreme, ultimate truth to be represented by a god that looks more like a great big human to be, how shall I put it, immature?

 

Anyway, I'd enjoy hearing your responses to the above two points.

 

In reply to the question of why do I believe: I will have to give a multi-faceted answer. There are subjective personal reasons why I believe in the God of the Bible, and there are objective reasons. One subjective reason I believe in the God of the Bible is because of the personal impact He has made in my life. I would love to go into detail with anyone who would like to talk about that. Yet my subjective experiences are validated (I think) by objective truth. I do not blindly believe. As a matter of fact I have had periods of time where I had some big questions. However most of the questions I have had that seemed to contradict the Bible I have found to answered by history. There are some however I still have no answers for. Yet I have found no other theory that gives concrete evidence either. So I have found that given the objective facts I do have and the personal experience I have had with God, I believe in the God of the Bible.

As an interesting approach, I'd like try something different with you than what typically happens here in normal challenge/response fashion. I'd like you to lay out on the table, honestly and sincerely, those things you have not found any other theory that gives concrete evidence for to me (or us), and see if we might have some perception to challenge you with.

 

After all, in my case I have a great deal of background in Christianity and have spent a great deal of time in thought and study since leaving it. Surely I've probably got some unique perspectives that might see something other's haven't in those areas you mentioned. The same with others here.

 

You've come to discuss your faith with us, so let's do that. You're faith is a mixture of beliefs, doubts, and questions. Sound like something interesting to try, maybe something beneficial to you and possibly us as well?

[Deva]

In reply to the question of why do I believe: I will have to give a multi-faceted answer. There are subjective personal reasons why I believe in the God of the Bible, and there are objective reasons. One subjective reason I believe in the God of the Bible is because of the personal impact He has made in my life. I would love to go into detail with anyone who would like to talk about that. Yet my subjective experiences are validated (I think) by objective truth. I do not blindly believe. As a matter of fact I have had periods of time where I had some big questions. However most of the questions I have had that seemed to contradict the Bible I have found to answered by history. There are some however I still have no answers for. Yet I have found no other theory that gives concrete evidence either. So I have found that given the objective facts I do have and the personal experience I have had with God, I believe in the God of the Bible.

 

Thank you for answering my question Whereelse. It's a bit vague though, isn't it? Anyway, I think you recognize that it is. You know, when we have our minds in a preconceived pattern which we regard as the "truth," or the "answer", the mind will pick up things around it to corroborate that belief. I would simply ask that you question yourself as to whether or not you blindly believe. Its not believing with a literal blindfold on, but it is filtering out information that is contrary to what the belief is and confirming things that conform to that pattern.

 

It is quite interesting to observe how people have different standards for "concrete evidence" and "objective facts". What is satisfying to one person is quite deficient for another.

[whereelse]

In reply to statement about holding the Bible as something outside of us being a preconceived notion which I said we should not do in interpretation:

I simply mean we can not as many people do in Bible study, read a passage and ask ourselves "what does this mean to me?" A passage means what it means. It is our job to ask what is it saying, not what is it saying to me? That is what I mean by taking our preconceived notions to Bible interpretation.

 

As for the comment about "Ancient Literature" and interpreting:

I agree that in order to get a brighter picture of the original meaning we need to know the context of the culture and its language, however the meaning of the texts can be understood in our English translations. I'll try to explain: I think it is like dusting off an old picture. Before dusting you may not see all the details before it is dusted, but it is still the same picture just after being dusted it is a more clear. That may not be the best illustration in the world, but I hope it gets the point I'm trying at.

[whereelse]

One subject that can not be examined by the scientific method and therefore can never be scientific law is the history of how the world was made

[whereelse]

Another response to the above post about interpretation:

What I am promoting is open interpretation, if that means studying the Bible to find out exactly what it is saying. I know I keep repeating this, but my point is the Bible has a meaning, each book, each chapter, each passage, each verse, each word has a meaning. It is my job to find out what it means. I do not believe this method is practiced my the majority of people (christians and non-christians).

I believe every piece of literature has a meaning that the author wants to get across, it is just honest and courteous to read like this. That is what we are all trying to do now I hope.