i'm not sure whether you mean heresy or hearsay but i'm guessing the latter. in that case, at at least 99.9999% of all direct quotes provided by bloggers on this or any other site would fall into that category.



of course! all media sources are suspect...with the exception of those you approve.
can one be more foolish than to allow oneself to be gulled by bbc????

of course! all media sources are suspect...with the exception of those you approve. can one be more foolish than to allow oneself to be gulled by bbc????

Perhaps you need to look at their OWN internal report?  But that would be just a biased evaluation of them as well.

Appreciate the tips Think Aloud, I have a few questions for you about your statements.

First if your assertion that God is a "he", thus a sexual identity, would that mean that God reproduces? Would it mean there are male and female parts to God or that there are more then one, a male or a female?

Also, One of "his books" I am curious as to why you believe that God wrote a book?

Nobody has ever seen God, or talked to him in person. Let me ask you why it is always that in the far distant past that these prophets have their interaction with God?

If this is so, why is he not interacting with us now, daily, or in recent history? In a way we can perceive beyond "a faith based" perspective?

Why does God not interact with us in a scientific way but always in this mystic sense?

To me it makes much more sense and much more likely that a man wrote these things, and since everything a man does is imperfect in some way, I am curious as to how and why people take these words to be God's.

I would be totally ok with people talking to God even though it has never happened to me, I've never heard the voice, or thought the thoughts in my head that weren't my own, never heard God through someone else, none of that, I've also witnessed people, once they came to their belief, just accepting a bulk of the related teachings regardless of their ethical meaning or validation, and just accepting it.

I'm afraid I have a very serious difficulty with that. That prevents me from just jumping on board with the talking to God thing. But your words of keep an open mind are encouraging and I will try.

HOw do you know he (or she - good point) does not?

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. -- Arthur C. Clarke

First if your assertion that God is a "he", thus a sexual identity, would that mean that God reproduces? Would it mean there are male and female parts to God or that there are more then one, a male or a female?

You are funny, you now that? I used He because He used that in His revelations to His prophets. He is gender neutral, as say a Moon, or a Star. He is unique, nothing we know resembles Him. He has no partners and no progeny of any kind. All that is from what He told us through His prophets.

Also, One of "his books" I am curious as to why you believe that God wrote a book?

He revealed his message to certain people He called Messengers. they, the, Messengers, wrote those words in books. Mainly They were in order of revelation: Torah (Old Testament is based on it) , Engile (the New Testament is based on it) then the final one is Qura'an.

Any one who is interested in religion and looking for answers should read the three of them, then decide for him/her self.

You really cant judge things without studying what its texts say. Can you?. you speak of scientific evidence, and i am with you 100% in that regard.Then let's treat the subject in a scientific way. If we do i.e. study the texts and His creations we can see that it all point to a Creator.

Nobody has ever seen God, or talked to him in person. Let me ask you why it is always that in the far distant past that these prophets have their interaction with God?

As i said before, He is a Creator and by definition is of a higher order beyond our normal senses. we cant see him. you certainly can understand that scientifically. We cant see or hear except in a very limited range of the electromagnetic and the sonic waves. He interacts with us in ways we CAN handle. He used voice communication only once with Prophet Moses. Even when Moses asked to see Him, He told him you cant, just look at the mountain and i will reveal myself to it and you will see what happened. The mountain shook and crumbled in front of moses eyes. with Jesus and Mohammad He communicated through Archangle Gabriel.

As to why He stopped sending Messengers, He said the message for us, humans, has been perfected and completed with Qura'an. It is like education. You go to school for certain years, till you get the final classes in college. From that point on, it is your job to use what you received to master the topic. They dont keep sending you to classes and give you new text book all your life, do they? the example may be crude but it gives you the idea. We received enough and that is all we need for guidance.

Still He interacts continuously with every thing He created including every human. But not in the same way he used to deliver His Message of Guidance. His interaction with regular humans is like the teacher who taught you what is in the text (through his assistants) then watch you perform. He is the most lenient and forgiving teacher. even if some reject his texts and dont even acknowledge his presence He still guarantees them certain things like sustenance, generous rewards for their efforts in this life and Justice and Mercy on the Day of Judgement.

If this is so, why is he not interacting with us now, daily, or in recent history? In a way we can perceive beyond "a faith based" perspective?

Why does God not interact with us in a scientific way but always in this mystic sense?

The funny thing is He did that many times during earlier prophets' times but people still did not believe. He said this: "they ask for a direct evidence and when We show them the proof they say it is just magic". And if you think about it, if He NOW sent an overwhelming evidence, dont you think many will say the same thing. Just magic or science tricks or visual effects.

It really comes down to this: just study the history of the messengers who deliverd the messages and the messages themselves then think of this universe and what is in it. If that cant provide proof for His existence then nothing really will.

The main thing is this: Use the same criteria and methods you use when you study any topic. For example: You study Shakespeare's writings. But how do you know that he actually wrote that? or for that matter did he really exist? are the writings we use now as his authentic? .... etc. of course we make sure that we are convinced of these points before we study his writings. Use the same method of proof you would use in say Evolution. Dont ask for things you wouldnt ask if you were studying other topics. In any thing we study or believe in, there is a certain degree of trust and authenticiy that must be satisfied before we accept any thing as true or believable.

A Big Job, isnt it? yes it is. I admit that. but we can all do it in our spare time.

To me it makes much more sense and much more likely that a man wrote these things, and since everything a man does is imperfect in some way, I am curious as to how and why people take these words to be God's.

Of course men wrote the words they received from God. The question is do you trust these men or not. These men provided sufficient proofs for many of the people around them at the time to believe that they were telling the truth. All prophets and messengers were provided with certain capabilities no human can attain by himself alone.

If you study the history of all these prophets and messengers you will find that the had no personal stake in the matter.Each of them suffered unbearable conditions and sometime torture while they gained nothing for delivering the message they recieved. All they said, here is what i was told to tell you. believe it or not. your choice. period. There was nothing in it for them and they pointedly said that.

Moses was a prince, Jesus was a son of a young woman who had a highly respected family lineage, mohammed was offered the kingdom of Arabia to stop talking. the three of them suffered persecution while they could have had great life. why did they do that? and what did they exactly get from the people around them? nothing but heart ache and nagging questions and doubts. but they all were patient and just kept deliverng the message. till they returned to their God.

I've also witnessed people, once they came to their belief, just accepting a bulk of the related teachings regardless of their ethical meaning or validation, and just accepting it.

First things First.

The existence of a God is the first thing to be established in your mind. From there then study what He say.

I personally think that most non believers "Refuse" to be convinced because of the responsibilty of that admission.

Because, if He exists and He is the Creator, then He sets the rules of "ethics". And that is a problem for many people. Many like to set their own rules.

So the ethical meaning depends on who's ethics govern? yours or the Creator?

You see the responsibility?

so work on His existence First. and go from there.

I found His rules and Ethics very logical and Fair and most of all practical. I yet to encounter a situation that His rules and ethics are a hindrance to any thing that is logical or decent. None whatsoever.

First off, I apologize. I went away for the weekend and now there is so much to comment on. Bear with, or not, however you choose.
-----------------------------------------------------

If God had only planned, as Jews and Christians believe, to reveal His Words thru prophets and then stop. Would that be a change? If He had set that into motion from the beginning with that plan, then that would be His MO. And it's not nearly so much the book as it is the Word. The medium is irrelevant. Already we have the Holy Ebook, and 50 years from now...how will we transmit the information then? They used first word of mouth, then tablets and scrolls, then books, now digital. If you finish something, like revelations, then why would you need to do anything more? If you finish eating a hamburger, why did you stop? Did you change your MO? No, you just finished the hamburger. You realize that you can't perpetually eat one hamburger until the end of time. There will be a beginning and a completion of that.
And I'm not sure what you mean by the "creation is spurious at best."




People will manipulate things towards their goals. We all do that. Manipulation isn't all that bad, maybe a better word to use is adaptation. Now, God's words may not be confusing per say, as long as you understand the context of the words. Even not understanding the context of the words, people can derive so many blessings from the Bible. That is the magnificence of the Book. It has the power to speak its message to the simplest of minds and yet still hold many truths for those who read it time and time again. God's gift is that all of His words can affect your life and change it for the better if you just listen. Be wary of the false teachers in sheep's clothing, they are sent by the Undoer. There are many people who use the Bible for their own causes, and not those of the Lord. If you listen carefully, they will encourage you to do things that God would never condone. They will disect the scriptures and repiece them together to weave their lies. Be cautious for they are similar to the defenders of faith, who teach the scripture at all times with the grace of God.


I would like to hear more. I think this is a great entry waiting to happen. I'm very interested it in.


The only cases that I can even pull from my memory, which is not really reliable, of personal visitations with messages only for the individual occurred with angels. For instance, Joseph was told to take Mary and raise her Son. However, this was for the advancement and the furtherment of God's plan in a grand scale. Touched by an Angel TV series depicted divine assistance from angels on a personal scale, but that is mostly for feel-good. In fact there is an instance in the Bible (Luke 16:19-31), in which Christ expounds on a story about a rich man and Lazarus. Lazarus goes to heaven, the rich man goes to hell. At the end, the rich man asks God to send Lazarus to his brothers so that they might believe. God told him that if they would not listen to Moses and the prophets, then they would not listen to a risen dead man. Therefore, it seems very unlikely that either God, Himself, or His angels would be sent to reform someone's life. They have the Bible and many Christians around the world to testify to that.
It seems instead that prophets are send to tell people to: repent from their lives of sin and foretell Christ and the Judgement.
Proof, I'm not sure what you mean. Faith is proof enough for me.
"For those with faith, no explanation is necessary; for those without it, none is possible." - St. Thomas Aquinas

To all of the smoke and mirrors -- Just because you don't understand the trick, doesn't mean that there isn't a solid explanation. Many people find philosophy and theology issues that are simply too taxing on them. It looks like a magic trick, and if you are the only one who doesn't get it, it might make you feel stupid. It shouldn't, just know that there is an explanation even if you can't comprehend it.

-- It seems as though you have already resolved yourself to hell. You stated that you had decent life and decent morals; an acknowledgment that they probably are inferior to what is asked. I hope that in your cynical life you may find peace. Arrogant/Vain? I think God simply wants us to be happy. The kind of happy that you don't feel shame afterwards. The kind of pure happiness that never causes your soul pain. Due to your cynisicm, I would bet you've seen your far share of the wrong kind of "happiness."

-- I'm not urging you to convert, but I am asking why you make it an issue on this forum. If you are uninterested in talking about it, why do you bring it up? Or why do you come onto these sites? From the pain in your posts, it is clear that you have been pushed far too far. But if you are tired of the battles, why run to the front lines?


-- Are you waiting to find a group who will guarantee you that you will never be hurt again? If we know one thing to be true of humans, it is that we will err. Therefore, to be safe, you have built up an impossible hurdle as justification for yourself. And yet, you seem to long for it. You want that perfect place. The safe place. We all want to be treated fairly. We all want the world to cooperate. We all don't want to be hurt. But this isn't the world that we live in. And that is for a reason, man can err. So do we give up. No, instead we live for higher ideals and higher ways. We try to make ourselves better and more than our temptations. We want to be strong. Zydor, you stated that you have morals and and live a decent life. Why? Do you not fail at that as well? Do you not hold something to be true, such as no stealing, and then find yourself snagging a cookie when no one was looking? Or have you reached perfection of your level of morals? And if you fail, then why would you hold a higher standard to anyone else? We want to because they have higher standards than our own, but that just means they have further to fall. If you only have step ladder, how easy it is for you to stand on it and be proud. Not much risk. If you compare that with people who have a two story ladder, there is much risk of falling, and failing. The reason why many people are a part of the Christian religion is that they have a being of perfection to follow. The followers of Christ might themselves not be perfect yet, and will most likely never get there, but they are always shooting for it. And the Faith starts with Christ. He is the Alpha. So if you are looking for perfection, go seek Him.

I can't even imagine what might have happened to you or the situation that you endured. Something I should have done a while back and seen coming, but now let me say this, "I believe with every essence of my being that you, as well as anyone on this planet, has a right to believe whatever they choose to, that is free will. Even if you are different from me, you can contend whatever you choose. If we debate about issues, I will hold myself in truth debate as best I can to discuss whatever issue arise. And at the end of the debate, we can each go our respective ways with our beliefs protected by one another. The only thing that can be found at fault is the adherence to good debate. I do not think of you any less or any more for your beliefs. At the end of the day, I will not interfer with your free will to choose, and if I see you being persecuted for those beliefs, I will join your side and use force, if necessary, to protect you."
Now, again, I don't know your circumstance, but you say that you have rarely experienced people's from one faith defend others against discrimination of their beliefs. If you want, there are many stories of Catholics defend the Jews during World War II for just that reason. Many of the Church's martyrs are actually defend not just the members of the Church but also all people at the time of their deaths.

-- Then what do you want? Hammurabi's code? Then don't follow humans that err, follow Christ who doesn't or God who doesn't?


-- I think that has been clearly explained in the forum to some end with the discussion on free will. Basically, God gave us free will. He has the ability to speak to us to instruct us in His ways. He has since, seemingly, stopped doing that. Apparently, we have received sufficient info to live lives in accordance with His ways. Now, we have the free will of whether to choose His ways or to ignore them. If God were to directly do or undo things with respects to humanity or any of the problems that we have created, then He imposes upon free will. Ultimately, we have the responsibility to clean up the mess we made. If it is unclear, I can speak to that some more.


-- In a couple of posts up from here I discussed this about the story of the rich man. He has chosen to give us sufficient information to choose Him (being omniscience, He knows), and if you choose otherwise, nothing else will be sufficient. People would search for a scientific reason for the sun, and if they didn't find one, they would create a poposterous explanation that all who don't believe in God would believe in that simply because they don't want to believe in God. If they had to believe in God, then they would have change their lives to adhere to His ways. That takes commitment.


-- If there was no such thing as God, and no one heard of or conceived of God before, do you think the world would be a pretty park walk? The reality is that people have used God to justify many things, but they would have done so anyways. You cited burning witches. That doesn't require anything of God. In fact, I'm not sure how much people even need to justify it with God, they simply killed them because they were a "threat" to their livestyle. Similarly, the genocide in Rwanda had nothing to do with religion or God. They simply tried to exterminate an entire people based on a difference that they found between the peoples. Why are the three different factions in Iraq fighting and killing each other? Not because of religious right, but instead because of differences between the tribes. Civil war? WWI? WWII? Sure, you are right that issues like the Crusades were fought because of religion, but it is not because religion exists that there exists war. Nor, if you did away with it, that it would cease. It[religion] is not the reason that there is a lot of messed up stuff in this world. Instead it is the weakness of man who do not resist their temptations.


--NEVER, and many of the religions today are working and fighting toward the end of these crimes, as well as many others, against humanity. Many are constantly giving and building to end hunger, disease, homelessness, poverty, etc. Religions are also helping the world.


--God didn't make us get lonely. He gave us and others free will. That means that we have either made ourselves lonely through our choices, or others have made choices that have impacted us resulting in loneliness. We are made in Him image. But that doesn't mean that we are made exactly like Him. And if all humans were made in His image, what image is that? Is God black or white? Tall or short? Asian or Swedish?



--This is an interesting issue. I'm not advocating that they will either, but if there are different sets of morals, then your wars will continue. One group may believe that war and killing is great. Another might think rape is okay. Another might condone killing helpless babies. It is the discrepancies that lead us to conflict, on large scales or small ones.

--I definitely believe that if you look for Him, you can't help but find Him. He is everywhere. This is His creation. There is a philosophical question that relates to intelligent design. It states simply that if you were to be the first person ever on the Moon, and that no one had ever been there nor had any equipment. What would you think if you found a pocket watch on the moon? You could open it up and all of the tiny gears moved together in a beautiful, fluidic rhythm. You could notice that each piece was precisely crafted so that it worked with another. At the end, you would most likely, if not absolutely, assume that some form of intelligent life had constructed it and placed it there. Shift that same situation to the human eye, or a myriad of other things within creation. All of it's pieces fit precisely together to work. In fact, we don't even understand how it does work together. But why, then, don't we see the same intelligent design at work in the eye as we do in the watch? Simple. It's because we are and are surround by the works of that same creator. Therefore, it all looks like nature to us. But instead they are all beautifully crafted systems that work together to an amazing degree of detail and precision. Does a fish realize that it is wet? No, because it belongs to the system and be taken out to examine the system away from it.
There are many scientists out there who constantly find that things are just a little too exact or precise to not be engineered by God. They have some great stories.


--He termed Himself Father, Abba. Christ told us to pray to Him as Father. He needs not to reproduce, especially in our way, since He is perfect. But He did have, from the outset, ready to send His Son. Now, how to introduce the Son of God and the Son of Man? Many ways could have been acceptable. But He chose to do so thru Mary.


--That's not exactly accurate. Moses talked to God, once thru a burning bush, and it is believed that when he received the commandments that just being in that close of a proximity to God, transfigured him. Abraham talked to God. These were not prophets. And there are more. But I think I see your point. After Christ, why do we not see of or hear of people talking with God? Well, in sorts, we do. Lourdes, Guadalupe, Fatima, these were not so long ago. Now, you're right, these are not God. But Mary is the mother of Christ. If she's not good enough for you, I'm not sure what is. If she doesn't live up to your standards and your expectations, just tell her to go back to heaven and send God right down here now. I'm sure He'll kindly make His way at your bidding.


--With the old testament, the prophets were many of the ones who revealed truths about God. They were also given special powers by God to authenticate His will. There is one example that talks about a sacrifice contest of sorts, where the prophet of one group was pitted against the prophet of the Hebrews. In the instance, when it came time for the first group's god to perform their miracle, it failed. When it came time for the Hebrew God to come thru, He not only consumed with fire the offering but had consumed all of the water on the altar as well (1 Kings 18:25)
Also when Moses freed the people from Egypt, many signs were witnessed by not only the Israelites, but also the Egyptians. These things were recorded by the people who witnessed them, but the grace and protection of God. Therefore, the documents are His words only written by human hands.
With the new testament, Christ, Son of God, spoke the words that were written down by those who heard it from Christ himself, except in the case of Luke, who wrote it sometime later after compiling all of the information from the Apostles and witnesses, which is why is it considered the most complete of the four gospels. All of the Biblical writers have been endowed with spiritual guidance. And there are many extensive tests done to ensure that they are written by God and not by man. On test is that it must not contradict other sanctioned Biblical books. God does not contradict Himself.
So why do people take these words to be God's? Because they are God's. If I have you dictate a memo for me, are they your words because you wrote them? And if when I have you read it back to me, and correct you on a mistake, then is the memo not exactly what I wanted it to say?


He is gender neutral. Think of an amoeba, they do not have sexes either. But if you want to communicate to an amoeba, if it was possible, calling yourself a man or a woman would just confuse it. So speaking in it's terminology is best, less room for confusion. Our minds are probably not really apt to conceiving God in His entirety, so we get just as much as we need.
As far as the nothing we know resembles Him...that depends. We are made in His image. But again what is that image? We have to work with that. So we know that our basic created model, before we messed it up with sin, in some ways (though probably few, if any, superficial ways) are similar to Him.
The progeny issue is dependent on whether or not you believe in Christianity's explanation or not. But if you believe in the Jewish, the Savior just hasn't come yet.


--The Torah is an integrated part of the Old Testament, in fact the foundation of it, not just based on it. Also called the Pentateuch. The Engile...I have no idea what this is. I've not only never heard of it, but I couldn't even find it in a google search or on wiki. Nothing. ThinkAloud, could you shed more light on this? I'm up for learning.
What about the Book of Mormon? You said the Qura'an was the last, but I think the Book of Mormon is more recent. Should we not read that as well?

Finally, ThinkAloud, I love your way. It's beautiful. God is at work with you.

I was told some people use he because in the bible is says a woman was created from a man with his ribs and thats why men have one less rib them women. So when you assume I was being cute, I point out the difference.

My assumption is that men have always had a dominate and controlling role in societies in the past and up until recent past and the thought of a female God would have been out of the question when the bible was being written or other religious texts.

As for my supposition that there must be more then one God if God is male, because to imply a sexual creature, either one that has sex, requiring a partner, or one sex of two which commonly occurs in nature, to be male is opposed to female and to be female is as opposed to male. Whereas to be "it", there is no opposing connotation. See where I'm going?

You say God is Gender neutral, my very good friend states God is a man. I'm perfectly comfortable with God being a woman, since you state God is gender neutral, and she states he is a man and I don't care one way or the other I just care how you both make your claims, what evidence you have providing support to your assertions.

You say God is gender neutral. Why?

Another statement you made was this... "He used voice communication only once with Prophet Moses."

According to the bible, a book written by a man not by God him, her or itself right?

"The mountain shook and crumbled in front of moses eyes."

Literally or figurative? Has anyone before or since heard from God and seen a mountain shake and crumble in front of their eyes?

According to a lot of my time invested in the bible studies, objectively I have come to conclude a lot of these stories to be figurative metaphors if believable at all.

Specifically the stories of Jesus making a blind man see, feeding crowds of people with two fish, making wine out of water, the sermon on the mount.

When you write about why God doesn't continue to send us messages, people are constantly on the look out for messages, so if it were true we should not expect any why should we look for them? Also it is very true that humans, as well as animals must continue to learn and apply what they learn all their lives in order to become better at what they do in any area of living.

So I cannot agree with you sentence. "They dont keep sending you to classes and give you new text book all your life, do they?"

Here I ask about God interacting with us, and I question the supposition that God did at one time communicate with us but then stopped because we either didn't' take him seriously, or believe, or for whatever reason. I would assume it takes God little or no time to decide to do something, and if so I would expect God doesn't go through a change of mind.

"The funny thing is He did that many times during earlier prophets' times but people still did not believe."

Regarding direct evidence...
""they ask for a direct evidence and when We show them the proof they say it is just magic".

Well I agree it would be difficult to bring everybody on board with evidence but the fact is, there is no direct evidence, its all indirect, its also from a time when evidence was and is not reliable, not sophisticated. It has also been rewritten and rewritten and taken as fact.

When you play a game of telephone at a party with a bunch of drunk people, nobody takes what the last guy says as absolute fact that the first guy said it just like that. Consider that analogy to be very accurate to what has happened to that information.

I also just do not see any compelling reason to think there is one higher power, I would tend to find it more believable that another race from another part of the galaxy or universe visited us around that time and purported to be this higher power in our form or appearing as one of us.

I just don't see how in the end, people can suppose their thoughts to be God talking to them, when the best evidence of God's existence is shaky, old, rewritten history by victors of conquered peoples, and contradicts one another's beliefs, while at the same time, we have knowledge of ancient beliefs which we take as either outdated, or mythology, while holding our own present day, mythology to be the truth.

But then I'm not one to just believe it because others say it is so.

Appreciate the discussion.

Well, biologically men don't have one less rib, anymore  . But it has also raised the question of the belly button, did Adam and Eve or did they not have a belly button since they weren't born. In the end, humans don't reveal much, if anything about God. That's like looking at the dinner you made last night. Does it look anything like you? Because you made it with carrots, does that mean you have carrots for arms? Very few people on this planet have made things that look exactly like them, similar...maybe a few more. But in the long run, looking at the creation is not the same as looking at the creator though you can still find many things that speak to his/her nature.


With the old testament, maybe. Highly doubtful. I don't think people would want to offend God by calling Him a man and not a woman, if that's what He had wanted. In addition, from a strickly anthropological view point, there are many male driven societies with very power female deities. Even in the ones that don't have powerful female deities, the society normally conforms itself, at least back then, to the deities ways and wishes.
With regards to the new testament, accepting that Christ came as the Son of God, He instructed the Apostles to call God by the title Father. If God had wanted to make a revision, He probably would have instructed His Son to fix that.

[quote]As for my supposition that there must be more then one God if God is male...[/qwote]
I totally see where you're going with this reasoning. Not bad at all. In fact, if God is able to be conformed to human logic, it might almost work. But like I said about the amoeba and communicating with it, you would not want to confuse it unnecessarily. That seems to be the way, don't get too hung up that you can still follow the path. Or work is out as you walk along. As far as we are above the amoeba, so God is above us (if you need similar quoted material from the Bible, I can get that, though it won't be an amoeba).


I would like to hear ThinkAloud's response as well. However, I have a feeling that it is somewhere along the same lines as the amoeba. He is the all-power entity that created Heaven and Earth. He along is perfect and complete. When He communicated with us, He wanted to share with us that He is with us as our Creator but also our Refuge. Therefore, I think He chose Father to best represent in our terms and to our limited minds, which can't conceive of our lives let alone all of creation, this idea. I don't think that God said Father for us to ask,　"where is Mother?" If you have studied foreign languages, earth languages, you will find that there is no such thing as direct translation. Since man(kind) has created our language, therefore flawed since we lack perfect, then God made the best due He could without confusing us more. God could have said that He was a toad. It is something that we can identify with. But the connotations of our language are a bit different. And who knows, maybe they didn't have the word or the concept back then for amoeba. Maybe that is the best word. But it is more important the relation that it creates between us and Him.


I couldn't find this quote, I assume it is from ThinkAloud. In the new testament, He spoke to all as St. John the Baptist was baptizing Christ saying, "this is My Son." There are other times as well, most all of them in the old testament.


Literally or figuratively. That is a fun question. Did God create the world in 6 days (leads us to another discussion on the philosophy of time, fun if you interested)? Did God literally spit into the dirt, form Adam, breathe into him, pull a rib, make Eve, have a tree of forbidden fruit, caste them into the desert? And that's just part of Genosis.
However, let's look at the flood for right now. Almost every single civilization on earth, that has records of their history, recorded a flood. The Mayans have a legend about it. The Egyptians, in one of the most precise libraries of the ancient world, recorded a flood. Wikipedia, which is not always fully reliable nor complete, has listed 22 different sources: Sumerian, Babylonian, Akkadian, Hebrew, China, India, Andaman Islands, Indonesia, Australia, Ogygyes(Greek), Deucalion (Greek), Dardanus (Greek), Germanic, Irish, Aztec, Inca, Maya, Hopi, Caddo, Menominee, Mi'kmaq, and Polynesian. And here is a site, with cultures all over the world http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html.
What's amazing is that everyone seems to verify that it existed. It's one of the hardest things to believe in the old testament, I think. The entire world being flooded. But yet it is all of these beliefs all around the world in places completely isolated from Jewish influences. Creationism is even more prevalent. And if you start reading them, it's interesting how many of them are done in stages or days. The coincidences are pretty uncanny.
Are some of them just metaphorical or figurative? I can certainly say that I wouldn't be surprized. Why? What is the overall purpose of telling the story of creation? Is it to relate history perfectly? What good does that really do mankind? Or does God, when inspiring the writers, write what is important for us to know about the creation and learn from it?

Yesterday at precisely 8:14'35.86" I roused awake out my dream about German dark chocolate Bunnies, 84% cocoa, standing 8'2.43" tall, weigh around 500 lbs 34 grams... ... ...
This could go on forever. What's the point? Nothing. You really learned nothing from that, and you might even be a bit more confused for all your trouble of reading it. Did it change your life? Is it helping you become a better person? Maybe, since you may never ask me about my day again. When God inspired the writers, especially on the issues that they weren't present for, because they were present for many others, He made things simple to understand. He didn't want to confuse them with all of the fine details that goes into designing and creating the universe. Could imagine if He wrote a manual for that?! He summarized the main points and gave us something that we could spiritually digest.

However this doesn't exclude miracles from happening right infront of the eyese of men, and they then recorded what they saw as a testiment to God. If I use one metaphor to describe a situation, does that make my whole essay a metaphor? Does it mean that nothing in the essay was the truth? Metaphors aren't lies, just ways to simplify the truth to an easily understood state.


Nothing mystifies us anymore. We won't allow ourselves to risk being dupped. Someone, or far too many people, have shown us something amazing and then revealed how easy it is. Then we feel all the dumber for believing that it might be magic or a miracle. We are cynics. A mark of the times, that's all. But that is an issue of faith. However, you are only asking the same questions that people asked the Apostles and other believers. They sat their and said, "are you sure you saw Jesus turn the water into, are you sure you saw Him multiply fish, are you sure He rose from the dead and appear in corporial form to you?" And they asked these questions, not as nice as you do, by torturing them. The Apostles and others knew that they would suffer the worst deaths at the hands of torturers if they didn't tell them the truth. And so they did. And so they died. Those torturers and high officials didn't believe it either. But when you're sure of something, so sure that you would die from hideous torturous deaths, you die for what you truly believe. It would have been so easy for them to say, "you know, in truth, I just exaggerated a bit. He really just bought some more wine and put it in the same barrels, he just had a feast hidden in the hollow of the tree, we just made that bit up about Him coming back." Why would all of those people die torturous deaths holding to the same story? After a while you would think that a few would break ranks and tell the truth. They were hunted for the about the first 200 years. You would think someone would stand up and say, "let's just tone this down a bit and maybe they'll let off." But that didn't happen. And then they kept going to other countries and suffering the same way, centuries after centuries.
Would you do that if you weren't absolutely sure?

I'll get back to more later, gotta run. And by the way, I enjoy the discussion as well.

need i repeat the aphorism bout the likely consequences of assuming things? the oldest manifestation of gods with which i'm familiar are very curvy female forms believed to represent the fertile earth goddess.

in hunter/gatherer societies, men hunted game while women collected plants for both food and medicine. as the earliest pharmacologists, women knew which plants to use as poison; as mothers, they brought life into the world. they literally held the power of life and death.

at about the same time humans quit being nomads to cultivate cereals, things changed completely. religion became patriarchal at womens' expense. same thing happened with medicine and prolly for the same reason.

those wise old healing women musta seemed terribly dangerous to their male usurpers judging from the way they went up in smoke after being declared witches.

"Well, biologically men don't have one less rib, anymore . But it has also raised the question of the belly button, did Adam and Eve or did they not have a belly button since they weren't born. In the end, humans don't reveal much, if anything about God."

That would assume you have any evidence as to the physiology of God. I'm assuming you don't.

Contega you seem to have an answer for everything. Nothing I ask is unanswerable to you. I appreciate your responses, but seriously some of your explanations are stretching the bounds of believability.

I am not interested in proving God existed in the past. For everyone indoctrinated in the cultures of the past, believe or die, it would have been easy to accept it if it keeps you alive. My task is providing evidence that it is true today. I'm not very interested holding what was believed 2000 or 1000 years ago to be fact. I have difficult enough time considering a lot of what is believed today by people is B.S.

For example, crop circles, created by UFO's from another part in the galaxy, possible yes, likey no, more likely created by people looking to make others believe they are created by aliens.

Go back 50 years, its UFO mania, 100 years it's ghosts and spirits, hauntings, some even believe this beyond entertainment today as fact and true occurances, though little or nothing of it is scientifically replicatable.

Go back 200-500 years, you got women and men being burned at the stake because they are believed to be witches and wrecking the crops and bringing bad weather.

Farther back 2000 years, bible times, you get mystical things happening that aren't reproducible today.

There is no way to perform the literal acts of replicating food for a crowd from two pieces of fish, no way to make water into wine, no way to walk on water (unless it's ice) etc...

Back as far as recorded history goes, the first story written on cuneiform 3500 BC is about the flood.

As for the story of the flood, I agree that is occurs in many other cultures, the stories of history are repeated and reworked. My questions about the specifics of the details recorded in the bible about Jesus and his mystical abilities remain.

In addition to that, think about the scientific age of the planet, man has been around for about 2 million years, decedents from the apes by our scientific understanding, yet there is no accommodation of this in religious texts. We came from Adam and Eve if the bible is to be believed, what about the dinosaurs?

What about the fact that the planet is about 4.5 billions years old. What about the fact that our sun is about that old too? What about that fact that there are other worlds orbiting other suns, and that in the future we will certainly have the ability to travel to them. Where is the ethics chat about our future of intergalactic exploitation in another 2000 years and being kind to the lesser advanced races, and being good stewards of intergalactic space?

Not a topic covered in any religious text I've read. I guess God never thought we'd make it off this rock?

As for the flood itself. Where did all this water go? The Earth is 75% covered by water give or take, some areas are miles high from the water, it would be impossible for the entire thing to be covered even if all the solid water was melted into liquid would it not? Is there any evidence of water being added or detracted at a rate that would put another ocean sized quantity of water on the Earth 2000 years ago?

I don't know of any. I think the bible and all the stories of floods have some holes to fill in that that theory.

This was about God talking to people though, I think you have to assume that unless you can prove that God exists first, and that he/she/it is interested in talking to us, and honestly why talk when you are God and can just act?

Oh well questions questions. I guess I haven't given up the search for answers but they are damn few to come by and meagerly inadequate.