Intentionally Hidden (Religion)
by Balance_Maintained 
, U.S.A., Wednesday, March 27, 2013, 08:11 (4257 days ago)
Carry over from the Trilobite Eyes discussion-[David] We can only know God through His works. There is no direct evidence, because He wants it that way.- >Tony: I think it is more than a simple case of 'he want's it that way'. I see that there is a reason behind it that is very valid and grounded in sound logic. Not going to derail this thread for that though.->Bella: Tony, I am interested to hear your perspective on the reason behind why God did things the way he did them. Maybe you could put it under a separate category?- First, understand that I am speaking partially from a biblical perspective when I am looking at this topic. Perhaps that should go without saying, but, better to be explicit. -In the beginning(that just sounds epic...) God revealed himself to man in a manner that one could almost call routine. There are numerous times in the early scriptures where God's presence was revealed directly. -However, he was presented with a challenge. Does God have the right to rule his creation? While he answered that challenge, he also established a precedent for showing people preferential treatment. While not unreasonable, this allowed room for the second challenge, which we see in the story of Job. Will people still follow you leadership if you do not give them special care, treatment, and rewards? -Essentially, while both questions attacked the character of God, the second one also questioned the faithfulness and character of mankind. Would we do the right thing simply for the sake of doing the right thing? Would we offer our loyalty, love, and respect to someone without asking/demanding anything in return? Could we be satisfied with what gifts we have received, without asking for special treatment?-Should God reveal himself or give physical blessings to people, as he had done with Job, then he is admitting that not only is he not fit because he has to resort to bribery, but also that humanity is not fit to exist because we can not be trusted to do the right thing. -The only way to answer that challenge is to allow things to happen on their own, without interfering, putting faith in humanity that at least SOME of the people would turn out to be good people, and that they would be worth saving. -When you look at the picture of the Bible as a whole, that is what we see. All of the prophecies, all of the events that are supposed to come to pass at 'the end of times' is a separating out of those that showed faith in God without requiring anything in return; people that loved him because he is worth loving.-Belief is not enough. "In fact, this is love for God: to keep his commands. And his commands are not burdensome,". Some people never realize it, but God has put a tremendous amount of faith and love in humanity, and that is all he expects in return; for us to love him and justify his faith in us by having faith in him by trusting that what he has told us to do is for our own benefit.-If God were to reveal himself, it would no longer be an act of faith. People would do what they were told to do because of fear, not loyalty, love, or faith. If that happened, YHWH would have failed the challenge that he was presented with, he would be declared unfit to rule and humanity unfit to exist. -That is why I say that it is no great surprise that we can not find obvious evidence of God. If you start with the faith that there is a God, and then you will see the evidence absolutely everywhere. Seeing is not believing, believing is seeing.
--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.
Intentionally Hidden
by David Turell , Wednesday, March 27, 2013, 13:35 (4257 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained
Tony: If God were to reveal himself, it would no longer be an act of faith. People would do what they were told to do because of fear, not loyalty, love, or faith. If that happened, YHWH would have failed the challenge that he was presented with, he would be declared unfit to rule and humanity unfit to exist. > > That is why I say that it is no great surprise that we can not find obvious evidence of God. If you start with the faith that there is a God, and then you will see the evidence absolutely everywhere. Seeing is not believing, believing is seeing.-But I came to faith in God the other way around. I was on dhw's fence and it was only after studying God's works that I came to the conclusion that God must exist, much like Adler's gradual acceptance. And I agree with the point of view that we are to be 'good' for goodness sake, not for promised rewards. There is a higher adult level of religious thought than simple reward or punishment, which is the child-like approach. One shound never be frightened into believing.
Intentionally Hidden
by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Wednesday, March 27, 2013, 15:25 (4257 days ago) @ David Turell
David: But I came to faith in God the other way around. I was on dhw's fence and it was only after studying God's works that I came to the conclusion that God must exist, much like Adler's gradual acceptance. And I agree with the point of view that we are to be 'good' for goodness sake, not for promised rewards. There is a higher adult level of religious thought than simple reward or punishment, which is the child-like approach. One shound never be frightened into believing.- I once heard a really great speaker talk about studying the two 'books' for studying God; the bible, and nature.
--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.
Intentionally Hidden
by BBella , Saturday, March 30, 2013, 06:13 (4254 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained
[David] We can only know God through His works. There is no direct evidence, because He wants it that way. > > > >Tony: I think it is more than a simple case of 'he want's it that way'. I see that there is a reason behind it that is very valid and grounded in sound logic. Not going to derail this thread for that though. > > >Bella: Tony, I am interested to hear your perspective on the reason behind why God did things the way he did them. Maybe you could put it under a separate category? > > > First, understand that I am speaking partially from a biblical perspective when I am looking at this topic. Perhaps that should go without saying, but, better to be explicit. > > In the beginning(that just sounds epic...) God revealed himself to man in a manner that one could almost call routine. There are numerous times in the early scriptures where God's presence was revealed directly..................... > If God were to reveal himself, it would no longer be an act of faith. People would do what they were told to do because of fear, not loyalty, love, or faith. If that happened, YHWH would have failed the challenge that he was presented with, he would be declared unfit to rule and humanity unfit to exist. > > That is why I say that it is no great surprise that we can not find obvious evidence of God. If you start with the faith that there is a God, and then you will see the evidence absolutely everywhere. Seeing is not believing, believing is seeing.-Tony, I appreciate your taking the time to express what you meant by God doing the things the way he did, and staying "intentionally hidden". I have had this "faith that there is a God" for all of my life. And until the last decade or a little more I had concluded much of what you say above about God, the reason he has done things the way that has been done, etc, with very little difference then what you say above. I remain open to this way of "seeing" God (not closing it off), but in the last years, I have become more open to "seeing" beyond words that are written (specifically the words of the Bible as well as other sacred books). Oddly enough, it was the words written in the Bible itself, in some ironic sense, that gave me permission to look beyond words of the scriptures to see what I "myself" might can see - without the assistance of man's words and views of God, including the men who wrote the Bible. -At the time, I wasn't looking for permission, yet I believe that as a Christian, I must have needed it, because without it, I probably would have remained within the box. We Christians, you will agree I'm sure, are in some sense, boxed in with our firm belief's, as sheep without separate minds. Or even better, like dogs; we may differ in many ways, but we are all the same in kind. -Our box is the sacred "Word of God" and, let's not forget, those who delve deeply, expounding and squeezing out it's every bit of information to it's innermost/furthermost reaches of it's parameters. We can go from this parameter to that parameter, but we go no further. Possibly, in the back of our mind we believe (or fear?) Satan dwells beyond those set parameters. Whatever the reason, like sheep, we stay within our fence. -The scripture that gave me the permission to venture beyond the fence is Romans 1:20-23. For the benefit of others, I will quote it here: NKJV -"For since the creation of the world His {Gods} invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man--and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things."-Of course this scripture was not placed there to give me permission to look beyond the Word for God (I know it was not meant to), but it did. And when I did observe what the God this scripture spoke of, low and behold, it looked nothing like the God of the scriptures, to me. This scripture said plainly to me, God is not an intentionally "hidden" God, but a God that is clearly seen by the things that are made. When I removed mans words, ideas and thoughts of God and just look at what is made, I saw very little of anything that the scriptures express that God is like. That which can clearly be seen is that which I see right now, at any given moment, in every moment. When man then tells me what God is, through words or thought, and places his ideas on What Is, I begin to suspect "beings" beyond this world, like aliens and such. When man gives attributes like a man to God, I do not relate that with what I see. -continued.....
Intentionally Hidden
by BBella , Saturday, March 30, 2013, 06:17 (4254 days ago) @ BBella
continued...-If men talked with God in the "beginning" and God spoke back or revealed himself to them, and God did this, that or the other thing, and we are made in his image, etc, then I suspect somethings afoot. If God is clearly seen by what is, then it's not the same God as the one that spoke and destroyed and hovered above, etc. The God that can be seen by what is, if it can even be called "God" is more like the Ein Sof we spoke of earlier. A cosmic womb from which all things are made and return to in a constant state of creation. If, from this cosmic womb, a god person, who then created man in his image, and called himself YHWH, then dictated his word to man, but man can no longer can see, claims he created man, then maybe "he" did. And maybe he does have the right to dictate to us or require from us, or wait for us to have faith in him. But that god is not clearly seen. He has intentionally hidden himself from us. I cannot relate the two with each other. -But I can see that "if" from creation, a man/god like being evolved or was created and called himself our God because he, in turn, created us, would want us to believe that because he was created first, deserves, in some sense, a big brother/father status. But, I also believe, that if this is so, this man/god has evolved as well, and now allows us to be what we will be, and not what he, in the beginning, had created us to be - worshipers of him. -This is just my take at the moment. And like yours, it is ever evolving and subject to change.-Sorry I didn't have the time to edit and compress this to one post but wanted to get in a reply.
Intentionally Hidden
by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Saturday, March 30, 2013, 07:30 (4254 days ago) @ BBella
I was with you on your first post, you lost me on your second. -The bible DOES give explicit instructions to look beyond the bible to find out more about god. It is completely rife with passages that instruct to look towards all creation to learn more about the creator. There is a tremendous difference between spirituality, faith, and religion. Note that no where in the bible does the word religion appear. -The word 'religion' an English word, is translated from the Greek word, "threskeia" which means to show piety in a reverent way. It is found four times in the New Testament, James 1:26,27; Colossians 2:18; Acts 26:5. It is also translated sometimes as 'worship' as in Colossians 2:18...Likewise The word "church" was substituted for a correct translation of the Greek word 'ekklesia'; and that anti-scriptural word has deceived millions of unknowing, often uncaring, people into actually believing that there really is a church in the Bible. It is a great deception; a horrible error. The English words assembly, congregation, or gathering are correct renderings of the Greek word. There is no justification whatever for the English word church being in the Scripture.-Where most people get messed up is that they put faith in religion, in the church, instead of in God. The 'church' is all about power and control, not God. When I hear you talk about your past experiences, in many ways it is heart breaking to me because I know all to well how members of a 'church' can destroy your faith with their dogma and hypocrisy.
--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.
Intentionally Hidden
by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Saturday, March 30, 2013, 07:38 (4254 days ago) @ BBella
As for your second post.. -> continued... > > Bella: If men talked with God in the "beginning" and God spoke back or revealed himself to them, and God did this, that or the other thing, and we are made in his image, etc, then I suspect somethings afoot. If God is clearly seen by what is, then it's not the same God as the one that spoke and destroyed and hovered above, etc. The God that can be seen by what is, if it can even be called "God" is more like the Ein Sof we spoke of earlier. -None of this makes sense to me. Logically, if a scriptural view is taken, God did indeed reveal himself, but did not look face to face with any man, as that would have killed them. Moses face was glowing for a week after being in God's presence and he never saw God's face. -Also, you can tell a lot about the creator by his creation. To use a layman example, if you get a product from a manufacturer that is poor in quality, cheaply made, over priced, and toxic to boot, you can infer a lot of information about the maker of said product. They don't care about the environment, their customers, or their product. All they care about is getting rich quick. Conversely, we are 'fearfully and wonderfully made'. It is awe inspiring the amount of detail, complexity, and beauty that went into creation. Moreover, the very fact that we are capable of not only appreciating this beauty through our senses and our minds, but we are able to participate in the act of creation. That tells us a lot about the creator. - >Bella: If, from this cosmic womb, a god person, who then created man in his image, and called himself YHWH, then dictated his word to man, but man can no longer can see, ..maybe he does have the right to dictate to us or require from us, or wait for us to have faith in him. But that god is not clearly seen. He has intentionally hidden himself from us. I cannot relate the two with each other. -'He' is a language artifact, disregard it at your leisure, though I do think it is fitting in a way(that has nothing to do with my being male). As for being hidden, it is clear from the scripture that it was not his original intent, but rather a means to an end. The challenge must be answered. -Think of it like this. One day, your child comes home from school and takes you aside and privately questions why you have authority as a mother and why he/she should do things your way. At that point, you can calmly explain what is going on. -Now, suppose a different scenario, where the child challenges your right to govern your house hold in front of your husband, other children, extended family members, and the neighbors. Now, you could punish your child, but if you did so you would be lending credence to their claim in the eyes of everyone else. If you completely ignore the child, you also give credence to their claims because you seem incompetent. What choice is there? It would seem like a damned if you do, damned if you don't. However, there IS a good way of dealing with it. You say, "If you know better than I what is in your best interest, then by all means, prove it." You have admitted no weakness, you have given no quarter, you have not lost face in front of anyone, but you have deftly shifted the burden of proof onto the accuser. -What happens as your other children watch the rebellious child struggle and fail?-See, one of the great follies of the 'church' is arrogance. They think that all the crap we have to go through is for our benefit. It isn't. We may be a favored creation but we are not the end all be all center of the universe. The things done here on earth are for the benefit of God's other children as much as they are for us. Yes, it is a universal power struggle. It is a chess game.. the original competition. It is a game played between two rivals for the right to be crowned king. There can only be one king of creation.-Like any game, it has its rules and strategies, and each piece is different and moves in different ways. Yes, we humans can get all twisted up over if we want and call names and point fingers and cry about how unfair it is. At the end of the day though, our ancestors volunteered us as pawns in this chess game. Once the game starts there is no stopping until only one king is left. There is no stalemate in this game. Just like in chess, sometimes pawns pawns are lost, sometimes they are sacrificed. The big difference is that God can reset the board and put the pieces back into play as intended from the start, but not until after the game is finished.- There are two choices people have to make. The first is which side they are on, the second is whether they are capable of putting the safety of the king above their own. The sacrifice of Christ was more than a ransom, it was an example. Can you subject yourself willingly, not as a sheep with no mind, but as a free intelligent creature to the will of someone else for the greater good. Faith is the requirement for that. You have to have faith that not only can the board be reset after the game is played out, but that it will be and that sacrifice will not be asked for again.-See, the other thing people often forget is that it doesn't have to happen a second time. When two kings play, and one king loses, the winner doesn't have to take on every uppity prince that comes along. He has already proven himself.
--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.
Intentionally Hidden
by BBella , Sunday, March 31, 2013, 05:57 (4253 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained
edited by unknown, Sunday, March 31, 2013, 06:05
Tony, thank you for your indepth response. In times past, I could have, and probably did write or say pretty much the same words as you wrote in both posts to make the same points to others that you have made to me. Your words are giving me flashbacks they are that familiar. You can be sure, this information you expounded, better than I could have back then, IS very well understood by me. In some ways I feel we have viewed God thru the exact lense with similar ways of seeing. Is it uncanny or just one of those coincidence that just happens? -Just to get this out of the way, I do want to let you know, we can drop the word "religion" altogether. I left religion in the dust long ago. I have children older than that dust (my youngest is 17, my oldest is 40 and I have two in-between.) I've never felt burned by religion. I lived my life studying to see God past religion within the scriptures; thru the english, greek, hebrew and aramaic,and multitude of translations, concordances, root words, etc. Dedicating my life to God at 22, I did seek him with my whole heart - within the allowed boundaries. Whether I made those boundaries for myself or they were made for me, I'm not sure. Maybe that's what you mean by religion - the fence/box of the scriptures? -As I said in my first post, there is a place within me still reserved for seeing "God" in this way you have written in your posts. I have not abandoned it. But I have set it aside - not forgotten - but very much appreciated. It's been a great help and guide, and still remains for me, to this day, and even assists, always, within the place that I am.-To see God the way you wrote in the last few posts does take faith, any way you look at it. But for me, now, in the place that I am, it's not just a question of faith any longer, or even a faith in what. Would faith even be needed by the God that can clearly be seen thru that which manifests itself as creation without the words of man? I have yet needed faith in what I can now so clearly see. -Yes, it takes faith to believe what man has written about their encounters with God. Faith that these men had a relationship with a hidden, unseeable God that decides where, when and how to relate with man (man to man so to speak). Do we "need" their encounters with God, seen thru their filters, to know a God who can so easily be known and seen without knowing of their encounters and their information? I am finding I don't need faith in what is in the past. I can clearly see what is the here and the now. -Stepping back, what I see in the scriptures (as a whole) is an ever evolving God with multi-faceted faces that grew from childlike dictatorial ways and tantrums to a more mature allowing adult. And the last face (metaphorically speaking) that I saw from this God, was one that said to me, I have evolved past all of these faces, you go and do the same and stop rummaging for me in the past looking at my unevolved faces. And since doing so (leaving all words and ideas of the past about God behind), I have yet to run across (hide nor hair - as we southerners would say) of the God of the scriptures. Instead, I have found this fascinating malleable fabric of the all that is that I am amazed and intrigued to understand more about as I observe it in action, feel it and be it. -If you take away everything you know about God that you have learned thru words and others encounters that you've read or heard, what are you left with? That is what I see as God, if you would even want to use the word. I have yet to feel the need.
Intentionally Hidden
by David Turell , Sunday, March 31, 2013, 06:15 (4253 days ago) @ BBella
> b bella: Just to get this out of the way, I do want to let you know, we can drop the word "religion" altogether. I left religion in the dust long ago. > > As I said in my first post, there is a place within me still reserved for seeing "God" in this way you have written in your posts. I have not abandoned it. But I have set it aside - not forgotten - but very much appreciated. It's been a great help and guide, and still remains for me, to this day, and even assists, always, within the place that I am. -I am the same way. No religion, jost approaching God through science. > > Would faith even be needed by the God that can clearly be seen thru that which manifests itself as creation without the words of man? I have yet needed faith in what I can now so clearly see.-But there has to be faith in your conclusion. I accept faith in God, after I did my search.- > B Bella: Do we "need" their encounters with God, seen thru their filters, to know a God who can so easily be known and seen without knowing of their encounters and their information? I am finding I don't need faith in what is in the past. I can clearly see what is the here and the now. -We don't need faith in them. we can 'see' on our own > > b bella: If you take away everything you know about God that you have learned thru words and others encounters that you've read or heard, what are you left with? That is what I see as God, if you would even want to use the word. I have yet to feel the need.-Just rely on what you understand on your own.
Intentionally Hidden
by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Sunday, March 31, 2013, 10:16 (4253 days ago) @ BBella
Bella,-I do understand what you are saying. While I know I refer back to the bible a lot, in many ways I view it as I would any text book, something which I can reference when I find something confusing, something that forces me to ask tough questions and meditate upon them. It serves as a frame of reference for understanding. It is not the only way, but I do think it is a fairly vital component. I do not think it was ever meant to be the end all be all of approaching god, and in fact it indicates as much within it's very pages! -The bible even clearly indicates that its truths are hidden, so that we must search them out as if seeking precious treasures. Even Christ himself said that his public message was intentionally hidden, and I can see the purpose behind it. Truth and knowledge is power, and power is easily abused, as it has been for centuries. -Are the words there to give every detail that we might wish to know? Not at all. Do we have to rely solely upon it for evidence? Not at all. Does that make it any less real or valid? Not at all. -You mentioned that you see God as having matured, which I find interesting in many ways, because I don't see that in what I read. What I read, is one coherent picture of a personality that was forced to do things that he would have preferred not to by circumstances that, while not beyond his control, would have been made worse if he had tried to control them. -The 'tantrums' are no more tantrums than a parent being angry or hurt over the actions of their child, even when they are not directed towards the parent. When you see that the course of their actions is going to hurt them, and they reject your help, it hurts, angers, and frustrates you. That my dear, is known as love. - I think the testament of that love is the greatest purpose the Bible serves. We can learn and speculate all on our own about the nature of a creator, even if we get to the point where we acknowledge his existence by virtue of our own experience and observations, but they do not give us the vital clues needed to understand him. Just like an engineer is not wholly defined by their designs, DHW by his previous profession, David by his books, and I by my games, God can not fully be understood by his creations alone. This is especially true in light of how much we have screwed it all up. -The bible provides that window to the personality. While DHW & David may scoff at the idea of anthropomorphic details of Gods personality, I personally find no disparity between what I see in my own experience and observations and what I read in the Bible.
--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.
Intentionally Hidden
by David Turell , Sunday, March 31, 2013, 16:30 (4253 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained
Tony: I think the testament of that love is the greatest purpose the Bible serves. We can learn and speculate all on our own about the nature of a creator, even if we get to the point where we acknowledge his existence by virtue of our own experience and observations, but they do not give us the vital clues needed to understand him. Just like an engineer is not wholly defined by their designs, DHW by his previous profession, David by his books, and I by my games, God can not fully be understood by his creations alone. This is especially true in light of how much we have screwed it all up. > > The bible provides that window to the personality. While DHW & David may scoff at the idea of anthropomorphic details of Gods personality, I personally find no disparity between what I see in my own experience and observations and what I read in the Bible.-If I accepted the bible beyond the true history it contains, I could accept your interpretation of the 'love' aspect. Unfortunately I do not accept the contention that the written words are under the control of divine inspiration and are inerrent. They are written by humans with points to make. God can be seen in his creations. Only God could have done this. Beyond that it is all human speculation. The Bible sets moral and ethical guidelines as a proper backdrop for our civilized activity. And yes, we screw it up. Whether God cares or not is human speculation. I can love God in thankfulness for his gift of life, and reasonably expect no more in return. In Hebrew we say: "it is enough". Deyanu, from the Sedar service.