Do you think it odd that your God never acknowledges you? Is that rude?

[night_son]

S

You asked for the prancing pony and the dancing dog. A juggling bear next? You know I know we know they know--what. Some past disillusionment has brought you to the act of casting doubt in public for all to see of the words of your forefathers regarding a religion which has in some way oppressed your life or disappointed its expectations for the Divine.

Now you want to perform a public execution of that very same belief to exorcise that disillusionment as justification guilt of doubt. Only you don't just want to execute the fear and guilt of lack of belief in yourself, you want to instill doubt in others as well, to gain company in the cold Godless rooms of life. All you have accomplished is to cast doubt on yourself.

Faith is not for the faithful to prove or disprove on demand. You chose particular words of mine to weaponize against me, here in public, in an effort to make them--and me seem foolish in order to drum up so-called atheist sympathy. But the burden of proof or disproof lies with you in the act of calling out to the public square for showdown and trial, as does an examination--a personal reflection of why those words of mine troubled you so.

Now then, why does the concept of God speaking to the individual so disturb you. A summarized personal history would be sufficient.

Thank you for your indictment of me. I will file it with the others....*flush*

So, you say a god talks to you. How so? Do you hear a voice? Please clarify.

So, the concept of God speaking to man has scarred your life? How so?

Not at all. And it is a bit rude to avoid my question and then ask me a question. Let me ask again:

What do you mean, when you say a god talks to you? Do you hear a voice? or is it more, a feeling?

Or is it ruder or perhaps more disingenuous to hide behind your reason for asking the question in the first place? You need better bait to catch out the fish inside of you. You've called yourself out in the asking. Now prove or disprove your motivation.

Your answer should not depend on my reason for asking the question. I'll try again:

When you say a god talks to you, what do you mean? Do you hear a voice?

And fail . . . again, until you come out from behind the bulwark of self-righteousness. You mistake truth and justification of cause for obdurate insistence. Insofar as the concept of faith, you're proving your own in this pursuit. I understand you seek reassurance for the core of doubt that brought you to this thread. Tell me, is it God's voice driving you so to seek my reinforcement of your wavering belief?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

S

Thank you for your indictment of me. I will file it with the others....*flush*

So, you say a god talks to you. How so? Do you hear a voice? Please clarify.

So, the concept of God speaking to man has scarred your life? How so?

Not at all. And it is a bit rude to avoid my question and then ask me a question. Let me ask again:

What do you mean, when you say a god talks to you? Do you hear a voice? or is it more, a feeling?

Or is it ruder or perhaps more disingenuous to hide behind your reason for asking the question in the first place? You need better bait to catch out the fish inside of you. You've called yourself out in the asking. Now prove or disprove your motivation.

Your answer should not depend on my reason for asking the question. I'll try again:

When you say a god talks to you, what do you mean? Do you hear a voice?

And fail . . . again, until you come out from behind the bulwark of self-righteousness. You mistake truth and justification of cause for obdurate insistence. Insofar as the concept of faith, you're proving your own in this pursuit. I understand you seek reassurance for the core of doubt that brought you to this thread. Tell me, is it God's voice driving you so to seek my reinforcement of your wavering belief?

Another question, after refusing to answer mine? I would be happy to answer, if you would do me the courtesy of same.

Again: what do you mean, when you say your god talks to you? Is it a voice? A feeling? What?

 

[night_son]

Pretty sure he's busy.

Busy doing what? So many cancers, people going hungry, kids being abused. Sounds like to me God isn’t doing much.

No. Cancers, hunger, child abuse . . . all human acts or causalities of human behavior, not divine ones. Mankind must take responsibility for his own actions, and the subsequent consequences--not blame them on God. Do you blame your parents for the consequences of your own actions?

Then what is the purpose of worshipping God if ain't doing shit for humanity?

Stop worshiping the Gods of smart devices, social media and purely intellectual moral relativism--they are all graven images created by and proselytized to men by men. Stop blaming God for the consequences of human behavior, and submit your outrage over human darkness to the Son who always forgives. God has done much for humanity simply in giving him a place at the starting line of life. What we do after beginning the race is on us. Personal responsibility is the only path to the Logos within and without.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Pretty sure he's busy.

Busy doing what? So many cancers, people going hungry, kids being abused. Sounds like to me God isn’t doing much.

No. Cancers, hunger, child abuse . . . all human acts or causalities of human behavior, not divine ones. Mankind must take responsibility for his own actions, and the subsequent consequences--not blame them on God. Do you blame your parents for the consequences of your own actions?

Then what is the purpose of worshipping God if ain't doing shit for humanity?

Stop worshiping the Gods of smart devices, social media and purely intellectual moral relativism--they are all graven images created by and proselytized to men by men. Stop blaming God for the consequences of human behavior, and submit your outrage over human darkness to the Son who always forgives. God has done much for humanity simply in giving him a place at the starting line of life. What we do after beginning the race is on us. Personal responsibility is the only path to the Logos within and without.

Shaman night_son has spoken!

 

[night_son]

S
So, the concept of God speaking to man has scarred your life? How so?

Not at all. And it is a bit rude to avoid my question and then ask me a question. Let me ask again:

What do you mean, when you say a god talks to you? Do you hear a voice? or is it more, a feeling?

Or is it ruder or perhaps more disingenuous to hide behind your reason for asking the question in the first place? You need better bait to catch out the fish inside of you. You've called yourself out in the asking. Now prove or disprove your motivation.

Your answer should not depend on my reason for asking the question. I'll try again:

When you say a god talks to you, what do you mean? Do you hear a voice?

And fail . . . again, until you come out from behind the bulwark of self-righteousness. You mistake truth and justification of cause for obdurate insistence. Insofar as the concept of faith, you're proving your own in this pursuit. I understand you seek reassurance for the core of doubt that brought you to this thread. Tell me, is it God's voice driving you so to seek my reinforcement of your wavering belief?

Another question, after refusing to answer mine? I would be happy to answer, if you would do me the courtesy of same.

Again: what do you mean, when you say your god talks to you? Is it a voice? A feeling? What?

In this echo chamber you've created, you're ears ring. So loudly so you fail to see ahead far enough on the path you follow to read the steeply descending terrain and take precaution. Abstinence of acquiescence to personal restraint does not validate an argument, just as blind acquiescence without a careful step make admirability apparent.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Not at all. And it is a bit rude to avoid my question and then ask me a question. Let me ask again:

What do you mean, when you say a god talks to you? Do you hear a voice? or is it more, a feeling?

Or is it ruder or perhaps more disingenuous to hide behind your reason for asking the question in the first place? You need better bait to catch out the fish inside of you. You've called yourself out in the asking. Now prove or disprove your motivation.

Your answer should not depend on my reason for asking the question. I'll try again:

When you say a god talks to you, what do you mean? Do you hear a voice?

And fail . . . again, until you come out from behind the bulwark of self-righteousness. You mistake truth and justification of cause for obdurate insistence. Insofar as the concept of faith, you're proving your own in this pursuit. I understand you seek reassurance for the core of doubt that brought you to this thread. Tell me, is it God's voice driving you so to seek my reinforcement of your wavering belief?

Another question, after refusing to answer mine? I would be happy to answer, if you would do me the courtesy of same.

Again: what do you mean, when you say your god talks to you? Is it a voice? A feeling? What?

In this echo chamber you've created, you're ears ring. So loudly so you fail to see ahead far enough on the path you follow to read the steeply descending terrain and take precaution. Abstinence of acquiescence to personal restraint does not validate an argument, just as blind acquiescence without a careful step make admirability apparent.

Look, I get it. You are refusing to answer. Maybe someone with a pair of stones will come along and answer. I will offend your delicate sensibilities no more.

 

[night_son]

Or is it ruder or perhaps more disingenuous to hide behind your reason for asking the question in the first place? You need better bait to catch out the fish inside of you. You've called yourself out in the asking. Now prove or disprove your motivation.

Your answer should not depend on my reason for asking the question. I'll try again:

When you say a god talks to you, what do you mean? Do you hear a voice?

And fail . . . again, until you come out from behind the bulwark of self-righteousness. You mistake truth and justification of cause for obdurate insistence. Insofar as the concept of faith, you're proving your own in this pursuit. I understand you seek reassurance for the core of doubt that brought you to this thread. Tell me, is it God's voice driving you so to seek my reinforcement of your wavering belief?

Another question, after refusing to answer mine? I would be happy to answer, if you would do me the courtesy of same.

Again: what do you mean, when you say your god talks to you? Is it a voice? A feeling? What?

In this echo chamber you've created, you're ears ring. So loudly so you fail to see ahead far enough on the path you follow to read the steeply descending terrain and take precaution. Abstinence of acquiescence to personal restraint does not validate an argument, just as blind acquiescence without a careful step make admirability apparent.

Look, I get it. You are refusing to answer. Maybe someone with a pair of stones will come along and answer. I will offend your delicate sensibilities no more.

That's okay, no offense intended or taken, Indiana. What I was trying to illustrate was the source of the drive of the non-believer (not assuming you are one) to harvest answers from the believer. My suspicion, long held, of that source, is the need for reaffirmation of faith.

As I wrote to the OP in an earlier post in this thread, the voice of faith is a highly personal self- interpretive one, and a different and equally personal understanding and journey for each of us. Does God text me every night before bedtime? Of course not. However, over the course of a life led over one long and evolving cycle of belief, disbelief, and finally--a return to absolute faith--well then yes, I do believe God speaks to us all--through the many euphemisms of life, through experiencing them: tactile, sensory, intellectual derivation--through all interactions of being. And finally, in the repercussions of our behaviors, both interpersonally and introverted.

And that, is all I can provide for you . . .

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Your answer should not depend on my reason for asking the question. I'll try again:

When you say a god talks to you, what do you mean? Do you hear a voice?

And fail . . . again, until you come out from behind the bulwark of self-righteousness. You mistake truth and justification of cause for obdurate insistence. Insofar as the concept of faith, you're proving your own in this pursuit. I understand you seek reassurance for the core of doubt that brought you to this thread. Tell me, is it God's voice driving you so to seek my reinforcement of your wavering belief?

Another question, after refusing to answer mine? I would be happy to answer, if you would do me the courtesy of same.

Again: what do you mean, when you say your god talks to you? Is it a voice? A feeling? What?

In this echo chamber you've created, you're ears ring. So loudly so you fail to see ahead far enough on the path you follow to read the steeply descending terrain and take precaution. Abstinence of acquiescence to personal restraint does not validate an argument, just as blind acquiescence without a careful step make admirability apparent.

Look, I get it. You are refusing to answer. Maybe someone with a pair of stones will come along and answer. I will offend your delicate sensibilities no more.

That's okay, no offense intended or taken, Indiana. What I was trying to illustrate was the source of the drive of the non-believer (not assuming you are one) to harvest answers from the believer. My suspicion, long held, of that source, is the need for reaffirmation of faith.

As I wrote to the OP in an earlier post in this thread, the voice of faith is a highly personal self- interpretive one, and a different and equally personal understanding and journey for each of us. Does God text me every night before bedtime? Of course not. However, over the course of a life led over one long and evolving cycle of belief, disbelief, and finally--a return to absolute faith--well then yes, I do believe God speaks to us all--through the many euphemisms of life, through experiencing them: tactile, sensory, intellectual derivation--through all interactions of being. And finally, in the repercussions of our behaviors, both interpersonally and introverted.

And that, is all I can provide for you . . .

Okay, thank you for your answer. I would ask you now: Do you understand and accept that a rational person may, without any value judgments of any particular faith, not accept any of that as communication from a god? Or, is this some sort of nefarious, will full rejection , in your opinion?

 

[night_son]

And fail . . . again, until you come out from behind the bulwark of self-righteousness. You mistake truth and justification of cause for obdurate insistence. Insofar as the concept of faith, you're proving your own in this pursuit. I understand you seek reassurance for the core of doubt that brought you to this thread. Tell me, is it God's voice driving you so to seek my reinforcement of your wavering belief?

Another question, after refusing to answer mine? I would be happy to answer, if you would do me the courtesy of same.

Again: what do you mean, when you say your god talks to you? Is it a voice? A feeling? What?

In this echo chamber you've created, you're ears ring. So loudly so you fail to see ahead far enough on the path you follow to read the steeply descending terrain and take precaution. Abstinence of acquiescence to personal restraint does not validate an argument, just as blind acquiescence without a careful step make admirability apparent.

Look, I get it. You are refusing to answer. Maybe someone with a pair of stones will come along and answer. I will offend your delicate sensibilities no more.

That's okay, no offense intended or taken, Indiana. What I was trying to illustrate was the source of the drive of the non-believer (not assuming you are one) to harvest answers from the believer. My suspicion, long held, of that source, is the need for reaffirmation of faith.

As I wrote to the OP in an earlier post in this thread, the voice of faith is a highly personal self- interpretive one, and a different and equally personal understanding and journey for each of us. Does God text me every night before bedtime? Of course not. However, over the course of a life led over one long and evolving cycle of belief, disbelief, and finally--a return to absolute faith--well then yes, I do believe God speaks to us all--through the many euphemisms of life, through experiencing them: tactile, sensory, intellectual derivation--through all interactions of being. And finally, in the repercussions of our behaviors, both interpersonally and introverted.

And that, is all I can provide for you . . .

Okay, thank you for your answer. I would ask you now: Do you understand and accept that a rational person may, without any value judgments of any particular faith, not accept any of that as communication from a god? Or, is this some sort of nefarious, will full rejection , in your opinion?

I absolutely accept that. Free will is the foundation of our existence. Just as you or I are free to interpret our metaphysical intellectual rationalizations for being alive and sentient in any way we choose. No one has to believe in any dogma or secular philosophy. It's all open to personal interpretation. I am no evangelical or crusader for either or any one. Just a humble believer in what makes sense to me.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No one has to believe in any dogma or secular philosophy.

Very true. But some things are hard not to believe, as the evidence is overwhelming. And I find it a bit disingenuous to present an authoritative code that supposedly dictates our eternal well being as "just another philosophy". Such claims (and threats) based on dictated, supposedly divine authority go far beyond, for instance, the implications of most philosophies.

 

[night_son]

No one has to believe in any dogma or secular philosophy.

Very true. But some things are hard not to believe, as the evidence is overwhelming. And I find it a bit disingenuous to present an authoritative code that supposedly dictates our eternal well being as "just another philosophy". Such claims (and threats) based on dictated, supposedly divine authority go far beyond, for instance, the implications of most philosophies.

Agreed. And most of it stems from political enforcement of religion down through the ages. Do I believe in a living God? Yes, I do. Will I enforce said belief on others with the sword? No I will not. However, will I raise the sword to defend my belief from those who would take it out of my own mouth and the minds of others who believe similarly? Yes, if atheist led purges were ever rolled out violently. I believe in countering anti-faith with faith, but only on a personal non-violent or non-culturally aggressive level. I have no need to make anyone believe as I do. Just allow us both to believe as we would choose.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No one has to believe in any dogma or secular philosophy.

Very true. But some things are hard not to believe, as the evidence is overwhelming. And I find it a bit disingenuous to present an authoritative code that supposedly dictates our eternal well being as "just another philosophy". Such claims (and threats) based on dictated, supposedly divine authority go far beyond, for instance, the implications of most philosophies.

Agreed. And most of it stems from political enforcement of religion down through the ages. Do I believe in a living God? Yes, I do. Will I enforce said belief on others with the sword? No I will not. However, will I raise the sword to defend my belief from those who would take it out of my own mouth and the minds of others who believe similarly? Yes, if atheist led purges were ever rolled out violently. I believe in countering anti-faith with faith, but only on a personal non-violent or non-culturally aggressive level. I have no need to make anyone believe as I do. Just allow us both to believe as we would choose.

I would also defend your right to hold your beliefs. But I would not say you had a right to have your religious beliefs codified into law. Secular government is one of the crowining achievements of mankind.

 

[night_son]

No one has to believe in any dogma or secular philosophy.

Very true. But some things are hard not to believe, as the evidence is overwhelming. And I find it a bit disingenuous to present an authoritative code that supposedly dictates our eternal well being as "just another philosophy". Such claims (and threats) based on dictated, supposedly divine authority go far beyond, for instance, the implications of most philosophies.

Agreed. And most of it stems from political enforcement of religion down through the ages. Do I believe in a living God? Yes, I do. Will I enforce said belief on others with the sword? No I will not. However, will I raise the sword to defend my belief from those who would take it out of my own mouth and the minds of others who believe similarly? Yes, if atheist led purges were ever rolled out violently. I believe in countering anti-faith with faith, but only on a personal non-violent or non-culturally aggressive level. I have no need to make anyone believe as I do. Just allow us both to believe as we would choose.

I would also defend your right to hold your beliefs. But I would not say you had a right to have your religious beliefs codified into law. Secular government is one of the crowining achievements of mankind.

Thanks. And I yours. We're lucky to share a nation without a state enforced religion. However, what I do champion is at least the acknowledgement of the Founder's beliefs as tradition--if not some kind of insulation of the "right" and proper belief. For instance, any new American "national faith" founded on either Islam or Secular Humanism would not be to my taste, as it is direct antithesis to American cultural tradition. I do not support Christian education in public schools, nor atheist philosophy, or Islamic religion either. Keep the schools clean, intellectually of all religion, as well as dominant ideologies of pop culture, so that our children can decide for themselves. But that's not to say, in my biased opinion, that a parent passing down religious tradition is doing something wrong.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

However, what I do champion is at least the acknowledgement of the Founder's beliefs as tradition-

Which one? Some were deists; some were unitarians. And all were united in the desire to keep religion far away from government.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

God doesn't acknowledge me? Oh, pulleeeze!

God gave me a participation award just last week!

 

[GreatestIam]

Your criticisms of God are actually criticisms of Christian religion which is a construct of man. God is unknowable by man, but it is at least plausible that God is an interested observer, not an active participant in what he/she/it created.

No more plausible than God being an uninterested entity who has just moved on to a more interesting species.

If all God can be is a deadbeat absentee dad, why should we even want to acknowledge that such a prick exists?

Regards
DL

You seem to need God to be an "involved Dad" in order for you to believe in God's existence. That seems a narrow view of what an all being might be.

Indeed. If a deadbeat dad wants respect from his children, then he should not remain a deadbeat dad.

If God cannot walk the dad path properly, that shows a character defect and that would help explain why he is shown to be a genocidal son murdering prick.

Regards
DL

You do not appear to be rational in your discussion about God. Did you have expectations of God that were not met?

No.

I see you do not put any reasons on your criticism.

Do so or be seem for the liar and poor judge ot rationality you seem to be.

You show a lot of hate with your chastisement without correction.

Do you also spank your kids without correcting them?

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

I see god's love of his children at the local cancer ward. One of those things that makes you question religion. Suffer the little children unto thee...All the little plaques with hand turkeys and drawings from kids like Dawn, or nameless others that god gave various forms of incurable cancer too. Suffer the little children unto thee, my sweet ass.

U C 20/20.

Regards
DL

 

[saveliberty]

GreatestIam's god is dead and powerless. A Living God communicates daily with His people through prayer.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

A Living God communicates daily with His people through prayer

No he doesn't.

 

[saveliberty]

A Living God communicates daily with His people through prayer

No he doesn't.

Really not surprised you have a problem.