Not understanding the rejection of God...

[Book of Jeremiah]

God has done from the very beginning is to give us all good things and desire to have a relationship with us. I don't see the crime in that

All went down hill after the Original Sin.

Which is why God sent His Only Begotten Son to us, Moonglow. The second Adam accomplished what the first Adam could not.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

I am an athiest. I do not get offended by reading "In God we trust" on our coins. I don't care if Ike put "under God" in the Pledge of Allegence to the Flag (which I consider silly even before he did that). I can even walk past nutty street preachers shouting that "The end is near", without doing anything other than rolling my eyes.

On the other hand, When someone wants to pass laws under which I would have to live, based on their religious convictions, They will have my attention, and it will be negative. I don't reject God, because God does not exist. I regect religious people who want to control my life, based on their own agenda.

I do not believe ones religion should ever be forced on another person through the making of laws. This is the atithesis of christianity, Vandal. You cannot force someone to love God. You cannot pay someone to Love God, therein buying their commitment to serve him. If one could buy love it would be utterly despised. How much more so by making a law forcing one into loving God?

Pity a significant number of your fellow Christians don’t believe this.

I do not know of a single Christian who wishes to make laws forcing others to become a Christian. The very idea is preposterous, Clayton. It completely negates the premise of the Gospel "Whosoever will"........it is a free will choice....always. Even to the end. Many turned back and followed Jesus no more.....the scriptures say.. No one locked the gates and said, that is not allowed! You cannot leave! If someone chooses to turn back from following the LORD and return to the world they can do that. Many have. - Jeri

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I am not a religious man. I haven't been to church in about 20 years. I don't remember the last time I prayed. God is not a part of my life in any real sense.
But I do not reject God. I find no contempt when I see a religious symbol. I do not run in horror if someone says "bless you" when I sneeze.
I do not understand the Theophobia of the left, in which they believe they are somehow violated when anything religious is anywhere near them.
Why?

Does the OP now understand there is no ‘rejection’ of ‘god’?

Those free from faith simply live in a manner before the aberration of religion, as indeed religion is the bane of humankind, the source of much evil, suffering, and death over the last 10,000 years – if not longer.

 

[Dajjal]

The earliest religions were devoid of deities;
.

Say what! I would love to know more about these religions without deities.

But all that constitutes religion, every faith and denomination, is the creation of man, and consequently there is no ‘god’ as perceived to be an omnipotent entity.

It seems to me that it is in human nature to believe in God, and that religions are all just an attempt to get a handle on him. They are all doomed to failure because we have finite minds, but Gods mind must be infinitely great if he could cause creation. But it may be that we are inspired or influenced by higher powers and God does not concern himself about the details of our limited theologys. In other words you can worship God by any name you choose and it makes no difference to him. By those terms all religions have some validity.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

These people that rebuke God are the same as those that do not. They are still humans and exhibit human traits.

Not so. Only a fool would rebuke God Almighty. Who in their right mind would do such a thing? Only the morally insane. We are not all morally insane, Moonglow. Speak for yourself.

Thanks.

- Jeri

I cannot believe that there is any being in this universe who has created a human soul for eternal pain. I would rather that every god would destroy himself; I would rather that we all should go to eternal chaos, to black and starless night, than that just one soul should suffer eternal agony.

Robert G. Ingersoll (1833-99):

I hope Ingersoll changed his mind about that and accepted Jesus Christ as His Savior before he died, Dajjal. If not? He got his wish.

He was describing one of the punishments of hell - outer darkness - Matt. 22: 13 - Jeri

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I do not believe ones religion should ever be forced on another person through the making of laws. This is the atithesis of christianity, Vandal. You cannot force someone to love God. You cannot pay someone to Love God, therein buying their commitment to serve him. If one could buy love it would be utterly despised. How much more so by making a law forcing one into loving God?

Pity a significant number of your fellow Christians don’t believe this.

I do not know of a single Christian who wishes to make laws forcing others to become a Christian. The very idea is preposterous, Clayton. It completely negates the premise of the Gospel "Whosoever will"........it is a free will choice....always. Even to the end. Many turned back and followed Jesus no more.....the scriptures say.. No one locked the gates and said, that is not allowed! You cannot leave! If someone chooses to turn back from following the LORD and return to the world they can do that. Many have. - Jeri

No doubt.

That doesn’t mean they don’t exist, however.

Many Christians seek to deny same-sex couples their equal protection rights by enacting ‘anti-gay marriage’ laws; many Christians seek to deny gay citizens their due process rights by enacting laws designed to ‘criminalize’ homosexuality; and many Christians seek to deny women their privacy rights by enacting measures banning abortion – all predicated on, and justified by, their beliefs as Christians, where homosexuality or abortion ‘violate’ those Christian beliefs, and where Christians work to enact laws designed to force those beliefs on society as a whole.

Even if the above is not officially sanctioned by a given Christian denomination, even if the above is advocated by a non-representative Christian minority, it is nonetheless a fact that a significant number of Christians wish to see such laws enacted they believe conform to Christian dogma.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

I am not a religious man. I haven't been to church in about 20 years. I don't remember the last time I prayed. God is not a part of my life in any real sense.
But I do not reject God. I find no contempt when I see a religious symbol. I do not run in horror if someone says "bless you" when I sneeze.
I do not understand the Theophobia of the left, in which they believe they are somehow violated when anything religious is anywhere near them.
Why?

Does the OP now understand there is no ‘rejection’ of ‘god’?

The greater question is, Clayton, do you? ....and if so then what shall you decide to do about it?

p.s. God is spelled with a capitol "G". Thanks.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

.......

These people that rebuke God are the same as those that do not. They are still humans and exhibit human traits.

Not so. Only a fool would rebuke God Almighty. Who in their right mind would do such a thing? Only the morally insane. We are not all morally insane, Moonglow. Speak for yourself.

I do not believe ones religion should ever be forced on another person through the making of laws. This is the atithesis of christianity, Vandal. You cannot force someone to love God. You cannot pay someone to Love God, therein buying their commitment to serve him. If one could buy love it would be utterly despised. How much more so by making a law forcing one into loving God?

There is no conflict here, Pacer. Only in your own mind.

- Jeri

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Pity a significant number of your fellow Christians don’t believe this.

I do not know of a single Christian who wishes to make laws forcing others to become a Christian. The very idea is preposterous, Clayton. It completely negates the premise of the Gospel "Whosoever will"........it is a free will choice....always. Even to the end. Many turned back and followed Jesus no more.....the scriptures say.. No one locked the gates and said, that is not allowed! You cannot leave! If someone chooses to turn back from following the LORD and return to the world they can do that. Many have. - Jeri

No doubt.

That doesn’t mean they don’t exist, however.

Many Christians seek to deny same-sex couples their equal protection rights by enacting ‘anti-gay marriage’ laws; many Christians seek to deny gay citizens their due process rights by enacting laws designed to ‘criminalize’ homosexuality; and many Christians seek to deny women their privacy rights by enacting measures banning abortion – all predicated on, and justified by, their beliefs as Christians, where homosexuality or abortion ‘violate’ those Christian beliefs, and where Christians work to enact laws designed to force those beliefs on society as a whole.

Even if the above is not officially sanctioned by a given Christian denomination, even if the above is advocated by a non-representative Christian minority, it is nonetheless a fact that a significant number of Christians wish to see such laws enacted they believe conform to Christian dogma.

Clayton, I am not an expert on how laws are created, changed, etc. Correct me if I am mistaken in my reply here:

As I understand it the laws of the land are voted on and passed according to the will of the people. Perhaps a year ago there was a vote in a certain state about same sex marriage bill. The vote was no. Marriage is between a man and a woman. If this be the case are you saying that you do not wish to live in society in which Christians have an equal vote to that of non Christians?

Or are you saying that unless the vote comes back in the affirmative of your own personal will it is therein Christians imposing their own will upon your own. (because their vote outnumbered your particular group of voters ) How am I doing? Is that what you are telling me? Or did I misunderstand?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The earliest religions were devoid of deities;
.

Say what! I would love to know more about these religions without deities.

But all that constitutes religion, every faith and denomination, is the creation of man, and consequently there is no ‘god’ as perceived to be an omnipotent entity.

It seems to me that it is in human nature to believe in God, and that religions are all just an attempt to get a handle on him. They are all doomed to failure because we have finite minds, but Gods mind must be infinitely great if he could cause creation. But it may be that we are inspired or influenced by higher powers and God does not concern himself about the details of our limited theologys. In other words you can worship God by any name you choose and it makes no difference to him. By those terms all religions have some validity.

For example:

Is your spiritual home right here on Earth? | World Pantheism

Pantheism is among the oldest of religions, if not the oldest.

Prior to the advent of civilization, humans practiced what we might refer to as ‘nature religions,’ free from deities, doctrine, and conformity.

 

[pacer]

There is no conflict here, Pacer. Only in your own mind.

You obviously recognize a conflict since you mentioned it, not I.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

There is no conflict here, Pacer. Only in your own mind.

You obviously recognize a conflict since you mentioned it, not I.

Could there be any other reason for your putting the two comments together? Truly your inability give me an honest answer is quite puzzling, Pacer.

Perhaps it is unfair of me to expect such a thing from you in the first place.

After all.....

- Jeri

 

[pacer]

Could there be any other reason for your putting the two comments together? Truly your inability give me an honest answer is quite puzzling, Pacer.

You recognized it for what it is - conflicting statements.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I do not know of a single Christian who wishes to make laws forcing others to become a Christian. The very idea is preposterous, Clayton. It completely negates the premise of the Gospel "Whosoever will"........it is a free will choice....always. Even to the end. Many turned back and followed Jesus no more.....the scriptures say.. No one locked the gates and said, that is not allowed! You cannot leave! If someone chooses to turn back from following the LORD and return to the world they can do that. Many have. - Jeri

No doubt.

That doesn’t mean they don’t exist, however.

Many Christians seek to deny same-sex couples their equal protection rights by enacting ‘anti-gay marriage’ laws; many Christians seek to deny gay citizens their due process rights by enacting laws designed to ‘criminalize’ homosexuality; and many Christians seek to deny women their privacy rights by enacting measures banning abortion – all predicated on, and justified by, their beliefs as Christians, where homosexuality or abortion ‘violate’ those Christian beliefs, and where Christians work to enact laws designed to force those beliefs on society as a whole.

Even if the above is not officially sanctioned by a given Christian denomination, even if the above is advocated by a non-representative Christian minority, it is nonetheless a fact that a significant number of Christians wish to see such laws enacted they believe conform to Christian dogma.

Clayton, I am not an expert on how laws are created, changed, etc. Correct me if I am mistaken in my reply here:

As I understand it the laws of the land are voted on and passed according to the will of the people. Perhaps a year ago there was a vote in a certain state about same sex marriage bill. The vote was no. Marriage is between a man and a woman. If this be the case are you saying that you do not wish to live in society in which Christians have an equal vote to that of non Christians?

Or are you saying that unless the vote comes back in the affirmative of your own personal will it is therein Christians imposing their own will upon your own. (because their vote outnumbered your particular group of voters ) How am I doing? Is that what you are telling me? Or did I misunderstand?

Of course not.

But laws may not be enacted that disadvantage a particular class of persons based solely on religious dogma, absent a legitimate legislative end – such as disallowing same-sex couples access to marriage law.

As to your last paragraph, what matters is the rule of law and the requirements of the Constitution that citizens’ civil liberties are not determined by majority rule, and one does not forfeit his civil liberties as a consequent of his state of residence.

Christians are at liberty to express their opinions and vote as they see fit. Should they, however, enact legislation offensive to the Constitution – such as disallowing same-sex couples’ access to marriage law – then they can expect the courts to invalidate those laws.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

No.. I recognized a man who is incapable of handling the truth. Therein he must make an "issue" out of it.

It is said that misery loves company, Pacer. Nevertheless, you shall have no more of mine.

- Jeri

 

[pacer]

No.. I recognized a man who is incapable of handling the truth. Therein he must make an "issue" out of it.

It is said that misery loves company, Pacer. Nevertheless, you shall have no more of mine.

- Jeri

It is clearly obvious you contradicted yourself.

 

[Chuckt]

I do not know of a single Christian who wishes to make laws forcing others to become a Christian. The very idea is preposterous, Clayton. It completely negates the premise of the Gospel "Whosoever will"........it is a free will choice....always. Even to the end. Many turned back and followed Jesus no more.....the scriptures say.. No one locked the gates and said, that is not allowed! You cannot leave! If someone chooses to turn back from following the LORD and return to the world they can do that. Many have. - Jeri

No doubt.

That doesn’t mean they don’t exist, however.

Many Christians seek to deny same-sex couples their equal protection rights by enacting ‘anti-gay marriage’ laws; many Christians seek to deny gay citizens their due process rights by enacting laws designed to ‘criminalize’ homosexuality; and many Christians seek to deny women their privacy rights by enacting measures banning abortion – all predicated on, and justified by, their beliefs as Christians, where homosexuality or abortion ‘violate’ those Christian beliefs, and where Christians work to enact laws designed to force those beliefs on society as a whole.

Even if the above is not officially sanctioned by a given Christian denomination, even if the above is advocated by a non-representative Christian minority, it is nonetheless a fact that a significant number of Christians wish to see such laws enacted they believe conform to Christian dogma.

Clayton, I am not an expert on how laws are created, changed, etc. Correct me if I am mistaken in my reply here:

As I understand it the laws of the land are voted on and passed according to the will of the people. Perhaps a year ago there was a vote in a certain state about same sex marriage bill. The vote was no. Marriage is between a man and a woman. If this be the case are you saying that you do not wish to live in society in which Christians have an equal vote to that of non Christians?

Or are you saying that unless the vote comes back in the affirmative of your own personal will it is therein Christians imposing their own will upon your own. (because their vote outnumbered your particular group of voters ) How am I doing? Is that what you are telling me? Or did I misunderstand?

Art. 3. Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged. The utmost good faith shall always be observed towards the Indians; their lands and property shall never be taken from them without their consent; and, in their property, rights, and liberty, they shall never be invaded or disturbed, unless in just and lawful wars authorized by Congress; but laws founded in justice and humanity, shall from time to time be made for preventing wrongs being done to them, and for preserving peace and friendship with them.

Avalon Project - Northwest Ordinance; July 13, 1787

Art. 1. No person, demeaning himself in a peaceable and orderly manner, shall ever be molested on account of his mode of worship or religious sentiments, in the said territory.

Ibid.

If morality isn't taught, whose morality will be taught?

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

No doubt.

That doesn’t mean they don’t exist, however.

Many Christians seek to deny same-sex couples their equal protection rights by enacting ‘anti-gay marriage’ laws; many Christians seek to deny gay citizens their due process rights by enacting laws designed to ‘criminalize’ homosexuality; and many Christians seek to deny women their privacy rights by enacting measures banning abortion – all predicated on, and justified by, their beliefs as Christians, where homosexuality or abortion ‘violate’ those Christian beliefs, and where Christians work to enact laws designed to force those beliefs on society as a whole.

Even if the above is not officially sanctioned by a given Christian denomination, even if the above is advocated by a non-representative Christian minority, it is nonetheless a fact that a significant number of Christians wish to see such laws enacted they believe conform to Christian dogma.

Clayton, I am not an expert on how laws are created, changed, etc. Correct me if I am mistaken in my reply here:

As I understand it the laws of the land are voted on and passed according to the will of the people. Perhaps a year ago there was a vote in a certain state about same sex marriage bill. The vote was no. Marriage is between a man and a woman. If this be the case are you saying that you do not wish to live in society in which Christians have an equal vote to that of non Christians?

Or are you saying that unless the vote comes back in the affirmative of your own personal will it is therein Christians imposing their own will upon your own. (because their vote outnumbered your particular group of voters ) How am I doing? Is that what you are telling me? Or did I misunderstand?

Of course not.

But laws may not be enacted that disadvantage a particular class of persons based solely on religious dogma, absent a legitimate legislative end – such as disallowing same-sex couples access to marriage law.

As to your last paragraph, what matters is the rule of law and the requirements of the Constitution that citizens’ civil liberties are not determined by majority rule, and one does not forfeit his civil liberties as a consequent of his state of residence.

Christians are at liberty to express their opinions and vote as they see fit. Should they, however, enact legislation offensive to the Constitution – such as disallowing same-sex couples’ access to marriage law – then they can expect the courts to invalidate those laws.

You've lost me here, Clayton. How did these laws come to be in the first place if not by a vote of the people or those elected into office who voted the will of the people they represented? I am thinking this was a long standing law that marriage is between a man and a woman and in more recent history some have sought to overturn it. On your last statement I do not see that enacting a law of marriage between a man and a woman to be offensive to the Constitution but I am sensing that it is a law that offends you personally which brings me back to my original question:

Do you feel that your votes based on your own personal convictions and beliefs are of greater value than that of christian voters who vote according to their own personal convictions and beliefs? It cannot be both. You must make a choice in order to come to some realization of the truth here.

On the matter of defending the rights of the unborn, Clayton. The Constitution is not in conflict with defending the rights of the unborn to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The Constitution is in conflict with the rights of the unborn being denied due to a mother wanting to abort the child.

The discussion on when life begins should resolve the matter. It begins at conception. The heart starts beating at 17 days old I am told. A doctor should be able to confirm such facts. So what you are speaking of is murder. Abortion is murder, Clayton. That isn't a religous question. It is a moral one.

On the matter of murder. It is already on the books unless you wish to say that Murder of any human being is a religious issue vs a moral issue and therein should be legalized. In that case you will have a lawless society which is precisely where we are headed at this very moment. imo.

I do believe this is a very sad day for America. The moral decay of our society is defended & justified at every turn while people question how did we get to this point? I suppose the answer will become self evident soon enough. A nation that turns against God is destined for destruction, Clayton. Our own stands at the door now.

-Jeri

 

[theword]

I am not a religious man. I haven't been to church in about 20 years. I don't remember the last time I prayed. God is not a part of my life in any real sense.
But I do not reject God. I find no contempt when I see a religious symbol. I do not run in horror if someone says "bless you" when I sneeze.
I do not understand the Theophobia of the left, in which they believe they are somehow violated when anything religious is anywhere near them.
Why?

People have a conscience and God is the antithesis (direct contrast or opposition) to their sins. Lakeview is right because they don't want a higher authority or people telling them of right and wrong.

God kicked man out of the garden and it is estrangement or enmity because God gave us the curse and man gave us sin so we have this "enmity" or hatred for one another.

Some Christians still haven't gotten rid of their enmity for God because when I teach or preach from the Bible, I get opposition to what is on the page of the Bible.

When Adam broke God's law, you essentially had two wills. The will of God and the will of Satan. I tried to narrow down the definition of sin but I sometimes come up with a will that is apart from the will of God. Hence the problem.

2 Corinthians 2:16 To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things?

I saw a woman walk into class smiling and an angry man said, "Why are you smiling? You shouldn't be smiling." It is saying that we have life and you have not.

Everyone is obeying the will of God, whether it's through His delusion called Lucifer ( the tree of the knowledge of good and evil ) or through Christ ( tree of Life ). Man's flesh can't operate unless God gives the flesh the "breath of life", which is the spirit of man created in Christ.

Genesis 2
7: then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

 

[PainefulTruth]

I am not a religious man. I haven't been to church in about 20 years. I don't remember the last time I prayed. God is not a part of my life in any real sense.
But I do not reject God. I find no contempt when I see a religious symbol. I do not run in horror if someone says "bless you" when I sneeze.
I do not understand the Theophobia of the left, in which they believe they are somehow violated when anything religious is anywhere near them.
Why?

Theophobia? Maybe it is. More like Religiophobia I think. I see the harm caused by blind faith standing in for reason, the same principle/problem with the big government Statism of the left. Theirs is a religion of sorts as well, using the same principle of doubt suppression of religious blind faith. God is love? Yes, but more than that. God is Truth.

I believe in God, and whatever It is will be found by the pursuit of Truth, not by intentionally obscuring it.