by venus 35 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
venus,
What suits you may be something else which obviously you need to find out.
I agree, your position on God is a bit out of my reach for now. I will keep searching for something that addresses my current situation. Where I'l end up I'm not sure.
Thank you.
Confusedalot,
How have you identified a God that is not involved in the actions/lives of men and does not want to be Identified? Are your abilities of discernment greater than his of concealment?------confusedalot
I like your musings and the hard questions which you have been asking. Some people just choose to believe that God exists but that he is not interventionist. He just created the world then went AWOL (deism).
However, it is this lack of intervention which has led others to believe that God does not exist at all. Take the case of Gretta Vosper a minister with the United Church of Canada who came out as atheist.
The following is an excerpt from her defense to the United Church of Canada:
http://www.grettavosper.ca/tag/matthew-fox/
"........a being who presides over Earth from another realm, a supernatural one, from which it has the power to intervene in the natural world – capriciously or by design – by responding to our prayerful requests, or altering our minds and so, too, our actions, or intervening in the natural world with or without provocation or invitation in order to alter weather patterns, health, the accumulation or loss of wealth, the circumstances of birth including geography - a predictor of health and access to food and water - gender, sexuality, mental capacity, or beauty - all predictors of the power status and ease with which individuals will live their lives, then, no, I do not believe in that at all.
Neither do I believe in a god of no substance who exists beyond the universe yet contains it, interpenetrating it in some incomprehensible way for some incomprehensible purpose.
I see no evidence of such gods.
Were I to be given incontrovertible proof that a god does or gods do exist, the evidence of the cruel and capricious realities of disparity, tragedy, illness, and anguish in the world, and the truth that our world and our experience of it is wrapped not only in beauty but also in excruciating pain, would prevent me from worshipping it or pledging my allegiance to it, no matter the cost.
I DO NOT BELIEVE ......
.......in gods who can intervene in the natural world; therefore, I cannot believe that there is something we could define as a “call” from any god to us to direct us to act in any particular way.
while the above arguments are applicable to the concepts of men - created mental concepts of deities, the elephant staring us in the face is Creation, the incomprehensible vastness and energy locked up in it. that is where the "majesty" is lurking.
Control weather patterns? man is doing it on a small scale without violating the laws of nature, just nature perhaps.
The writers of ancient Holy books (biblia) tailored their picture of gods to the idea of the universe they had. We ought to develop / accept the existence of a creator that accommodate what has emerged as the true scope of creation. unless the cosmos made itself.
Venus that was beautiful - I really, really enjoyed reading it. I particularly loved your comparison of Watchtowers egotistical belief that they are the chosen with the same nonsense a Semitic tent swelling nomadic tribe felt ( ironically jws would secretly gloat at that comparison whilst feeling offended at the same time!)
Although when we say the scriptures of the ancients misrepresent him, are we not doing exACTly what they did and creating a God that fits the image of what we expect of him?
a God that fits the image of what we expect of him?
Ds: in my case, not so much what we expect of him, but in accord with the record in nature, that the past allows us to draw on, although because of last month's pre- eclipse experience, I would go one step beyond that.
If God is non-interventionist, this can be interpreted as proof for his non-existence. But it can also be interpreted as His firm confidence in humans who are like Him in qualities. We have shown our abilities many times—for example, when we found that separation is no longer working, Germany went for re-union. This can be tried with regard to countries such as Pakistan & India, South Korean & North Korean … so on, and finally with the whole world. But ego (individual and collective) is the only obstacle. Yet ego is the easiest thing in the world to destroy because ego is just a thought which dies when you no more foster it (which justifies God’s policy of non-intervention). In some language, word for egolessness is construction. This carries the thought that ego means path to destruction/wastefulness, and history has numerous proofs to this effect. It means when one chooses to be egoistic, he knows he has set himself on a path to wastefulness. In other word, man is able to make or mar and free to choose between them—hence God doesn’t have to intervene.
Everyone experiences the truthfulness of what we all say “I” exist. This “I” exist behind all the details we know. And this “I” is something that feels the full force of my personality and even the voice of “I” within me. Specialty of this “I” is that it can feel self-contented in any situation or greedy if it wants to. This fact too makes God a non-interventionist. If He intervenes we will again accuse Him of reducing us to be mere robots.
There is great beauty in allowing man to run his affairs unhindered. Let him learn from each experience. If he refuses to learn, let him continue to do so till he feels saturated with his refusal.
Although when we say the scriptures of the ancients misrepresent him, are we not doing exACTly what they did and creating a God that fits the image of what we expect of him?
Looking at what God does not do would also reveal some details about God (which is not same as carving “an image of what we expect of Him”). For example, He is the recipient of our worship, says the scripture which is obviously written by humans who are known to put their own thoughts into the mouth of characters. For example, Jesus did not say what is said in John 3:13 where he supposedly said: “he has ascended into heaven” which he did after 3 years. If he has not said John 3:13, what about the famous verse in John 3:16? This shows scripture writers were putting their own thoughts as though dictated by God, hence we find too many human thoughts in the scriptures.
That means God is for receiving our worship is a human concept. But the fact is that He is the giver of worship (not recipient of worship). For example, when a child is born, or when a child grows and accomplishes something parents say (outwardly or inwardly): “Look at him, he is our child.” By saying this parents unwittingly take credit (as though being worshiped) for something which came into existence without them doing any programming. Truth is that parents were only seeking sexual pleasure from each other, and in the process a child came into existence.
Yet, Bible is like a forest where you find both wild animals and mild animals, sweet waters and muddy waters. Similarly, in the Bible too some truths have crept into by chance. For example, Mathew 5:44-48. A careful and impartial reading of those verses show that God, like sun, does not receive anything, but only gives; and He neither wants nor receives worship, but wants us to become worship-worthy by being a giver with no expectation from others.
When I tried that it made me happier
than that is in receiving. This is in contrast to what the world understands to
be love. For example, we have heard the proverb: “A friend in need is a friend indeed.” And most people would agree
with it. But deep down that reveals a commercial attitude! That is not
friendship; that is not love. You want to use the other as a means. But the truth is that no man is
a means, every man is an end unto himself. One need not be worried about who is
a real friend?
The real question has to be: “Am I friendly to people?” Friendship is the
highest form of love.
In love, idea of getting something from the other does not exist, and a question of using the other does not arise. You have too much and you would like to share. And whosoever is ready to share your joy with you, your dance, your song, you will be grateful to him, you will feel obliged. Not that he is obliged to you, not that he should feel thankful to you because you have given so much to him. A friend never thinks in that way. A friend always feels grateful to those people who allow him to love them, to give them whatsoever he has got. Similarly, God feels thankful to us because His love has meaning only because we are there as recipients.
Making friendships with the idea of using people is taking a wrong step from the very beginning. Friendship has to be a sharing. If you have something share it and whosoever is ready to share with you is a friend. It is not a question that when you are in danger the friend has to come to your aid. If he comes you are grateful, but if he does not come, it's perfectly okay and he doesn’t automatically cease to be a friend. It is his decision to come or not to come.
You will not say to him, `When I was in need you didn't turn up what kind of friend are you?' Friendship is absolutely human. It has something for which there is no inbuilt mechanism in your biology; it is non-biological. Hence one rises in friendship; one does not fall in friendship. It has a spiritual dimension—something we gleaned from look at the way God acts.
No wonder, in some ancient languages, worship literally means egolessness, living in the now … etc. which means worshipfully engaging in whatever you do with 100% involvement. Those who have done this do not feel time passing as though living in heaven (compare Luke 17:21)
@deegee
Thanks for finding me on another thread, appreciated!
@venus
@Confusedalot
I suppose an argument can be made that divine intervention violates human free will (yet the Bible is the story of Yahweh manipulating Jewish history).
A belief in free will is in direct opposition to a belief in divine intervention. It is impossible to believe in both free will and miracles at the same time as the two concepts are mutually exclusive. If God intervenes and changes a situation it invokes a necessary denial of free will somewhere along the line.
If God created us with free will because he wants us to make choices for ourselves, for him to then intervene, override a person’s free choice and change the course of their life by compelling a specific action or mental state would be a violation of his own plan.
And so perhaps God is justified in concealing himself from humans, he is just an observer of human behaviour.
But then, how can we know or how can we prove that God exists if God is not involved in the actions/lives of men and does not want to be Identified?
Has God ever told anyone that he created the world but prefers to be AWOL because he gave man free will to run things himself?
Has God himself ever told anyone this or is this what people have assumed?
I think it would be nice to hear what the situation is directly from God himself.
