And who's
idea of god do we use when reaching these «scientific» conclusions?
The idea of god does not meet their criteria, so they disbelieve in god.
So the idea of truth gives you the same problem that
the idea of God does, and that, to me, is the reason why I believe in God.
It's becoming abundantly clear to those growing up in the 21st century that religion is a sham, and the idea of god doesn't square with the world around them.
Just because you hate
the idea of god does nt negate historical figures.
Which Jewish
idea of God did he take over?
Not exact matches
Those put into question your belief in the characteristics
of the
god, perhaps even the existence
of the
god itself, but it is still more comforting to assume something more powerful than yourself has your best interests in mind vs. the
idea that we are left to our own devices — especially when you are surrounded by people that agree with and reinforce that
idea and shun you when you
do not agree with it.
You want your
ideas, your tastes to be celebrated, instead
of having a humble, submissive attitude in order to be part
of what
God is
doing.
You may RATIONAL in regards to the [irrational]
ideas of «
God», but that
does not prevent you from being IRRATIONAL about other things, including your POLITICAL IDEOLOGY and desires for POWER and wealth.
Not only
does this
idea solve the problem
of predestination and free will but is much more in line with the
idea of God.
You said, «Their anger may come from the fact that they
do not like the
idea that they might have to be accountable to a higher authority (
God) when they die and our witnessing to them reminds them
of this event that they have to look forward to unless they repent and accept Jesus as their Savior before they die» Make sure that you also accept Thor, Zeus, Ra, and tens
of thousands
of other
gods ever invented by man.
While i don't agree 100 %
of everything she said, i agree with her general
idea that we need to stop chasing after what's cool and what will draw the most church members and start chasing after serving the poor, following Christ, doctrine, outreach, santification, and, specifically,
God.
The concept
of God did not spring out
of thin air - intelligent humans created him and then thousands
of years later used the
idea to explain what they
did not understand and / or like about evolution.
All
of my
ideas about
God suddenly didn't really matter... what mattered is that He was there with me filling the room, my soul, and my spirit.
Do you realize that rejecting your
idea of That - Which - We - Call -
God is not rejecting that which the word points to?
1) everything is made
of energy 2) energy CAN NOT be created nor destroyed 3) energy merely changes from one form to another; matter / energy conversion 4) if energy can not be created nor destroyed then it remains a a constant 100 % 5) energy will always remina constant for ALL ETERNITY, thus the universe either recycles itself, or never stops exsisting 6) you «
idea of a
god» violates the basic laws
of the universe, thus he can't exsist because we
do.
yo the thing is not about believing or not, is the fact that if we don't believe then we are worthless living garbage who occupy a space in the universe only to create crap and pollution, in that kind
of case we would better be recycled into some industrial material for a better use than eating and living like cattle, but if there is a
god we acquire a divine status and a purpose to continue to exist beyond afterlife or at least the
idea of it, which would give life a sense right?
Many religious people are incapable
of comprehending the
idea that other people really don't believe their
god exists.
Atheist reject the
idea of a
god and believe their view to be true or they would be agnostic unless they choose no stance at all
of a
god that
of which would require unknowing
of what the term «
god» means so it would fall under a belief and since they can't prove that a
god doesn't exist then by definition it requires faith for their view, meaning it would effect their view
of the cause, nature, and purpose
of the universe if a
god was proven to be true.
It's the 0.001 %
of them who hold rallies, blow themselves up, and go on television / radio (in the case
of Fox News, start their own network) who HATE the fact that there are those
of us out there who
do not accept the
idea of God or Jesus or Allah and think it is unacceptable.
«Perfect Justice» for you may mean cutting off your wife's hand if she touches the genitals
of someone ATTACKING you, but
God's
ideas certainly don't ALL jibe with those
of most INTELLIGENT people.
I also wish you the same — which you will
do irregardless
of what you write back — cause I
do believe
God's Spirit will lead you into
ideas like «love your neighbor as yourself» and even «treat other how you want to be treated»... or am I sadly mistaken?
We all approach the text with an
idea of God in our minds, even if we don't believe in a g
God in our minds, even if we don't believe in a
godgod.
I think Paul is hinting the Spirit
of God will lead people into the
ideas of God (from the whole Tanakh) and they don't need mind themselves with Jewish rituals (ie: circumcision — then I would also say — for that matter atonement — which is a Torah ritual).
If they would allow priests to marry ths might not happen but I don't know where they get the
idea they can't marry, my Bible doesn't say anything about a man
of God not being able to marry.
Perhaps
god doesn't like a bunch
of mindless sheeple, and lets in only people who think for themselves and live honest and compassionate lives because they think it's a good
idea, not because they fear eternal punishment.
I wouldn't call Spenser a greater poet, but he saw the human condition and our often - anguished journey toward
God in a richer, more humane way than Milton
did, who at the end
of the day was more interested in
ideas than people.
I don't know whether the latter exists but I'm trying to reconcile the
idea of self - described atheists believing in a
God.
I don't believe my
idea of God boils down to just my better nature.
In regards to the absence
of God, the
idea behind it is that the individual chooses a life apart from
God (essentially anybody who
does not follow now).
It
does enforce the
idea that
god is the product
of a delusional mind.
Yep, the *
idea *
of a
god (bogeyman) is quite effective in controlling folks... that doesn't mean that it is real.
Why would the HORRIBLE HEARTLESS things
done by
God qualify him as a good source for anyone's
idea of «objective morality?
As a CHRISTIAN i
do support the
idea that they put a cross but in all fairness america gives the freedom
of speech but i will say only
god can judge and no ones perfect.
What we can't
do is make up a
god to fit our human
idea of what he should be.
If you believe that the universe had a beginning, but that a
god didn't, you have a very strange
idea of reasoning.
This
idea has me thinking about the progression
of the faith walk —
do you think
God becomes more silent as we grwo more mature in our faith?
In light
of the
idea that
God did not kill the firstborn sons
of Egypt, why then
does the Bible say that it is
God who would destroy them (Exodus 11:1, 4 - 5; 12:12)?
Epicurus taught the
idea that pleasure
of the individual was the sole good in life, though he also believed in the existence
of gods, whom they felt
did not create the universe, nor inflict punishment or bestow blessings, but that they were disinterested in what man was
doing.
BUT they usually don't seem to realize or want to talk about the fact that
ideas have consequences, and that believing or not believing in the
ideas of Calvin has a major impact upon our daily walk and the way we view
God, ourselves, and the people in our world.
Also, why
do people try and assert that since
God doesn't fit their
idea of what
God should be like he must not exist.
For liberal Christians, such victories embody the justice
of the social gospel, the
idea that believers should
do God's work — even aid the Second Coming - by improving society.
So the story proceeds, in a vein
of pure imagination, stripped
of all puerile fancies, to evoke the
idea of a
God who «spake and it was
done».
The acronym is a bit more cumbersome, but not only is the phrase more in line with what Jesus actually wanted us to
do, it is also more acceptable to the largest part
of the body
of Christ — those who have come to
God by non-Christian paths and are uncomfortable with the
idea of equating Jesus the man (the way Jesus looked physically) with
God.
He was surprisingly open with his
ideas and questions about
God, and we were in the midst
of discussing the forgiveness and love
of God when, as if disgusted by himself, he said, «But you don't even know the thoughts I've had about you before we were talking.
Though we human beings must use concepts to grasp the content
of our faith, in the end
God does not reveal a series
of ideas: He reveals the «mystery»
of Himself in the person
of Christ, who is «the fullness
of all revelation».
The basic
idea of a Non-Violent view
of the atonement is that
God did not want or need the death
of Jesus in order to offer grace or forgiveness
of sins.
Instead
of affirming the
idea of evolution as supporting atheism or rejecting it because it
did so, some Christians took the position that its acceptance changes the way we understand
God's work in the world.
At what point
did the
idea that all people are created in the image
of God lose its currency and appeal?
You tell others they don't understand your
god and yet you have no
idea as to what they know, outside
of the fact that they grew up and left imaginary friends (aka
god / jesus) behind.