Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 1)
Options
Comments
-
daithifleming wrote: »Does anyone here claim to have actually heard God speak to them? If so, I have a question.
As I understand it, He's not too fond of questions.
And there's a saying I read somewhere once... If you talk to God you're faithful, if God talks back you're crazy.
We frequently hear perfectly sane christians say that god speaks in their hearts but the phrase "God told me to.." seems to most often be followed by something like "...kill all those people".0 -
AtomicHorror wrote: »We frequently hear perfectly sane christians say that god speaks in their hearts but the phrase "God told me to.." seems to most often be followed by something like "...kill all those people".
This is an interesting counterpoint to two of wolfsbane's recent posts, however.
He has maintained that it is possible for an individual to know God, but accepts that this knowledge cannot be objectively proven to others.
He also maintains that God has justly inflicted his wrath/vengeance/justice/whatever-term-suits-you on entire nations, and that there is nothing wrong with this, as it is from the divine.
However, God surely achieved this divine wrath/vengeange/justice/whatever-term-suits-you through people whom he instructed. They did God's bidding.
So when people say that God told them to kill someone, how can anyone decide otherwise, without disallowing that God may indeed have told them to do this. Are we to presume to know the mind of God, and to decide that our judgement is sufficient to determine the objective truth that wolfsbane tells us we cannot know?
Ultimately, I guess, this all leads to the question that when someone else claims to have acted on God's instructions, how can the faithful - who believe that God does talk to them - gainsay that?
In case anyone is wondering...I'm not asking this to suggest that those who claim to hear God are wrong. I'm asking because the explanation of what God speaking to an individual entails seems to lead inexorably to this dilema. Unless we accept that when God talks to the individual, He does not place demands on them in this manner. This, in turn, would then call into question what Wick is calling atrocities and what wolfsbane is defending as divine right, as they (at least in part) would appear to be carried out by individuals carrying out God's bidding.0 -
daithifleming wrote: »Does anyone here claim to have actually heard God speak to them? If so, I have a question.
The Holy Spirit (who is Jesus and God) spoke to J C at least once. I think he said something about the Georgia Guidestones. :eek::eek::eek::pac:0 -
This is an interesting counterpoint to two of wolfsbane's recent posts, however.
He has maintained that it is possible for an individual to know God, but accepts that this knowledge cannot be objectively proven to others.
He also maintains that God has justly inflicted his wrath/vengeance/justice/whatever-term-suits-you on entire nations, and that there is nothing wrong with this, as it is from the divine.
However, God surely achieved this divine wrath/vengeange/justice/whatever-term-suits-you through people whom he instructed. They did God's bidding.
So when people say that God told them to kill someone, how can anyone decide otherwise, without disallowing that God may indeed have told them to do this. Are we to presume to know the mind of God, and to decide that our judgement is sufficient to determine the objective truth that wolfsbane tells us we cannot know?
Ultimately, I guess, this all leads to the question that when someone else claims to have acted on God's instructions, how can the faithful - who believe that God does talk to them - gainsay that?
In case anyone is wondering...I'm not asking this to suggest that those who claim to hear God are wrong. I'm asking because the explanation of what God speaking to an individual entails seems to lead inexorably to this dilema. Unless we accept that when God talks to the individual, He does not place demands on them in this manner. This, in turn, would then call into question what Wick is calling atrocities and what wolfsbane is defending as divine right, as they (at least in part) would appear to be carried out by individuals carrying out God's bidding.
Interesting question0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Ultimately, I guess, this all leads to the question that when someone else claims to have acted on God's instructions, how can the faithful - who believe that God does talk to them - gainsay that?
It is a dilemma for the likes of Wolfsbane, however I gather that many Christians do not maintain that God speaks to people in such a direct manner. In fact I'm quite sure that a considerable number of catholics would view any claim of such direct communication dubious or even as blasphemous. Essentially, such communication is reserved for the Messiah and presumably the Second Coming.
We are left to search for God's word amongst the scriptures and in our hearts. Also there's peer pressure.0 -
daithifleming wrote: »Which will be done no justice by the predictably banal response it will receive.
He may have painted himself into a corner on this one...0 -
This is an interesting counterpoint to two of wolfsbane's recent posts, however.
He has maintained that it is possible for an individual to know God, but accepts that this knowledge cannot be objectively proven to others.
He also maintains that God has justly inflicted his wrath/vengeance/justice/whatever-term-suits-you on entire nations, and that there is nothing wrong with this, as it is from the divine.
However, God surely achieved this divine wrath/vengeange/justice/whatever-term-suits-you through people whom he instructed. They did God's bidding.
So when people say that God told them to kill someone, how can anyone decide otherwise, without disallowing that God may indeed have told them to do this. Are we to presume to know the mind of God, and to decide that our judgement is sufficient to determine the objective truth that wolfsbane tells us we cannot know?
Ultimately, I guess, this all leads to the question that when someone else claims to have acted on God's instructions, how can the faithful - who believe that God does talk to them - gainsay that?
In case anyone is wondering...I'm not asking this to suggest that those who claim to hear God are wrong. I'm asking because the explanation of what God speaking to an individual entails seems to lead inexorably to this dilema. Unless we accept that when God talks to the individual, He does not place demands on them in this manner. This, in turn, would then call into question what Wick is calling atrocities and what wolfsbane is defending as divine right, as they (at least in part) would appear to be carried out by individuals carrying out God's bidding.
You will find many Christians who claim that God speaks to them in different ways. These range from claiming to actually hearing voices to simply believing that it was God who put a good idea into their head.
However, Christian belief is that God has spoken through the Bible in a way that is authoritative and objective, whereas all other ways of hearing God are essentially subjective. Therefore, the first port of call for any Christian claiming to hear something from God is the Bible - does the purported message square up with the teaching of Scripture?
When Christians talk about testing something by 'the Bible' then they are referring to a revelation where the Old Testament must be interpreted in the light of the New Testament. This means that the wars of the conquest of Canaan, or Abraham being willing to sacrifice his son, are viewed as historical events that occurred in the past, but not as something that could be repeated without going in direct disobedience to the teachings of Jesus and the New Testament epistles.
Therefore if anyone claims that God has told them to kill someone etc. then most Christians would view that as a sign of mental illness.0 -
AtomicHorror wrote: »As I understand it, He's not too fond of questions.
And there's a saying I read somewhere once... If you talk to God you're faithful, if God talks back you're crazy.
We frequently hear perfectly sane christians say that god speaks in their hearts but the phrase "God told me to.." seems to most often be followed by something like "...kill all those people".
I hear people say "God told me to..." probably every day. Here's a selection of the ones I've heard this week.
"God told me I should help pay for the digging of a well for an impoverished village in Nigeria"
"God told me I should go and work as a volunteer in that orphanage in Zambia this Summer instead of just getting a job to have more money for going back to College in the autumn."
"I was in town last week and God told me to buy a few burgers from MacDonalds and hand them out to those homeless guys that sit down by the river."
"God told me to bake an apple pie and go and give it to that old woman at the end of our street that never seems to get any visitors."
"God told me to volunteer to go into the women's prison and volunteer my services as a beautician to help some of the inmates feel better about themselves and to improve their self-esteem."
"God told me to phone up my parents and apologise for all the trouble that I caused them back when I was still on drugs."
Amazingly, for this week at least, no-one has come to me claiming that God told them to decapitate anyone or wipe out any nations.0 -
Pure evil......:D
"I was in town last week and God told me to buy a few burgers from MacDonalds and hand them out to those homeless guys that sit down by the river."
How about this one:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/oct/07/iraq.usa
Really, need we say any more?
MrP0 -
Advertisement
-
Pure evil......:D
How about this one:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/oct/07/iraq.usa
Really, need we say any more?
MrP
Need we say more? You mean, other than the fact that both the White House and the Palestinian President denied that Bush ever made the comment?
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/abbas-denies-bushs-mission-from-god-remark/2005/10/08/1128563027485.html
Or do you mean the fact that Nabil Shaath, the guy who made the claim, went on to say that he believed the statement was not intended to be taken literally? - "It was really a figure of speech (by Bush). We felt he was saying that he had a mission, a commitment, his faith in God would inspire him ... rather than a metaphysical whisper in his ear," http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article575880.ece
Funny how you forgot to mention that bit of the story, isn't it?0 -
-
I hear people say "God told me to..." probably every day. Here's a selection of the ones I've heard this week.
"God told me I should help pay for the digging of a well for an impoverished village in Nigeria"
"God told me I should go and work as a volunteer in that orphanage in Zambia this Summer instead of just getting a job to have more money for going back to College in the autumn."
"I was in town last week and God told me to buy a few burgers from MacDonalds and hand them out to those homeless guys that sit down by the river."
"God told me to bake an apple pie and go and give it to that old woman at the end of our street that never seems to get any visitors."
"God told me to volunteer to go into the women's prison and volunteer my services as a beautician to help some of the inmates feel better about themselves and to improve their self-esteem."
"God told me to phone up my parents and apologise for all the trouble that I caused them back when I was still on drugs."
Amazingly, for this week at least, no-one has come to me claiming that God told them to decapitate anyone or wipe out any nations.
Those are all noble sentiments. I take it PDN, that you are very much active in a Christian community? A volunteer or a priest perhaps? I've never in my life heard a single person say anything of that sort, which is most likely biased due to my general separation from the very faithful. Usually when I encounter the phrase "God told me to..." it is in newspaper reports of unpleasant deeds. There is almost certainly a reporting bias there- naturally a story of how God told somebody to do something nice will simply not sell as many papers as a good old-fashioned tale of dismemberment.
The question that remains is that given the presence of both good and highly questionable deeds in scripture (and I mean those that are exalted in the bible, not criticised), whether it is really possible to differentiate between the subjective claims of direct divine communication made by psychotics or made by delusional do-gooders?0 -
In fairness to MrP, that isn't in the Guardian article he linked to. Claiming is left that out on purpose is a bit unfair.
No, I don't think he did it deliberately. But neither do I think he happened to be surfing through the archives of the Guardian from 3 years ago.
My guess would be that he googled it and ended up on one of those antireligious blogs that invariable leave the full facts of the case out.0 -
I see we have a radically different understanding of reality. In my world, the creator is entitled to the final say about his creation: the potter, the carpenter, the artist. You put the creator on a par with his creation, God having no more right over us than our neighbour has. A fundamental error in your thinking.Unfortunately throughout history there have been slaves who, though indoctrinated self-loathing, considered themselves no better than what their masters declared.
You aren't defined by your master Wolfsbane. That isn't how it works.
You are a sentient living creature. Your value is not decided by a creator, any creator. Your value is not decided by a master, any master.
Your value is decided by the fact that you exist. This is independent to how, why, when or by who.
“The moment the slave resolves that he will no longer be a slave, his fetters fall. Freedom and slavery are mental states.”
Mahatma Gandhi
If you must, deny there is a God. But if you concede His possibility for the sake of argument, you can't logically make Him our peer. God the creator, if He exists, has all rights over His creation.0 -
Well clearlyI see we have a radically different understanding of reality.In my world, the creator is entitled to the final say about his creation: the potter, the carpenter, the artist.
Well I suppose all I can say is that I feel sorry for you to have such a view on the value of humanity.
You are not property. Your rights are defined by what you are, not who made you or who you feel owns you.
You can certainly be grateful to God for creating you. But to feel that he owns you, that you are no more than his possession to do with as he so wishes, simply because he created you is tragic.You put the creator on a par with his creation, God having no more right over us than our neighbour has. A fundamental error in your thinking.
You are missing the point. No one supersedes your rights but it isn't a question of putting God on par with your neighbour. That is irrelevant. Your neighbour doesn't have rights over you simply because he is a less creature than a god. He doesn't supersede your rights because nothing supersedes your rights.
As I said you have rights based on what you are, not your standing in some kind of moral league ladder.
Again it is nothing to do with being our peer. I happily accept that if God exist he is certainly not our peer. But God is actually irrelevant to all this. It is what you are that is the important bit.If you must, deny there is a God. But if you concede His possibility for the sake of argument, you can't logically make Him our peer.
It doesn't matter where God comes in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter where anything else comes, be it at the top or the bottom.
You are a sentient life form, which gives you rights, rights that exist because of what you are.0 -
AtomicHorror wrote: »Those are all noble sentiments. I take it PDN, that you are very much active in a Christian community? A volunteer or a priest perhaps? I've never in my life heard a single person say anything of that sort, which is most likely biased due to my general separation from the very faithful.
Yes, I am a Church Pastor. Most of the comments I quoted above came from young people aged 18-25. As a Church we are heavily involved in humanitarian aid and social justice issues, partly because we believe God has told us to do this.Usually when I encounter the phrase "God told me to..." it is in newspaper reports of unpleasant deeds. There is almost certainly a reporting bias there- naturally a story of how God told somebody to do something nice will simply not sell as many papers as a good old-fashioned tale of dismemberment.
I have, in my life, personally encountered two cases of people claiming God had told them to do something violent. In each case they were suffering from a clearly diagnosed mental illness.
As I've already said in an earlier post, Christian theology teaches clearly that the Old Testament should be read in the light of the New Testament. In my experience even the least experienced Christians seem to find it pretty obvious that violent incidents in the Old Testament, and details in Parables, are not prescriptive teaching or things to be emulated.The question that remains is that given the presence of both good and highly questionable deeds in scripture (and I mean those that are exalted in the bible, not criticised), whether it is really possible to differentiate between the subjective claims of direct divine communication made by psychotics or made by delusional do-gooders?
The only people I have ever encountered that would see such passages as legitimising violence are paranoid schizophrenics or atheist posters on boards.ie0 -
I have, in my life, personally encountered two cases of people claiming God had told them to do something violent. In each case they were suffering from a clearly diagnosed mental illness.
Out of curiosity how many of those who believe God had directly told them to do something good or helpful were suffering from mental illness?0 -
-
Out of curiosity how many of those who believe God had directly told them to do something good or helpful were suffering from mental illness?
Unfortunately it's highly unlikely they were even tested. Nobody ever really wants to know if the do-gooders are mad. The voices are only a problem if they're not nice voices.0 -
Advertisement
-
Yes, I am a Church Pastor. Most of the comments I quoted above came from young people aged 18-25. As a Church we are heavily involved in humanitarian aid and social justice issues, partly because we believe God has told us to do this.
Good works, certainly. However, I would wonder how we can tell the difference between the mentally ill (admittedly a minority) who claim that God told them to do evil and the people who claim God told them to do good. I'm certainly not implying that those who feel God communicating to them via less explicit means are insane but in terms of being "spoken" to, so far as I know only schizophrenia puts uncontrollable voices of any nature in a person's head.The only people I have ever encountered that would see such passages as legitimising violence are paranoid schizophrenics or atheist posters on boards.ie
There's some Christian posters here who seem to believe that God may permit or perform genocide or work through others to do so. I personally feel that this is an attempt to seek patterns in chaos. Evil deeds/events being less depressing if they're for a greater good.0 -
AtomicHorror wrote: »Good works, certainly. However, I would wonder how we can tell the difference between the mentally ill (admittedly a minority) who claim that God told them to do evil and the people who claim God told them to do good. I'm certainly not implying that those who feel God communicating to them via less explicit means are insane but in terms of being "spoken" to, so far as I know only schizophrenia puts uncontrollable voices of any nature in a person's head.
By uncontrollable do you mean that people can't control hearing the voice or that they can't control their actions as a result of hearing the voice?0 -
daithifleming wrote: »Don't be so silly. Clearly only those who hear God telling them to do something bad are mental.
No, the majority of mental people don't hear God telling them anything.
I understand that schizophrenics in the former Soviet Union believed that Comrade Stalin was speaking to them directly. I once met a guy in Belfast who believed that the Queen of England was sending him telepathic messages.
There is a clear difference between someone who is diagnosed as mentally ill and believes that God is telling him to stab people, and someone like William Wilberforce or Martin Luther King who believed God was telling them to fight against the injustices of slavery and racial segregation.0 -
This is an interesting counterpoint to two of wolfsbane's recent posts, however.
He has maintained that it is possible for an individual to know God, but accepts that this knowledge cannot be objectively proven to others.
He also maintains that God has justly inflicted his wrath/vengeance/justice/whatever-term-suits-you on entire nations, and that there is nothing wrong with this, as it is from the divine.
However, God surely achieved this divine wrath/vengeange/justice/whatever-term-suits-you through people whom he instructed. They did God's bidding.
So when people say that God told them to kill someone, how can anyone decide otherwise, without disallowing that God may indeed have told them to do this. Are we to presume to know the mind of God, and to decide that our judgement is sufficient to determine the objective truth that wolfsbane tells us we cannot know?
Ultimately, I guess, this all leads to the question that when someone else claims to have acted on God's instructions, how can the faithful - who believe that God does talk to them - gainsay that?
In case anyone is wondering...I'm not asking this to suggest that those who claim to hear God are wrong. I'm asking because the explanation of what God speaking to an individual entails seems to lead inexorably to this dilema. Unless we accept that when God talks to the individual, He does not place demands on them in this manner. This, in turn, would then call into question what Wick is calling atrocities and what wolfsbane is defending as divine right, as they (at least in part) would appear to be carried out by individuals carrying out God's bidding.
AtomicHorror said:There's some Christian posters here who seem to believe that God may permit or perform genocide or work through others to do so. I personally feel that this is an attempt to seek patterns in chaos. Evil deeds/events being less depressing if they're for a greater good.The question that remains is that given the presence of both good and highly questionable deeds in scripture (and I mean those that are exalted in the bible, not criticised), whether it is really possible to differentiate between the subjective claims of direct divine communication made by psychotics or made by delusional do-gooders?
PDN has answered it fine. But let me confirm it.
First, this may take a couple of posts, as I can't get back on line since I started this reply and I want to deal with all the pertinent issues raised.
God speaks to His people in ways appropriate to their individual needs - it may appear as a distinct voice at times to some; usually it is a pressing certainty in one's heart that this is what one is to do. The Christian is one who has God the Holy Spirit in his heart - leading, teaching, comforting on the pilgrim way. But we also have the old nature lurking, fighting against our new nature, opposing the rule of the Spirit in our hearts - so we cannot assume every thought or desire is from God. We must test the thoughts and prompting of our hearts by God's revealed will - the Bible.
So if I feel led to love my neighbour's wife in a sexual way, I can be sure this is not of God - even if a voice tells me it she would appreciate it and it would be an act of kindness. Likewise with waging war to impose God's rule in the world - that is not how God intends us to spread the gospel. It is specifically forbidden. But did He not command Israel to destroy his enemies in the OT? Yes, but we are not national Israel, and this is the New Covenant era, a time when God is extending mercy to the Gentiles. So the Bible tells us God's will in crucial matters, and nothing we can hear or feel within is from Him if it contradicts His written word.0 -
Indeed, and I knew a guy who used to believe that he was Napoleon or Jesus, depending on which of his medications he wasn't taking at the time. And I know people who aren't on medication, but who still have vivid conversations with god and allah (and no doubt other deities), depending on what culture they grew up in.I understand that schizophrenics in the former Soviet Union believed that Comrade Stalin was speaking to them directly. I once met a guy in Belfast who believed that the Queen of England was sending him telepathic messages.
What is the difference?There is a clear difference between someone who is diagnosed as mentally ill and believes that God is telling him to stab people, and someone like William Wilberforce or Martin Luther King who believed God was telling them to fight against the injustices of slavery and racial segregation.0 -
Indeed, and I knew a guy who used to believe that he was Napoleon or Jesus, depending on which of his medications he wasn't taking at the time. And I know people who aren't on medication, but who still have vivid conversations with god and allah (and no doubt other deities), depending on what culture they grew up in. What is the difference?
That would be my point exactly.0 -
There is a clear difference between someone who is diagnosed as mentally ill and believes that God is telling him to stab people, and someone like William Wilberforce or Martin Luther King who believed God was telling them to fight against the injustices of slavery and racial segregation.
Is there a clear difference between people who appear to hear God telling them to do "good" and those who appear to hear God telling them to do "bad" (relatively concepts since most Christians, at least on this forum, appear to believe that God decided good and bad in the first place).0 -
What is the difference?
As a parent, the difference is clear. I want my child to be inspired to emulate people like Wilberforce and King who made the world a better place. I never want her to be like thesick person who believes God has told him to kill people.
I also believe that there is a medical distinction in that Wilberforce and King were not mentally ill by any accepted medical criteria. Oh that we were all as sane as them!0 -
No dilemna for me. Christians test all things by the Bible, that includes promptings, voices, visions, whatever.AtomicHorror wrote: »It is a dilemma for the likes of Wolfsbane, however I gather that many Christians do not maintain that God speaks to people in such a direct manner. In fact I'm quite sure that a considerable number of catholics would view any claim of such direct communication dubious or even as blasphemous. Essentially, such communication is reserved for the Messiah and presumably the Second Coming.
We are left to search for God's word amongst the scriptures and in our hearts. Also there's peer pressure.
One's only danger of going astray is a defective understanding of the Bible, and that is something we have to labour against. The peer pressure of our fellow-believers can be a great help, warning us that our understanding is not that shared by most down the ages. So we know we better have a second look at what we feel led to and our interpretation of the Scripture.0 -
Advertisement
-
Yes, a valid question. I'm sure not all mentally ill folk who hear voices are 'told' to do evil. I'm guessing, not having experience in that field.Out of curiosity how many of those who believe God had directly told them to do something good or helpful were suffering from mental illness?
But let me move it to the sane folk - I can well see an excitable personality feeling God wants them to give up employment and go to Peru to preach to the Indians. That is a good work in itself - but God may have no such will for that Christian. It could be just his wish to do good, or his desire to get away from a boring job, etc. - but he persuades himself that God is leading him in his heart to do this. Desire is not enough - God must actually lead. We cannot hype ourselves up and then say God must be doing it. We are to bring our desires to God and ask Him to direct our hearts. How He does so is up to Him, but He expects us to test it all by His word and prayer.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement