Can I not believe in God and NOT be an atheist?

Spooky · Nov 19, 2020

FreshAir said: ↑

is God like Trump, punishes people that do not worship the ground he walks on?

if there is a God, I doubt he would be that petty
Click to expand...

He kinda said He would....yea

Spooky · Nov 19, 2020

FreshAir said: ↑

that is not the golden rule, just punishing someone cause they do not worship one is evil

if God has an evil side, that is ok, just own it

it's said when he comes again he will be much different ....

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation 19:11-16&version=KJV

11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.

13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
Click to expand...

He has owned it many times.

Even Jesus said He did not come to bring peace but a sword to turn people against one another, especially families.

The Amazing Sam's Ego · Nov 19, 2020

emilynghiem said: ↑

I call it being "nontheist" if you believe in ASPECTS or concepts that "other people attribute to God" but you talk about Spirituality using "impersonal" or "SECULAR" terms (and do not "personify" or "deify" this as a father figure or anthropomorphic entity).

This is similar to believing in NATURE but NOT believing in personifying as a figure like MOTHER NATURE.
Or believing in TIME without personifying it as FATHER TIME.

I believe that if God and Jesus are used to represent UNIVERSAL concepts,
then the meaning should be able to translate into SECULAR TERMS.

Like taking the female figure THETIS and describing that she represents JUSTICE. Or the Statue of Liberty and explaining in common terms what
it means to exercise or defend LIBERTY which the personal figure represents.

Some other names of God include
WISDOM or TRUTH
LOVE
JUSTICE (I normally equate JESUS with JUSTICE)
LIFE
NATURE or forces of nature/life
UNIVERSE OR Universal laws or truth
CREATION/CREATOR

The REAL difference in whether people make hell for themselves or heaven
is FORGIVENESS.

Believing in RESTORATIVE JUSTICE is the equivalent of faith in Christ Jesus
while not forgiving and seeking to live by Retributive Justice is the opposite and
can become the abusive force of Antichrist behind the selfish desire to force justice on others
that benefits one side. Manmade justice is biased and flawed this way,
and only God's Divine Justice with Mercy treats all people equally to restore peace.

So the issue is not so much "do you believe in God as a personified figure"
The real distinction is do you believe that
Good will overcomes ill will
Truth prevails over falsehood and error
Justice governs humanity and will correct all injustice
Peace will overcome war
Love will conquer fear and ignorance
etc.

If you believe "Good will or God's will" is supreme
and will outweigh any motivations or problems to the contrary,
then that is what it means to have faith in God.

You basically believe there is higher truth or knowledge
or greater good that drives the universe toward justice,
so you believe this power of goodness is greater than any obstacle
or obstruction that could block it.

Some VERSION of that anyway,
whether you believe in universal laws of life,
or collective truth and knowledge that is greater than all.

Not everyone focuses on the same aspect of God,
but AS LONG AS WE FORGIVE AND ACCEPT OUR DIFFERENCES
then we can see "we are referring to the same universal source of life and truth"
even if we use different names or terms, or we focus on different manifestations.
Click to expand...

Quoted from gotquestions.org.

Is the idea of mother nature biblical?
Question: "Is the idea of mother nature biblical?"

Answer: The earliest written and most reliably dated references to Mother Nature are found in Mycenaean Greek transcripts dated in 12 or 13 BC. The term Mother Earth is transliterated as “ma-ga” or “Mother Gaia.” This notion had its roots in the pre-Socratic philosophers who had “invented” Nature, and it was further championed by the Greek philosopher Aristotle. Other cultures have embraced the notion that “nature” had its own spirit and relevancy unique from God the Father. The American Indian is one such culture that believes that there is something called an “Earth Mother” that provides the water of life that gives them the abundant provision of food. In reality, no one but God provides our basic needs of food, shelter, water, and life.

The term Mother Nature is sometimes used in a general way to refer to the environment as a whole. The term is sometimes used in association with political and cultural ideologies such as global warming, environmentalism, and climate change. For some, news reports of rising temperatures, rising sea levels, savage wildfires, earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, the emergence of new and even ancient diseases, and the like demonstrate that "Mother Nature" is a kind of capricious goddess who wreaks havoc throughout the earth.

It is God who controls the forces of nature: “But God made the earth by his power; he founded the world by his wisdom and stretched out the heavens by his understanding. When he thunders, the waters in the heavens roar; he makes clouds rise from the ends of the earth. He sends lightning with the rain and brings out the wind from his storehouses” (Jeremiah 10:12–13). Jesus demonstrated His divine power over nature by calming the raging sea (Matthew 8:26). It is also true that there are natural laws at work in our environment; these are systems God instituted (Genesis 8:22). God created our world; human sin damaged it (Romans 8:19–22). Yet God still holds our world together (Colossians 1:16–17). There is no capricious goddess at play.

Another bizarre idea is that Mother Nature is somehow the wife/consort of God and she rules in heaven alongside Him. This idea of a “mother and father god” is seen in some Roman Catholic traditions that declare Mary to be the “queen of heaven.” The Bible, however, declares that God, in the triune Godhead, rules heaven and earth alone and unaided (Daniel 4:25). Nature is His creation and He alone sustains and protects it and, in doing so, He testifies to His goodness and kindness toward it. “He has shown kindness by giving you rain from heaven and crops in their seasons; he provides you with plenty of food and fills your hearts with joy" (Acts 14:17).
Click to expand...

Cybred · Nov 19, 2020

Distraff said: ↑

An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in God. So if you don't believe in God, you are an atheist. However, atheism is very controvercial so most people don't want to be associated with it. Most people who won't believe in God try to find other labels like "agnostic", "non-religious", "pantheist", "non-practicing <insert religion here>", or spiritual.
Click to expand...

What's the label for I don't care?

Cybred · Nov 19, 2020

Spooky said: ↑

You can believe anything you like. I'm sure God will find it amusing on your judgement day.
Click to expand...

Yes she will.

Buri · Nov 19, 2020

Spooky said: ↑

You can believe anything you like. I'm sure God will find it amusing on your judgement day.
Click to expand...

Lots of gods have judgement stories, which one are you referring to?

Patricio Da Silva · Nov 19, 2020

emilynghiem said: ↑

I call it being "nontheist" if you believe in ASPECTS or concepts that "other people attribute to God" but you talk about Spirituality using "impersonal" or "SECULAR" terms (and do not "personify" or "deify" this as a father figure or anthropomorphic entity).

This is similar to believing in NATURE but NOT believing in personifying as a figure like MOTHER NATURE.
Or believing in TIME without personifying it as FATHER TIME.

I believe that if God and Jesus are used to represent UNIVERSAL concepts,
then the meaning should be able to translate into SECULAR TERMS.

Like taking the female figure THETIS and describing that she represents JUSTICE. Or the Statue of Liberty and explaining in common terms what
it means to exercise or defend LIBERTY which the personal figure represents.

Some other names of God include
WISDOM or TRUTH
LOVE
JUSTICE (I normally equate JESUS with JUSTICE)
LIFE
NATURE or forces of nature/life
UNIVERSE OR Universal laws or truth
CREATION/CREATOR

The REAL difference in whether people make hell for themselves or heaven
is FORGIVENESS.

Believing in RESTORATIVE JUSTICE is the equivalent of faith in Christ Jesus
while not forgiving and seeking to live by Retributive Justice is the opposite and
can become the abusive force of Antichrist behind the selfish desire to force justice on others
that benefits one side. Manmade justice is biased and flawed this way,
and only God's Divine Justice with Mercy treats all people equally to restore peace.

So the issue is not so much "do you believe in God as a personified figure"
The real distinction is do you believe that
Good will overcomes ill will
Truth prevails over falsehood and error
Justice governs humanity and will correct all injustice
Peace will overcome war
Love will conquer fear and ignorance
etc.

If you believe "Good will or God's will" is supreme
and will outweigh any motivations or problems to the contrary,
then that is what it means to have faith in God.

You basically believe there is higher truth or knowledge
or greater good that drives the universe toward justice,
so you believe this power of goodness is greater than any obstacle
or obstruction that could block it.

Some VERSION of that anyway,
whether you believe in universal laws of life,
or collective truth and knowledge that is greater than all.

Not everyone focuses on the same aspect of God,
but AS LONG AS WE FORGIVE AND ACCEPT OUR DIFFERENCES
then we can see "we are referring to the same universal source of life and truth"
even if we use different names or terms, or we focus on different manifestations.
Click to expand...

Nontheist? Nahh, Pantheist is closer to my belief. There is no 'God's will', as god is not a conscious being. it is a collective force, like energy, but it's the source of energy which gives rise to all things, not as a 'design' but as randomity.

FreshAir · Nov 19, 2020

Spooky said: ↑

He has owned it many times.

Even Jesus said He did not come to bring peace but a sword to turn people against one another, especially families.
Click to expand...

agree, but, I am talking about his believers

Spooky · Nov 19, 2020

Buri said: ↑

Lots of gods have judgement stories, which one are you referring to?
Click to expand...

I'm sure you will let us know when you experience it. None of them are good so it's not like there is a way out of it for you.

The Amazing Sam's Ego · Nov 19, 2020

Patricio Da Silva said: ↑

Nontheist? Nahh, Pantheist is closer to my belief. There is no 'God's will', as god is not a conscious being. it is a collective force, like energy, but it's the source of energy which gives rise to all things, not as a 'design' but as randomity.
Click to expand...

https://crossexamined.org/8-major-worldviews-part-1/

8 MAJOR WORLDVIEWS (PART 1)
By Brian Chilton

Before the website transferred from pastorbrianchilton.wordpress.com to bellatorchristi.com, I had written an article on the major worldviews across the globe. I presented six major worldviews at the time. While I still think the previous article treated the most major of worldviews, I have come to realize after reading Douglas Groothius’ book, Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith, that other major worldviews exist that should be discussed and incorporated into the list.[1] So, let’s revisit the major worldviews in this article. The goal of the article will be to notify the reader of each belief and will show how Christian theism triumphs. In addition, the Christian apologist will need to understand the starting points that must be taken with each worldview.

Atheism/Naturalism: Rejection of God’s Existence, Only the Physical World Exists.

The term “atheist” is taken from the Greek term “a” meaning “no” and “theos” meaning “God.” Placed together, the term means “no God.” The atheist, therefore, is one who does not believe in the existence of God. Atheists are often termed “naturalists” as they only accept the existence of the natural/physical world, thereby rejecting the existence of things like God, spirits, the human soul, angels, and demons. Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss are good examples of atheism.

Atheism holds a problem as it pertains to the immaterial world. Naturalism cannot explain the existence of human consciousness. Even if the consciousness could be shown to derive from material means, naturalism (or materialism) faces a great problem as the human consciousness is a non-material thing. A scanner can see brainwaves, but not mental thoughts and the like. Naturalism holds two additional problems. On the one hand, naturalism cannot answer why anything exists. It has been mathematically demonstrated by the theorem of Borg, Vilenkin, and Guth (i.e., the BVG Theorem) that there cannot be an infinite regress of material worlds. Every material world must have a beginning point. On the other hand, naturalism fails to account for the mounting evidence of near death experiences.[2] Atheism and naturalism hold great problems serving as a cohesive worldview. The Christian apologist will need to demonstrate the reasonability of God’s existence and the means by which naturalism fails.

Agnosticism: God’s Existence is Unknowable.

Agnosticism comes from two terms: “a” the Greek term meaning “no” and “gnosis” the Greek term meaning “knowledge.” The agnostic does not necessarily reject belief in God. The agnostic claims no knowledge on the issue. There are at least two forms of agnosticism. Atheistic agnostics incline to reject belief in God, but are open to the possibility of God’s existence. The atheistic agnostic claims that it is impossible to know whether God exists or not. Bart Ehrman and Neil deGrasse Tyson are examples of atheistic agnostics.

Theistic agnostics are individuals who are inclined to believe in God’s existence. However, they are doubtful whether individuals can know anything about God. The theistic agnostic may either reject divine revelation altogether and claim that no religion is correct, or the theistic agnostic may reject exclusive revelation and will claim that all religions are correct. When I stumbled into my time of personal doubt, I became more of the theistic agnostic (one who claimed to be spiritual but not religious). The Ba’hai religion and Morgan Freeman may be considered examples of theistic agnosticism.

The trouble with agnosticism is with divine revelation. If God can truly be shown to exist, then atheistic agnosticism begins to wane. If one can demonstrate that God has revealed himself to humanity (particularly through Jesus of Nazareth), then theistic agnosticism begins to fade. The Christian apologist will need to understand, first, that agnosticism can cover a wide variety of flavors. Second, the Christian apologist will need to describe the evidence for Jesus of Nazareth’s life, miracles, and resurrection.

Pantheism: The Force is With You.

Pantheism comes from two Greek terms: “pan” meaning “all” and “theos” meaning “God.” Pantheism may look quite a bit like panentheism and even theistic agnosticism. However, generally speaking, pantheism is the belief that God is an impersonal force. Buddhism is the greatest example of pantheism. The Star Wars idea of the “force” is another example of pantheism. Buddhists claim to be agnostic concerning God’s existence. Yet, the Buddhist believes in impersonal forces (i.e., the force behind reincarnation). The goal of such a worldview is to become nothing. In fact, the Buddhist concept of Nirvana means that one has become so enlightened that he or she escapes the wheel of reincarnation and becomes nothing.

The trouble with pantheism is diverse. On the one hand, the pantheist will speak of such forces in such a way that intelligence is necessary. For example, why is there a wheel of reincarnation? Why is it that good behavior elevates one to a higher level and vice versa? On the other hand, pantheists have great trouble in explaining why anything exists at all. Much more could be said on this issue as it pertains to the trouble of pantheism. The Christian apologist will need to describe the internal inconsistencies of pantheism as a starting point as well as note the personal nature of the divine.

Panentheism: Everything is God.

Panentheism comes from three Greek terms: “pan” meaning “all,” “en” meaning “in,” and “theos” meaning “God.” Therefore, panentheism is literally defined as “all in God.” Panentheists hold that God penetrates everything. While the Christian may initially be inclined to agree, one must understand that panentheists believe that everything is God. Thus, the panentheist would agree that Jesus of Nazareth is God. But, the panentheist would also agree that you are God, he is God, everyone is God, and even your kitchen sink is God. The panentheist does not distinguish between the personal God and the physical creation. Hinduism is the greatest example of panentheism.

Panentheism, however, holds issues as it pertains to the world. If the world is God, then why is there so much evil? God is certainly good. So, if everyone is God, then wouldn’t everything be perfect? To accept such a claim, one must have a flawed idea of God’s nature. With the panentheist, the Christian apologist will need to begin by teaching the distinction between the personal divine being of God and the physical, material creation that is the world.
Click to expand...

Cybred · Nov 19, 2020

Spooky said: ↑

I'm sure you will let us know when you experience it. None of them are good so it's not like there is a way out of it for you.
Click to expand...

Yes there is.

Spooky · Nov 19, 2020

Cybred said: ↑

Yes there is.
Click to expand...

Ok

Patricio Da Silva · Nov 19, 2020

The Amazing Sam's Ego said: ↑

https://crossexamined.org/8-major-worldviews-part-1/
Click to expand...

The problem with all of them is this:

When the rubber hits the road, no one really knows.

Life is a mystery. Why not just accept it and celebrate the fact?

"Life is not a problem to be solved, it is a mystery to be lived" --Soren Kierkegaard.

The Amazing Sam's Ego · Nov 19, 2020

Patricio Da Silva said: ↑

The problem with all of them is this:

When the rubber hits the road, no one really knows.

Life is a mystery. Why not just accept it and celebrate the fact?

"Life is not a problem to be solved, it is a mystery to be lived" --Soren Kierkegaard.
Click to expand...

Pantheism denies the love that God has for His creation.

yardmeat · Nov 19, 2020

Patricio Da Silva said: ↑

The problem with all of them is this:

When the rubber hits the road, no one really knows.

Life is a mystery. Why not just accept it and celebrate the fact?

"Life is not a problem to be solved, it is a mystery to be lived" --Soren Kierkegaard.
Click to expand...

Seems like the healthiest and most rewarding approach, IMO. The semantics about this label or that label are relatively unimportant.

Buri · Nov 19, 2020

Spooky said: ↑

I'm sure you will let us know when you experience it. None of them are good so it's not like there is a way out of it for you.
Click to expand...

I don't share your enthusiasm, all we know for certain is the sun will run out of energy and collapse, then cool and die. Doubtful that the human race will be around then, but who knows?

Patricio Da Silva · Nov 19, 2020

The Amazing Sam's Ego said: ↑

Pantheism denies the love that God has for His creation.
Click to expand...

No. Pantheism asserts that the universe is God, that there is no personal God.

The fallacy of your assertion is this:

IN order for anyone to "deny the love that God has for His creation" would require the belief in a personal God and then deny it from that vantage point, but Pantheism does not proclaim there is a personal God, so your claim is moot.

The Amazing Sam's Ego · Nov 19, 2020

Buri said: ↑

I don't share your enthusiasm, all we know for certain is the sun will run out of energy and collapse, then cool and die. Doubtful that the human race will be around then, but who knows?
Click to expand...

Bible prophecy and eschatology is why the idea of human extinction is doubtful. God preserves the sun and maintains it.

https://thinkchristian.reframemedia.com/human-extinction-and-christian-eschatology

Human extinction and Christian eschatology

BRANSON PARLER • MARCH 7, 2013

Could humans go extinct? Scientist Fred Guterl writes of a “climate Armageddon” and warns of an “apocalyptic event.” Respected scientists James Lovelock and Frank Fenner have also warned that extinction is a real possibility. And while others consider this unlikely, I still think it’s worth asking given all the doomsday talk recently: How should Christians think about human extinction in light of Biblical eschatology?

Human extinction can be a valuable theological resource, for starters, because it can put us in our place. We are not God. We are creatures. Truth be told, our existence is not necessary. From dust we came and to dust we return. This could be true on a global as well as personal scale.

The above scientists suggest that, if extinction were to occur, humans would be largely to blame. Guterl almost sounds theological when he notes, “We are always figuring out new ways of bringing apocalypse on our heads.” To sin, to turn away from God, to overreach our proper boundaries brings inevitable consequences. In light of that, we might say that human extinction, far from being unthinkable, would simply be the outworking of the fact that “the wages of sin is death.” The future judgment of God could very well be God simply letting human sin take its natural toll on creation and humanity.

Although the Bible speaks of judgment, it is also clear that God in His grace always preserves a remnant.

God’s judgment can be seen with fresh eyes, I think, as a result of thinking about (near) human extinction. We sometimes think of God’s judgment in a very “interventionist” way, as if God has to halt the natural, regular processes of the world and step into nature or history to exact judgment that otherwise wouldn’t have happened. But the Biblical picture of God’s providence, judgment and salvation is more complex than that. God uses the natural rise and fall of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires to judge Israel. And it’s possible to explain even the plagues of Exodus as happening by natural causes. So did God cause these or were they produced by natural causes? The proper theological answer is: both.

Now, this all sounds quite gloomy. If human sin were the only story in town, we would have good reason to despair. But it’s not.

Humanity will not go extinct, ultimately, because of Jesus, who is not only fully divine but fully human. In Jesus, we know the destiny of the human race. The present, glorified humanity of Jesus is the linchpin and guarantee of our own survival and ultimate transformation. In the death of Jesus, humanity really died. This was the inevitable end of the sons and daughters of the first Adam. But in the resurrection and ascension of Jesus, we have the guarantee of our own destiny. As the Heidelberg Catechism Q&A 49 puts it, we have “our own flesh in heaven as a sure pledge” that God’s plan for humanity goes beyond the extinction we would eventually bring on our own heads.

So although the Bible speaks of judgment, it is also clear that God in His grace always preserves a remnant. From the beginning of the Biblical narrative, the human race has been hurtling toward a self-inflicted extinction. And yet God is always ahead of us, turning curses into blessings, working out life where we deserve death, taking our rightful destiny upon Himself and re-connecting us to the only true source of life. The wages of sin is indeed death, but we know that death itself has already been swallowed up in victory. So we look forward to the day when death will die, when the threat of extinction itself will go extinct.
Click to expand...

Buri · Nov 19, 2020

The Amazing Sam's Ego said: ↑

Bible prophecy and eschatology is why the idea of human extinction is doubtful. God preserves the sun and maintains it.

https://thinkchristian.reframemedia.com/human-extinction-and-christian-eschatology
Click to expand...

The bible is not a science book, stop making things up. It's just a collection of stories and metaphors many of which are borrowed from other texts.

The Amazing Sam's Ego · Nov 19, 2020

Patricio Da Silva said: ↑

No. Pantheism asserts that the universe is God, that there is no personal God.

The fallacy of your assertion is this:

IN order for anyone to deny the love that God has for His creation would require the belief in a personal God, but Pantheism does not make that proclamation, so your claim is moot.
Click to expand...

How can the universe be God, since God created the universe, and you need a personal God to create the universe?

The love that God has for His creation is consistent with the moral Law written on our hearts and everything having a design and a purpose. Pantheism doesnt acknowledge that.

https://www.compellingtruth.org/panentheism.html

Panentheism – What is it?
Panentheism is a blending of theism (belief in a God) and pantheism (all is God). It specifically teaches that God is greater than the universe and that the universe exists within God. It therefore stands distinct from pantheism (which believes God is all) as well as theism (which teaches God is distinct from His creation). Within Christian theology, panentheism is often discussed under the term Process Theology.

Panentheism is clearly contrary to the teaching of the Bible. Scripture presents God as one (Deuteronomy 6:4) and that all people are called to worship Him. If all things are part of God as panentheism teaches, worship of God and other beings could co-exist without conflict. Yet Scripture clearly teaches to worship God alone (Exodus 20:3-5).

Further, the Bible begins with the statement that, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1). God created all things, existing before their creation. As such, He is perfect, unchanging, and distinct from all created things. This should not result in the worship of created things, but rather the Creator of all things (Romans 1:20).

Many of God's other attributes also affirm traits only possible of a theistic God, or one God separate from His creation. For example, 1 Chronicles 29:11 affirms God is sovereign or in control of all things. If the creation exists within God and is changing (as panentheism suggests) then God could not be sovereign. If God is self-existent or eternal (Psalm 36:9), then no part of His creation could exist as part of Him. If God is unchanging (Psalm 33:11; James 1:17), then no part of creation could be equal with God since it is changeable.

Perhaps the fundamental flaw in panentheism is the desire to provide harmony between the views of theism and pantheism. God cannot be one and be all at the same time. God is either a single being who is the source of all other life or He is not. If not, some other explanation must be made that is sufficient to explain everything that exists. Yet even the scientific evidence of our time points to a single beginning of all space, time, matter, and energy. A single source is the cause of all things. This agrees with the biblical teaching of one God who is the Creator of all things rather than a view of God that is changing and part of creation.
Click to expand...

The Amazing Sam's Ego · Nov 19, 2020

Buri said: ↑

The bible is not a science book, stop making things up. It's just a collection of stories and metaphors many of which are borrowed from other texts.
Click to expand...

The book of Job has scientific details. The Bible says that the earth is round. The story of a global flood is evidence that the story of Noahs ark is true. Its not borrowed from other texts. https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2016/12/18/is-the-bible-a-science-textbook/

Is the Bible a Science Textbook?
by Ken Ham on December 18, 2016
I often have people tell me that “the Bible’s not a science textbook!” But the Bible is actually a textbook of historical science—and the only such textbook that is totally reliable and infallible.

Now, I’m glad the Bible’s not a textbook of science like those used in public schools, because it would change all the time. Many ideas have come and gone. For example, most of the evolutionary beliefs used by scientists in the transcript of the Scopes Trial have been abandoned—but God’s Word remains the same. It is the infallible Word of God—the true history book of the universe.

The Bible Is God’s Word
Does the Bible simply contain the Word of God? That’s not entirely accurate: the Bible is the Word of God—“All Scripture is God breathed” (2 Timothy 3:16 NIV). And which are the words of Jesus in the Bible? Remember, all are His words—from Genesis to Revelation. Jesus is the WORD (1 John 1:1).

Secularists often accuse us of reading Genesis literally but not other portions of the Bible. We point out that we should read the Bible naturally. There is history (e.g., Genesis), poetry (e.g., Psalms), prophecy (e.g., Isaiah), and so on. Different genres of writing require different interpretative methods. Historical documents such as Genesis are not intended to be taken figuratively.

Secularists also attack Christians for not following Old Testament laws. But most secularists have no understanding of the Old Covenant and New Covenant—and they don’t want to. They want to distort and attack the Word.

Challenge to Secularists
I’m burdened for those described in the Bible as “having no hope and without God in the world” (Ephesians 2:12), which is why we boldly proclaim truth. My challenge to secularists is this: the evidence of creation is obvious, so “do not be unbelieving, but believing” (John 20:27) and “lay aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light” (Romans 13:12 NASB).

Challenge to Believers
When you reject God’s Word in Genesis and interpret it through the lens of man’s fallible, opinionated word, more and more compromise is sure to follow. You see, when you start compromising in one area of the Bible, it isn’t long before compromise shows up in other areas. My challenge to all believers is this: believe all of God’s Word!

God’s Word Is Forever
People are born and die, but “the word of our God stands forever” (Isaiah 40:8)—and no person can ever change that! Secularists can’t change this: “The entirety of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous judgments endures forever” (Psalms 119:160).

Many people try to change God’s Word, particularly in Genesis, but “forever, O Lord, Your word is settled in heaven” (Psalms 119:89).
Click to expand...

Cybred · Nov 19, 2020

The Amazing Sam's Ego said: ↑

Pantheism denies the love that God has for His creation.
Click to expand...

What love.

Cybred · Nov 19, 2020

The Amazing Sam's Ego said: ↑

The book of Job has scientific details. The Bible says that the earth is round. The story of a global flood is evidence that the story of Noahs ark is true. Its not borrowed from other texts. https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2016/12/18/is-the-bible-a-science-textbook/
Click to expand...

If the bible is the word of god then where's the rest of it?

The Amazing Sam's Ego · Nov 19, 2020

Cybred said: ↑

What love.
Click to expand...

Jesus paid the price of sin for every human who ever lived. It means agape love. Humans cant love the way that God loves. The Psalms and the Greek and the Hebrew talk about God's love.

https://answersingenesis.org/hermeneutics/defining-love/

Defining “Love”
חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ)—Part 1
by John C. P. Smith on May 8, 2015; last featured February 14, 2017
Share:
According to John Lennon, “All you need is love!”1
Certainly we all need love. But whose love? And is it really all you need?

Is human affection sufficient? Is the love of a spouse, parent, child, sibling, relative, or friend enough to meet all your needs? Love such as this can be truly wonderful. I know full well! I’ve been happily married for more than 20 years and have six loving children.

But the love of fellow humans doesn’t last forever. It wavers and sometimes fails. It may be tainted by selfishness or pride. Try though it might, it cannot heal every disease or every broken heart. It can’t cure every addiction or transform all wayward behavior. Ultimately it can’t help us avoid the consequences of death.

But the love of God can do all of these things!

The Quality of God’s Love
The word חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ), occurring around 250 times in the Old Testament, is the main term used to describe the love of God.2 But to translate חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ) simply as “love” doesn’t adequately convey its richness and depth. The love of God far surpasses that of humans. His חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ) incorporates mercy, kindness, goodness, grace, and loyalty—and each aspect finds its supreme expression in Him.

Range of Meaning3 mercy, kindness, lovingkindness, goodness, grace, graciousness, love, steadfast love, unfailing love, faithfulness, loyalty
Pronunciation4 Biblical Hebrew: CHE-seth (ˈħeseð)
Modern Hebrew: CHE-sed (ˈχesed or ˈħesed)
Occurrences in the Hebrew Old Testament5 about 250
First occurrence Genesis 19:19
Strong’s number/Goodrick & Kohlenberger number 2617/2876
Root letters חסד (ḥsḏ)
Also derived from the same root חָסִיד (ḥāsîḏ) = kind, faithful, godly, devout, devoted, pious; person exhibiting these attributes, saint
Greek word most often paralleled with חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ)6 ἔλεος (éleos) = pity, mercy, compassion
To try to get this breadth of meaning across in translation is challenging. One approach is to combine two words. For example, the NASB predominantly renders חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ) as “lovingkindness,” the RSV as “steadfast love,” and the NIV as “unfailing love.”7 The NKJV, like the KJV, usually translates חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ) with the single word “mercy,” though in a couple of verses it uses the two-word phrase “merciful kindness.”8 In two verses where חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ) occurs twice, the NKJV uses different English words:

And Solomon said: “You have shown great mercy [חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ)] . . . ; You have continued this great kindness [חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ)] . . . .” (1 Kings 3:6)Mercy [חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ)] and truth preserve the king, and by lovingkindness [חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ)] he upholds his throne. (Proverbs 20:28)
Seeing the different ways in which חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ) is translated helps to build up a deeper understanding of God’s love.9

The Magnitude of God’s Love
It’s not just in quality that God’s love is supreme; it’s also in magnitude. Here’s what God said about Himself, including the abundance of His חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ), when He appeared in a very special way to Moses on Mount Sinai:

And the Lord passed before him and proclaimed, “The Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abounding in goodness [חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ)] and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin . . . .” (Exodus 34:6–7)
The words “abounding in goodness” here are a translation of the Hebrew רַב־חֶסֶד (raḇ-ḥéseḏ), a phrase which occurs eight times in Scripture, always with reference to the Lord. Once again, the variety of English wording used to convey this single Hebrew couplet sheds light on its rich meaning, as is here exemplified by the NKJV renderings:

“abounding in goodness” (Exodus 34:6)

“abundant in kindness” (Nehemiah 9:17)10

“of great kindness” (Joel 2:13)

“abundant in lovingkindness” (Jonah 4:2)

“abounding in mercy” (Psalm 103:8)

“abundant in mercy” (Numbers 14:18; Psalm 86:5, 15)

Unlike the English noun “love,” חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ) can comfortably be used in the plural, חֲסָדִים (ḥăsāḏîm), reminding us that authentic, faithful love is composed of numerous, practical acts of kindness.

I will mention the lovingkindnesses [חֲסָדִים (ḥăsāḏîm)] of the Lordand the praises of the Lord, according to all that the Lord has bestowed on us, and the great goodness toward the house of Israel, which He has bestowed on them according to His mercies, according to the multitude of His lovingkindnesses [חֲסָדִים(ḥăsāḏîm)]. (Isaiah 63:7)
This is reminiscent of the popular old hymn, “Count Your Blessings,”11 whose refrain went,

Count your blessings, name them one by one,
Count your blessings, see what God hath done!
Count your blessings, name them one by one,
And it will surprise you what the Lord hath done.
Similarly, Jews are encouraged to recite 100 blessings daily.12 Certainly, if we try, we can all think of many ways in which God’s faithful love, kindness, goodness, and mercy have touched our lives and blessed us. Indeed, if our eyes are open we will see that

. . . the earth is full of the goodness [חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ)] of the Lord. (Psalm 33:5)For His merciful kindness [חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ)] is great toward us . . . . Praise the Lord! (Psalm 117:2)
Having a thankful heart can dramatically transform our outlook and attitudes, as well as make a positive impact on those around us.

The Longevity of God’s Love
Another key aspect of God’s amazing חֶסֶד (ḥéseḏ), in addition to its quality and magnitude, is its longevity. The phrase “His mercy endures forever” is used in the NKJV to translate לְעוֹלָם חַסְדּוֹ (le ôlām ḥasdô), which occurs no less than 42 times.13God’s kindness is not transient. His love is faithful and never grows cold. This is exceedingly good news and another great reason to give thanks:

Oh, give thanks to the Lord, for He is good! For His mercy [חֶסֶד(ḥéseḏ)] endures forever. (1 Chronicles 16:34; Psalm 106:1, 107:1, 118:1,118:29, 136:1)14
We had this complete Hebrew phrase skillfully worked into our family piano by means of marquetry to remind and inspire us to make music and songs that praise and honor the Lord for all His goodness and great love.

Photo courtesy of Hannah P. Smith

Over half of the occurrences of the phrase לְעוֹלָם חַסְדּוֹ (le ’ôlām ḥasdô), “His mercyendures forever,” occur in Psalm 136, with one instance for each of the 26 verses. While the large middle section of this Psalm relates to God’s acts of kindness toward the nation of Israel (vv. 10–24), the beginning and end of the Psalm are about His love and mercy toward all, even as the sovereign Creator. We can indeed be eternally thankful that the “God of heaven” (v. 26) who is the “God of gods” (v. 2) and “Lord of lords” (v. 3) and “who alone does great wonders” (v. 4), “who by wisdom made the heavens” (v. 5), “laid out the earth above the waters” (v. 6), “who made great lights” (v. 7), “[t]he sun” (v. 8) and “[t]he moon and stars” (v. 9) “is good!” (v. 1). Despite His greatness, and despite our waywardness, in His compassion He has been mindful of “our lowly estate” (v. 23). His lovingkindness has compelled Him to stoop and rescue His people (v. 24)—whether Jews from slavery in Egypt, or Christians from bondage to sin.
Click to expand...

The Amazing Sam's Ego · Nov 19, 2020

Cybred said: ↑

If the bible is the word of god then where's the rest of it?
Click to expand...

What do you mean? Are you saying that the Bible was written by people? So are science textbooks. Christians and Jews have different beliefs about the Scriptures, because the Bible is progressive revelation. People were God's instrument that he used to write the Bible.

https://answersingenesis.org/the-word-of-god/a-question-of-authorship/

A Question of Authorship
by Dr. Jason Lisle on February 13, 2009
Share:
It’s a question almost everyone asks: how do we know the Bible is God’s Word? Dr. Jason Lisle, AiG–US, tackles this complex issue.

I’ll first note that I don’t know everything there is to know about Christianity.

I was raised as a Christian, but lately have been doubting what my family and church have taught me for many years.

The editors of this site seem to be very intelligent people. That said, can nobody see how much faith people put onto one book? Now I’m not saying that most Christian morals are not well taught, but it’s just one document that we can only assume was -really- written by God.

So basically, how on earth do we know that the Bible is really what we are told it is? And is any Christian theory/fact applicaple without resorting to a book we don’t know anything about?

With no disrespect,
—M. B., US

Although we have faith that the Bible really is the Word of God, it is not a “blind” faith or a mere assumption. It is something we can know for certain.1 We can know this by the impossibility of the contrary. That is, if the Bible were not the Word of God, we couldn’t really know anything at all! Let me explain:

First, the Bible itself claims to be the inspired Word of God (2 Timothy 3:16). For some reason, many people seem to dismiss this as if such internal evidence doesn’t count.2But this is a double standard that they would not apply to most other books. Consider my book Taking Back Astronomy. This book claims to have been written by me, and most people would accept that it really is written by me simply because it says so. So, why do some people arbitrarily reject the Bible’s internal claim? This is the fallacy of special pleading and may indicate an anti-God bias that is part of our fallen nature.

How else would we know that the Bible is written by inspiration of God unless it said so?
Granted, the fact that the Bible claims to be the Word of God does not by itself prove that it is. But for any other document, the internal claim of authorship is usually accepted on its own merit. So, the Bible’s self-authenticating claim should not be simply dismissed. After all, how else would we know that the Bible is written by inspiration of God unless it said so?

I suppose God could have attached a yellow sticky note to the Bible that said, “This really is my Word—God.” But then we’d have to ask the question, “How do we know for sure that the sticky note was really written by God?” And then I suppose God could attach another sticky note to the first sticky note that says, “The first sticky note was really written by Me—God.” But then we’d have to ask how we know for certain that the second sticky note was really written by God, and . . . well, you see where this is going.

Ultimately, the Bible must be self-attesting—and it is. It claims to be the Word of God, and a person must either accept or reject that claim. And that choice will have consequences. It is these consequences that allow us to know for certain that the Bible’s claim about itself is true. And this brings me to my second point:

Rejecting the claim that the Bible really is God’s Word will inevitably lead to the absurd consequence that knowledge would be impossible. Any alternative to the Bible is “sinking sand” and will not support a rational worldview (Matthew 7:24–27). This is because only the biblical worldview can account for those things necessary for knowledge. These are things most people take for granted, like laws of logic (as shown in Atheism: An Irrational Worldview), the ability of the human mind to be rational, and the basic reliability of our sensory perceptions.

These things all make sense if God created and sustains everything as the Bibleteaches but cannot be rationally explained in a non-biblical worldview. In a random-chance, evolutionary universe, why would we expect the mind to be rational or our senses to be reliable? If the Bible were wrong about God creating the universe, then why would we expect the universe to be orderly and comprehensible? Science depends upon the regular operation of the universe in order to be successful. Yet, only the Bible can account for this.

For example, God has promised a certain degree of uniformity in the future—in terms of the cycles of nature (Genesis 8:22). Such consistency of natural law throughout time is what makes science possible. It’s one of the things required for knowledge as shown here: Evolution: The Anti-Science. But only God is in a position to tell us on His own authority about the future because He alone is beyond time. None of us has experienced the future. And so, it is only on the basis of God’s revelation in the Bible that scientific knowledge has an objective, rational foundation. Apart from the biblical worldview, there would be no good reason to believe in the methods of science.3

All reasoning rests upon a type of faith.4 But faith in any ultimate standard other than the biblical God cannot account for those things we take for granted. So, faith in the Bible is not merely a blind assumption. The Bible must be what it claims to be because any alternative cannot account for those things necessary for genuine knowledge. Knowledge is possible; thus, the Bible really is the true Word of God.
Click to expand...

Log in or Sign up

Can I not believe in God and NOT be an atheist?

Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

Cybred Well-Known Member

Cybred Well-Known Member

Buri Well-Known Member

Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

Cybred Well-Known Member

Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

yardmeat Well-Known Member

Buri Well-Known Member

Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

Buri Well-Known Member

The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

Cybred Well-Known Member

Cybred Well-Known Member

The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Can I not believe in God and NOT be an atheist?

Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

Cybred Well-Known Member

Cybred Well-Known Member

Buri Well-Known Member

Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

Cybred Well-Known Member

Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

yardmeat Well-Known Member

Buri Well-Known Member

Patricio Da Silva Well-Known Member Donor

The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

Buri Well-Known Member

The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

Cybred Well-Known Member

Cybred Well-Known Member

The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

Share This Page

Useful Searches