So why do we need God?

[lingshu8]

In another thread

we cannot comprehend God the same as a human.  

But according to Hume, the very idea of God is "the proposition that the cause of order in the universe probably bears some remote analogy to human intelligence."

(Of course, theists get this backward and claim that God created man in His image.  It's more likely the other way around.)

What intrigues me is -- why did we need to create God?  

("If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him." -- Voltaire)

It seems that part of the answer is that giving oneself over to "something greater than oneself" helps us shuffle off the coils of our petty egos and (paradoxically) become even more ourselves.

But this "greater thing" does not necessarily have to be the putative Creator of the Universe, with all the scientific problems and inevitable conflicts that brings.  

Buddhism and Confucianism, to name a couple examples, are spiritual traditions which do not believe in God.

Any other thoughts on why we might need God?

[one_wing3d_ang3l]

if u dun believe in the catholic God u will die and rot in hell. all the others r fakes.

[one_wing3d_ang3l]

living proof that catholism exist bcause:
evidence
*found pieces of noahs art
*the cloth that jesus blessed with blood is in the measuem
*bleeding Jesus and Mary statues taped
*portraits begin to cry aand even video taped

dun believe in other junk like other religions besides catholism. ther is only 1 true God

[Saturn]

living proof that catholism exist bcause:
evidence
*found pieces of noahs art
*the cloth that jesus blessed with blood is in the measuem
*bleeding Jesus and Mary statues taped
*portraits begin to cry aand even video taped

dun believe in other junk like other religions besides catholism. ther is only 1 true God

I'm convinced.  Please let me know how I too can follow catholism.

[xvimbi]

Any other thoughts on why we might need God?

First of all, religious people don't need scientific proof that God exists. It is therefore a fallacy to try to convince them by scientifically disproving God. Of course, the Bible is chock-full of scientific errors, but any argument is moot as one can always reply: "We don't know enough to really assess the situation correctly", or "This is how God wanted it to be".

To get back to your original question, most religious people say that believing in God gives them guidance and their lives a purpose. Of course, one can now claim this speaks for the weak character of believers, because they don't seem to be able to get guidance from their societies, and they can't find a purpose for their lives based on earthly reasons. Believers will vehemently disagree, but they don't get much beyond gasping.

Interestingly, most of the Bible and nine out of ten commandments refer to how people should live together and how they should treat each other. These rules are however by no means an accomplishment of Christianity. Societies long before were following similar rules, whole societies today are following the same rules without the need for a God. As a side note, and many Christians don't like to hear this, Jesus' way is much more reflected in communism than in capitalism. Capitalism is utterly against the Bible, but most Christians are too lazy to recognize and act on such differences. But then again, every religion is strongly influenced by convenience and circumstance and changes as time goes on.

I think it is indeed true, that we need a God to give our lives a purpose. After all, if we die and nothing remains, what were our lives good for? We don't have a Free Will to begin with, and we don't have a purpose! Let's make some up. It will make us feel better.

[janice]

First of all, religious people don't need scientific proof that God exists. It is therefore a fallacy to try to convince them by scientifically disproving God. Of course, the Bible is chock-full of scientific errors, but any argument is moot as one can always reply: "We don't know enough to really assess the situation correctly", or "This is how God wanted it to be".

At this point, I would like to make a comment, then later on today I might comment on the rest, if I have time.  The thing that I wonder about unbelievers is this--Why do unbelievers tend to spend so much time and energy saying that something DOES NOT exist.  If you feel that something (that something being God) doesn't exist, then fine.  Why don't you then go about your day happily?  However, I feel that people who go out of their way to say that the God of the Bible doesn't exist, are truly seeking.  They desire an answer to life's burning questions.  I personally have been in that situation.  I used to doubt.  I used to go out of my way to try to disprove God.  Little did I know at the time that God was slowly opening my spiritual eyes to Him.  Wow!

[xvimbi]

Why do unbelievers tend to spend so much time and energy saying that something DOES NOT exist.

You are absolutely right, in principle. Non-believers are sometimes just as stubborn as believers in pushing their opinions.

However, as long as people do stupid things in the name of God, e.g. invade a country because they claim God told them so, it will be necessary for non-believers to react.

I am sure as soon as believers stop doing that, non-believers will stop talking back

[janice]

You are absolutely right, in principle. Non-believers are sometimes just as stubborn as believers in pushing their opinions.

I don't think that you, as a non-believer, are stubborn.  Likewise I don't feel that I, as a believer, am stubborn.  I don't think that either one of us is "pushing our beliefs".  It's just that it never ceases to amaze me--and sometimes it even amuses me--that non-believers spend SO much time and energy trying to say that something DOESNT exist.  Unless, deep down, they know that it exists (it=God), and they know that they are running away from "it", because they know that acknowledging an "it" will bring them face to face with the fact that they will have to do something about "it".

However, as long as people do stupid things in the name of God

Oh I totally agree!  People do dumb stuff all the time and say that God told them to.  People bomb abortion clinics.  Now, that is fanatical, I feel.  I'm pro-life, but I would never do that.  Duh!

... e.g. invade a country because they claim God told them so...

this is a political statement, I think.  I don't think that a genuine Christian says "God TOLD me....".  Many Christians, however, say that they felt God LEADING them in a certain direction or that they felt that it is God's Will for them to do something or other.

I am sure as soon as believers stop doingthat non-believers will stop talking back  

stop doing what?

[xvimbi]

Many Christians, however, say that they felt God LEADING them in a certain direction or that they felt that it is God's Will for them to do something or other.

stop doing what?

That!

[janice]

That!

I have felt that doing this thing or that thing was God's Will.  And only God knows exactly 'why', sometimes I don't have a clue 'why'!  Now, is there anything "wrong" with this, in your opinion?

[maxy]

God= way of controlling populations... because siners will burn in hell!  A society full of believers is therefore  easier to manage.

[bernhard]

Yes. There is something deeply wrong.

If you "feel" it is God's will, there is nothing that will stop from doing it.

Consider the Holy inquisition. Everyone involved was totally convinced thery were doing God's will.

Who knows how many innocent Iraqui (many children) died (last I heard it was on 50 000) and how many lost limbs and everything (again many children) because a bunch of greed men had the power to do so. And when their representative comes and say that he "felt" this is God's will, I have to side with xvimbi and say that htis deeply wrong.

"The way to hell is paved with good intentions". But in the cases above I cannot even fathom where the good intentions are.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

[janice]

Let me rephrase or elaborate on what I mean.  This is a fact, God will NEVER lead someone to do something contrary to what He has said in the Bible.  God says "Do not kill", so God will never say "Go kill 1000 innocent children in my name."  

When I say that I have "felt led by God", that is usually a result of a number of things.  But when I say that I have felt led by God to do something (and I think that most Christians would say that this has happened to them), I don't mean that I felt "God TELLING me" to do something.  That's why I brought this up in the first place.  Was because I was pointing out that, yes, there ARE those fanatics who will say "God TOLD me" to do whatever.  I once was friends with a lady like that.  I thought she was nuts!!  Every other sentence was "God TOLD me to (do this or that)".  She sounded psycho!!

[bernhard]

Let me rephrase or elaborate on what I mean.  This is a fact, God will NEVER lead someone to do something contrary to what He has said in the Bible.  God says "Do not kill", so God will never say "Go kill 1000 innocent children in my name."  

When I say that I have "felt led by God", that is usually a result of a number of things.  But when I say that I have felt led by God to do something (and I think that most Christians would say that this has happened to them), I don't mean that I felt "God TELLING me" to do something.  That's why I brought this up in the first place.  Was because I was pointing out that, yes, there ARE those fanatics who will say "God TOLD me" to do whatever.  I once was friends with a lady like that.  I thought she was nuts!!  Every other sentence was "God TOLD me to (do this or that)".  She sounded psycho!!

Let me understand this correctly. Are you saying then that George Bush could not possibly be doing God's will, even though he said so?

[xvimbi]

Let me rephrase or elaborate on what I mean.  This is a fact, God will NEVER lead someone to do something contrary to what He has said in the Bible.  God says "Do not kill", so God will never say "Go kill 1000 innocent children in my name."

Bernhard has refuted that one to my full satisfaction.  

But when I say that I have felt led by God to do something (and I think that most Christians would say that this has happened to them), I don't mean that I felt "God TELLING me" to do something.

This really the same thing, because the justification for your actions is the same, namely God is behind them.

As soon as these actions affect non-believers, there are severe problems:

1. No non-believer can affect the actions of believers, because God as the Ultimate Being has been invoked making all other opinions moot.

2. Social interactions between believers and non-believers will be severely hampered or even impossible. The reason is because social interactions must be based on human rules, independent of any faith. Only this method assures that humans with different faiths have a common platform for working out how to live together. Faith does not provide a common platform, unless everybody has the same faith. Achieving the situation that everybody has the same faith is only possible if a lot of non-believers are killed, which has already been attempted numerous times, every time in the name of God. You will say, they were misguided, but how do you stop those lunatics?

It is not disputed that faiths do not provide a common platform and are in fact dangerous for society, therefore the separation between religion and politics. Politics ensures that all people, irrespective of faith and religion, have a common platform. Invoking religion destroys that platform. The results are well-documented.

[janice]

Let me understand this correctly. Are you saying then that George Bush could not possibly be doing God's will, even though he said so?

George Bush just MIGHT be doing God's Will.  But he might NOT be, too.  I don't know.  I know that I trust God to carry out His plan, whatever that might be.

[Saturn]

God says "Do not kill", so God will never say "Go kill 1000 innocent children in my name."  

For some reason, that reminds me of this passage from the Bible:

II Kings 2
23   And he [Elisha] went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
24   And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.

Though I suppose those children weren't innocent, since they were mocking a prophet of God.

[lingshu8]

God says "Do not kill", so God will never say "Go kill 1000 innocent children in my name."  

Statements like these make me wonder if you've even *read* the Bible which you claim has no errors in it!  

In Deuteronomy  2:33-36, at God's instructions, the Israelites "utterly destroyed the men, women, and the little ones" in Heshbon leaving "none to remain."  

In Joshua 10:28-32,  Joshua, at God's command, kills everyone and everything that he can find in Libnah (including babies and little children) -- or, as the Bible puts it, he "utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord commanded."

In Deuteronomy 13:12-16, God says that if you hear of a city where another god is worshiped, then destroy everyone in the city (even the cattle) and burn it down.

In Exodus 11:7-12:29 God explains to Moses that he intends to "smite all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast" to show that he puts "a difference between the Egyptians and Israel."   He kills all the firstborn Egyptian children.  When he's finished "there was not a house where there was not one dead." Finally, he runs out of little babies to kill, so he slaughters the firstborn cattle, too.

In Genesis 19:24, God kills everyone (men, women, children, newborns) in Sodom and Gomorrah by raining "fire and brimstone from the Lord out of heaven."

In Numbers  15:32-36, The Israelites find a man picking up sticks on the sabbath. God commands them to kill him by throwing rocks at him.

God also says "He who sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed." If this commandment is obeyed, then the billions of people who do not believe in the biblical god must be killed.

In Leviticus, God gives detailed instructions for performing ritualistic animal sacrifices. such bloody rituals must be important to God, judging from the number of times that he repeats their instructions. Indeed the entire first nine chapters of Leviticus can be summarized as follows: Get an animal, kill it, sprinkle the blood around, cut the dead animal into pieces, and burn it for a "sweet savor unto the Lord."

The list goes on and on and on and on and on and on.  See here:

https://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html

[chopiabin]

The reason why I debate with believers is because I absolutely despise what I percieve as ignorance.

In response to the original question, here goes:

Human beings are animals. We have, like all other animals, a will to survive. Humans were once primarily solitary creatures, but they began to form societies in order to protect themselves better and become more efficient at getting food. Morality began at the second societies were formed. If someone steals food then they are depriving the group, and therefore, they are, in some way, depriving someone else of the right to survive. Those who steal (or take someone's woman - another form of property) or kill must be punished or chaos ensues. Modern monkeys have a very similar social morality. If someone breaks "the rules," they are ostracized from the society and most of the time they starve. Along with the will to survive comes an innate fear of death. In primitive times, natural phenomena, such as storms or earthquakes were highly dangerous - people were at the mercy of the elements. Since they had no science to explain these natural occurences, they assumed it was some sort of intelligence, and they egan sacrificing things they held preciious to appease it. Eventually, the traditions became so ingrained that anyone who went against tradition was evil, and those who followed it were good. As societie became less and less susceptible to natural phenomena, religion began getting easier and easier - hence modern Christianity in which the god sacrifices his son to save humans. When we see the animal sacrifices in the old testament, we are seeing the crux of the old and new religons. There is one god, but he still needs sacrifices. The old testament was written at a time when socities were finally evolving past the stage of nature - fearing.

People feel that we need a god because they are not secure in themselves or they fear death too much.

[lingshu8]

People feel that we need a god because they are not secure in themselves or they fear death too much.

Do you think that's why Bach needed God?

[janice]

That is interesting, Chopiabin.  Since you shared what you believe, so will I.

In the beginning.......God existed.  God has always existed, and always will.  Nobody can truly comprehend.  God created all, and He created humans.  Humans are eternal creatures, meaning that they will live forever. This is a part of "being made in the image of God". They enjoyed fellowship with God, and in the presence of God.They had it all.   The two humans, that He created decided that they wanted to rebel and make choices apart from God.  They passed this sin nature--this tendency toward sin-- to the rest of the human race.  So this desire to make choices without consulting God was and is ingrained in everyone.  This is also known as "selfishness".

God is so perfect and holy that He cannot allow even the smallest sin in His presence.  There is absolutely nobody who can be sinless 24 hours a day,7 days a week, for years and years.  Keeping all of this in mind, it sounds as though humans are doomed forever.  Kinda depressing. Because God is perfect, He is perfectly JUST.  God is also perfect LOVE.  God DESIRES that we live in His presence forever.  But we can't, because we are selfish and have sinned and desire to live apart from God and to do things OUR way.  The Old Testament animal sacrafices (the shedding of blood) was a forshadowing of what was to happen in the future.  The problem with these animal sacrafices (usually it was a lamb.  Which is why Jesus is called "the Lamb of God") is that people had to sacrafice over and over and over and over.  But these animal sacrafices didn't truly atone for sins.  God decided to do something about this.  He became a human (this is the 2nd part of the Trinity--God the Son) and lived a perfectly sinless life.  He was crucified as a criminal, even though he was without sin.  From the human standpoint, it seems as though Jesus (Who was God) was killed by his enemies.  (Picture the movie "The Passion of the Christ")After Jesus died, Satan was laughing. Of course he was loving every minute of this, because Jesus (remember, he is God) Little did he know was that Jesus would be resurrected 3 days later.  So.....God knew that you would have to be separated from Him for eternity, because of your sin.  But it doesn't have to be that way!  Jesus took YOUR place.  He suffered for YOUR sins so that YOU could live with Him forever.

So that's what I believe.

[janice]

Do you think that's why Bach needed God?

Although your question is probably for Chopiabin, I would like to give my answer.  Bach needed God, just as EVERYONE so desperately needs God.  Bach knew that God is total love, and that God is omniscent--He KNOWS what the consequences will be if you make this choice or that choice.  God had good intentions for Bach, just as He has good intentions for you.  God doesn't desire that evil happens to you, but good.  I think that Bach had a sound theology.  And I will admit that I have not studied Bach's life in depth, rather that is just the impression I get.

[chopiabin]

Do you think that's why Bach needed God?

I guess I should rephrase that. I don't believe that anybody "needs" god.  I guess I was addressing what I hear so often,"If I didn't believe in  god, my life wouldn't have a purpose, " or "The idea that we simply disappear after death is too scary" - to me this implies that these people only believe in religion or its comfort level and convenience.

As for Bach, I feel that he was a genius who truly believed in writing for the glory of god. However, I do not feel that this makes Christianity true: Scriabin believed that he was the creator of the universe and wrote amazing music, but there are very few who believe that he was a god.

[janice]

I guess I should rephrase that. I don't believe that anybody "needs" god.  I guess I was addressing what I hear so often,"If I didn't believe in  god, my life wouldn't have a purpose, " or "The idea that we simply disappear after death is too scary" - to me this implies that these people only believe in religion or its comfort level and convenience.

There is an eternity out there.  I (and others) are human--we are made in the image of God.  We were meant to live forever with God.  We humans screwed up.  But God loves each one of us so much that He became a man, and paid the penalty of your sin.  "For by grace have you been saved thru FAITH--it is the gift of God--not of works, so that no one can boast." (Ephesians 2:8-9)

"The idea that we simply disappear after death is too scary"  

Yes, the idea of dying is very frightening. But I'm not scared to die anymore.  In fact, I'm looking forward to it! Because I now KNOW where I will be.  I'll be more alive than I have ever been before!  Yes, my loved ones will grieve, but I will see them again someday!!!

[chopiabin]

Yes, Chritianity and most other religions pander to the hman fear of death - they claim that believing in the relgion rewars one with eternal life - how convenient and sweet.

[ninja600rs]

wow chopiabin you have to be one of the most bitter people I have ever seen posting on the internet.  Do you think you need a vacation or something mabey?

[Saturn]

Yes, Chritianity and most other religions pander to the hman fear of death - they claim that believing in the relgion rewars one with eternal life - how convenient and sweet.

Even assuming that this is true (that religions conveniently explain away death in a comforting way), why is it wrong?  Why should one not believe in a religion solely for the sake of comfort?

Also, what if I were to say that the human fear of death is not merely an irrational fear, but points to a fundamental need of man, and that religion seeks to satisfy or fulfill that need?

[chopiabin]

I am really not bitter in general, I just really hate what I percieve as superstition and ignorance.
I'm actually going to NYC this weekend so I'm really excited - I'm going to drink with William and Sasha - my best friends in the world
 


I don't thin there is anything "wrong" about having religion, but being dogmatic about it and refusing to look at science is simply idiotic in my opinion. If someone needs that comfort (a need I really don't understand) then that's fine, but why can't one allow (actual) science to coexist with it? Religious dogmatism is ruining this country - anti-abortion laws, anti-gay marriage, stem cell research restrictions, etc. - it pisses me off. Telling people that they are going to hell because they don't believe in something whose truth is highly debatable is just stupid.

[janice]

Telling people that they are going to hell because they don't believe in something .....

I never told you that you are going to hell.  I just told you what Jesus said about these things.  Don't get upset with me/us.  I/we are just relaying the information to you.  So if you have a problem with it, complain to Jesus about it.  If you think that God is too narrow-minded, tell Him. He loves you even though you resent Him.

btw--I used to think Christians were totally clueless and were living in a fantasy world.  I hated people that seemed so "happy all the time". (It still kinda bugs me!!  LOL)  Then.....God got ahold of me!  Wow!!

[mound]

I'm with Chopiabin on this one. I'm amazed, it's almost like you're my alter ego in the way you phrased your thoughts on this matter.  I don't tend to get involved in these type discussions because I find that most folks don't generally agree with me (I am atheist, or, more accurately, a non-theist. Difference? Posed with the question "do you believe in god" - an atheist will say "no, I do not believe in god" - a nontheist, from what I learned way back in philosophy classes, dismisses the question itself as entirely irrelevant rather than answering either way.

And as far as the way Janice phrased her thoughts, I just find it bizarre that anybody can actually think like that in this day and age. And it's impossible for me to say that without sounding insulting, I'm sorry for that. To each his or her own, I do respect diversity, but never the less, I find it utterly bizarre. This coming from one whose parents tried to raise him Catholic.

just that it never ceases to amaze me--and sometimes it even amuses me--that non-believers spend SO much time and energy trying to say that something DOESNT exist.

Actually it's quite the opposite my dear. non theists are not the ones who spend SO much time and energy trying to convince people their beliefs are wrong. Have you ever seen an atheist going door to door trying to convert somebody? Have you ever seen non-theists marching in protest against believers? Have you ever seen non-theists waging wars against believers in the name of "nothing"?  


-Paul

[chopiabin]

Well, Janice, I wasn't really talking to/about you.
When I was in 6th grade I had a teacher who would put Jewish kids in the front row of the class and then talk about how people who didn't believe in Jesus were going to hell - this is one particular instance out of many. And when did I say that I resented happy people? I am actually a very happy person, I just don't like idiocy. Janice, I know you have never told me that I was going to hell, those comment were not directed at you.

[lingshu8]

Janice, I know you have never told me that I was going to hell, those comment were not directed at you.

Well, Janice never told you DIRECTLY that you are going to Hell.  But she DID say that the Bible is without error.  And the Bible says (over and over and over) that non-believers like yourself are definitely gonna burn.  Don't forget to pack sunscreen!

"Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company."
- Mark Twain

"Where it is a duty to worship the sun, it is pretty sure to be a crime to examine the laws of heat."
- John Morley

[janice]

And when did I say that I resented happy people?

Oh, I know you didn't!!!  I was just stating a fact about myself.  That I used to resent these people who had smiles pasted on their faces, oblivious to the real world.  And I used to resent it...........before I experienced it myself!

[chopiabin]

So your'e saying that being oblivious to the real world is a good thing?

[janice]

So your'e saying that being oblivious to the real world is a good thing?

Not at all.  The real world=pain and suffering

I guess that I wasn't too clear on that.

[lingshu8]

The real world=pain and suffering

Fair enough.  There's certainly more evidence for that than there is for a Creator of this real world who is "perfect love" (your words).

Also, how does a God who is "pure love" do the things described in the Bible in Reply #17 above? (viz. instruct his followers to murder thousands of innocent babies)

How do you reconcile these contradictions?

[chopiabin]

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

[janice]

The real world=pain and suffering

Also, how does a God who is "pure love" do the things described in the Bible in Reply #17 above? (viz. instruct his followers to murder thousands of innocent babies)

God is pure love.He is the source & author of love but we need to define love.
Love is not defined as the world generally thinks of it as warm, fuzzy feelings or positive experiential feelings. Love from God is agape love, which means a love that seeks the best interest of the recipient. God is fully love, agape love. He is also fully righteous & just and  wrathful towards sin. In the Old Testament the passages you mentioned refer to Godless people who were in idolatry and unrepentant. God's  removal of them was similar to a surgeon removing a cancerous tumor. These nations were going to infect His people with their sinful idolatrous teachings & attitudes, turning the Hebrews hearts away from God, their Deliverer.
So, the passages, taken out of the whole of old testament context & history sound like God is hurtful & unfair. Remember that "context is king" when studying the  Bible and seeking the truth. Also, anyone who is not for God is against Him, therefore they are children of Satan and thus, God's enemies.
God is sovereign, just, righteous and loving. 

[ted]

I do not usually bother entering discussions of this nature on forums because most of them rapidly degenerate into abuse. However, people here seem relatively broadminded and tolerant so I might chance my arm.

There are as many interpretations of the “God” word as there are people. I have greater difficulty with some interpretations than with others. The popular notion of a being “out there” somewhere,  both omnipotent and good, is so fraught with difficulty for me because of the elementary problem of evil and many other considerations, that I cannot assign that particular meaning to the “God” word. The problem for me is not simply the obvious evil and suffering created by people – that’s bad enough -  it is the irrefutable fact that suffering and cruelty seem absolutely intrinsic to nature and to the world - beasts cruelly devouring one another and so on. That cannot be explained away by the morally improper actions of human beings. Therefore, an omnipotent creator of infinite kindness has designed a system of infinite cruelty ? That’s too much of a contradiction for me.

Having rejected the external manifestation of the “God” word with all its consequent trouble and strife, am I to be consigned to the barren world of Priestley’s “nothing but” men – nothing but reason, nothing but science ? No, I like crackpots and grasshopper minds too much; I like mythology, symbolism, imagination and serendipity. I cannot explain consciousness; I cannot even explain sleep, dreams, visions, intuition or my own state of mind from one moment to the next.

I therefore see little harm or inconsistency in assigning the “God” word to what could be loosely called the deepest level of beneficent consciousness, what Huxley called “suchness”, or the ground of all being – a sense of “all rightness” and oneness in the universe despite its essential horror. I have since found out that many modern theologians, notably Geering and Spong, have also advocated this Jungian approach as a workable end for all religious thought – that is, if people are ever going to finally stop killing one another over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

So my answer to the original question is that yes, an individual who rejects the attempt to forge this synthesis in some way, to give it some sort of name or label, even just to make sense of his own consciousness, to explain the inexplicable, is depriving himself, and perhaps the world, of a great deal of his own human potential. In other words I think it is advisable for humanity, individually and to some degree collectively, to assign a meaning to the “God” word, and the more universally obvious and consistent that meaning, the better for the world. 

I certainly do not expect to see such developments in my lifetime. They would necessitate placing greater importance on compromise, kindness and the reduction of suffering than on points of irrational belief, and I do not see this change in priority happening very soon. 

[chopiabin]

[quote author=Janice  He is also fully righteous & just and  wrathful towards sin. In the Old Testament the passages you mentioned refer to Godless people who were in idolatry and unrepentant. God's  removal of them was similar to a surgeon removing a cancerous tumor. These nations were going to infect His people with their sinful idolatrous teachings & attitudes, turning the Hebrews hearts away from God, their Deliverer.

I guess this includes children who know no other culture?

You idea of a god is terrifying.

Why would an omnipotent god reveal divine truth only to a small culture in the Middle East?

[janice]

I guess this includes children who know no other culture?   

Jesus commanded us believers to go into all the nations and tell the Good News (i.e. the gospel message that their salvation has been purchased by the blood of Christ).

God does not judge someone who has never heard.  That would be unfair.  He judges them only on the basis of what they chose to do with the information they have.

[lingshu8]

God does not judge someone who has never heard.  That would be unfair.  He judges them only on the basis of what they chose to do with the information they have.

No.  This is not what the Bible says.  Time and again, God instructs his followers to destroy everyone in a city of unbelievers -- men, women, children, newborns, even the cattle.

How could newborn babies or cattle ever have "chosen" to do anything on the basis of any kind of "information"?  How could mass slaughter of babies and livestock possibly be seen as "just"?

[janice]

God does not judge someone who has never heard.  That would be unfair.  He judges them only on the basis of what they chose to do with the information they have.

No.  This is not what the Bible says.  Time and again, God instructs his followers to destroy everyone in a city of unbelievers -- men, women, children, newborns, even the cattle.

How could newborn babies or cattle ever have "chosen" to do anything on the basis of any kind of "information"?  How could mass slaughter of babies and livestock possibly be seen as "just"?

God is fair, and God is just.  Period.  God was judging the NATION.  Fast forward your thinking to the present time.  America has turned it's back on God.  Unless we repent, and turn our hearts back to God, we shall be judged.  Yes, I am worried!  God won't condemn believers, personally.  But if they are alive when judgment is falling on this nation, then they won't be spared.  Ok, back to what you said, this is the same principle here.

[lingshu8]

God was judging the NATION.  God won't condemn believers, personally.  But if they are alive when judgment is falling on this nation, then they won't be spared.

So if babies or cattle just happen to be in a nation with non-believers in it, then God will order his followers to slaughter them just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time?

Do you honestly think that is "fair"?

[BoliverAllmon]

let the war begin!!!!!

[pianowelsh]

Rather odd question . If as God says he is, he is infinite and is not dependent on man or the reciprocal love of man (because in the Godhead - Father son Holy spirit - there is no lack - he is love). The question comes out more like 'why did God bother with us?'. Because whether a finite man believes in an infinite God one would be lead to believe is inconsequencial. True - it has no bearing on whether God exists or not whether we believe in him. God exists and in him everything that is made has its being - we are effectively sustained by God. But God is interested in us - for which i give him praise because he regarded our helpless estate and sent us Jesus to demonstrate how much he loves us even in our fallen state.
Simply we need God for everything! Living apart from Gods sustaining power is actually an illusion (which wont be a popular view - but nonetheless remains true). We need him for our daily needs now such as the ability to breath and physically exist and we need him when our frail bodies finally decay and we are dependent on his saving grace. Mindboggling but there has never been a time when the human race has not been dependent on God and there never will be - awesome.

Im expecting someone to say what a burke i am for replying to a year old post but the cool thing about this topic is actually it never ceases to be relevent. We need God every minute of our short lives and he is gracious to us as it points out in the psalms the God of the universe is so gracious he even inclines his ear to hear our individual cries to him (microsoft help desk puts you on hold but the God of the universe gives you a direct line! - that is truely awesome ) - Every blessing

[chopiabin]

At this point, I would like to make a comment, then later on today I might comment on the rest, if I have time.  The thing that I wonder about unbelievers is this--Why do unbelievers tend to spend so much time and energy saying that something DOES NOT exist.  If you feel that something (that something being God) doesn't exist, then fine.  Why don't you then go about your day happily?  However, I feel that people who go out of their way to say that the God of the Bible doesn't exist, are truly seeking.  They desire an answer to life's burning questions.  I personally have been in that situation.  I used to doubt.  I used to go out of my way to try to disprove God.  Little did I know at the time that God was slowly opening my spiritual eyes to Him.  Wow!

Honestly, I argue about this stuff because ignorance pisses me off to a very high degree.  I also feel that the self-denial that Christianity encourages is something that is quite literally unhealthy.

To get to the question of why we need god, I would say that we no longer do. Originally the concept of god came from the veneration of ancestors - those alpha males who were the "artisans of society". We had to deny our natural instincts to live within society, and they were the original creators of it. We felt we somehow owed them for the benefits we exprienced in society. As tribes grew larger and more powerful, the closer the progenitor of the society came to a god, and humans felt guilt for anyhting that was a natural instinct becasue they had been punished for following them. Eventually, as with Israel, the progenitor was raised to god status, but, as Israel was split in two and eventually taken over by Rome, the Israelites felt that their god was not "working" for them any longer - he began to owe them something. Eventually they forced their god to sacrifice to them, instead of the other way around, and thus we have the difficult birth of Christianity.

We no longer need something to scare us into following society's rules. We no longer need a god. God has become the extreme opposite of the naturalness of human beings, and we need to do away with the torture that belief in him demands.       

[Siberian Husky]

religion was a good idea, untill it got turned into a horrible belief

HI janice..how you doin?  

[janice]

Honestly, I argue about this stuff because ignorance pisses me off to a very high degree. 

I don't blame you, because ignorance pisses God off too.  In the Bible, He invites us to scrutinize Scripture, hold it under a microscope, and to test it.  Perhaps you should do more of that.  I'm certain that you (or anyone) will be able to find fault with Christians--followers of the Most High God.  So if, after reading the Bible, you still have a problem with God, take it up with Him.  He won't mind.  Go ahead and unlease Your anger on Him.  If GOD is the one who "pisses you off", let him know.  I'll be looking forward to hearing about this conversation with God that you will have. 

[janice]

HI janice..how you doin?  

Hi!  I'm doing well.....and you?