Things that make you go “HMMM 5!” Tuesday, Oct 30 2007

If one were to look at God through a different set of eyes, then one might be able to see what God is described as by those eyes.

In the days of Abraham certain properties were ascribed to God and it was through the properties that most people know Him. These properties are; Holiness, justice, sovereignty, omnipotence, benevolence, omnipresence, and immortality, transcendence(of being outside of time and space), therefore God is eternal and unable to be changed by earthly forces or anything else within it’s creation.

Now, my question again is why does man a finite being think he has the wherewith-all to define God?

Today man appears to be challenging something he neither has the right nor propensity to challenge. This, if nothing else, describes the individuals who challenge God’s authenticity as fools on a massive scale. My reasoning for this statement is as follows:

   1) In the way of physical evidence,

        Water, we use it every day, to cook, to clean, and to refresh. We have the different compounds with which water is made, but we cannot manufacture nor produce the potable version. So how does it exist, and from whence does it come. the answer is simple, right? Try to do it sometime and see how far you get.

   2) Still physical, look at yourself in the mirror, tell me how did you come into existence, yes science offers hypothesise, but ask for proof and they still fall short of the mark.

Science in itself is perplexed by God, it can not prove nor disprove His existence, science has said “Because of the lack of consensus as to the appropriate scientific treatment of religious questions, such as the existence, the nature, and the properties of God(mainly because of the lack of a common definition of God), a major point of debate has been whether God’s existence or attributes can be empirically tested.

Stephen Jay Gould (9/10/41 – 5/20/2002) an American Paleontologist, evolution Biologist, and historian of science, spent much of his time fighting against Creationism and related constructs Creation Science and Intelligent Design, provided us with the term NOMA(Non-overlapping Magisteria) to describe how in his terms science and religion could not comment on each others realms.. In other words, “Questions of the supernatural such as those relating to the existence of and nature of God are non-empirical and are the proper domain of theology.

Richard Dawkins, a British ethologist(the study of animal behavior), evolution, and outspoken anti-religionist, atheist, secular humanist, and sceptic stated that the existence of God is an empirical question on the grounds that “a universe with God would be a completely different kind of a universe without and it would be a scientific difference.”

Scientism states,”Any question that cannot be defined cannot be answered by science is therefore either nonsensical or not worth asking on the grounds that only empirical answerable questions make sense and are worth attention.

Are they saying that in fact because they cannot explain God that any questions about Him shall not be answered because it would make them look silly if they even tried?

Kind of makes you want to go           HMMM!

Leave a Response »

 

Things that make you go “HMMM!” #4 Thursday, Oct 25 2007

How is it, that man, a finite being with an immense ego thinks that he can describe an entity that literally defies all attempts to be described?

Does man in all of his vanity actually think that he has the capacity to describe God, a Being so vast that not even our universe could contain Him. A presence of such might and power, that we cannot even begin to visualize the extent of His Magnitude.

If such a Being cannot be visualized, then how is it that some menn think they can get God to dance?

Now you probably ask, what do I mean by that, and therein is a empirical question that needs an answer, so let’s look at it in a couple of aspects, one from science and one from man himself, then you make a choice which to believe.

If you were to try to get God to dance, you are going to wind up on the short end of the stick, either looking like a fool or being held accountable for what you say, then looking like a fool.

God does not dance for anyone, in ancient times, the people who lived around Noah’s time tried to make God dance and wound up trying to tread water. This story not only comes from the King James Bible, it is also told in the Hindu Puranas, the Deucalion in Greek Mythology, and the Utnapishtim from ancient Babylon in the Epic of Gilgamesh. A large percentage of the world’s cultures both past and present have stories of a great flood that devastated earlier civilization. If this is not enough to make smart people think, please explain to me what is that thing sitting atop Mt. Ararat in Turkey?

Another cause to consider is the story of Sodom & Gomorrah, as put by Flavius Josephus of Roman birth and Jewish heritage a well accepted historian who wrote:

 Now about this time, the Sodomites, overwhelmingly proud of their numbers and extent of their wealth, showed themselves insolent of men, and impious to divinity, insomuch that they no more remembered the benefits they had received for Him, hated foreigners and avoided contact with others. Indignant at this conduct, God accordingly resolved to chastise them for their arrogance, not only to uproot their city, but to blast their land so completely, that it should yield neither plant or fruit whatsoever from that time forward, (Jewish Antiquities), and Josephus recounts that when the angles came to Sodom to find good men, they were instead greeted by rapists: And the Angles came to Sodom, when the sodomites beheld the young men who were outstanding in beauty of appearance and who had been received into Lot’s house, they set about to do violence and outrage to their youthful beauty. Therefore, God, indignant at their bold acts struck them with blindness so they could not find the entrance into the house and condemned the Sodomites to destruction of the whole population.

What happened afterwards is a matter of record, both biblical and scientifically. Neither Sodom nor Gomorrah survived the destruction God rained down on them.

Something to make you go    “HMMM”

Leave a Response »

 

Things that make you go “HMMM!” #3 Tuesday, Oct 23 2007

From before recorded history, there has been a vast amount of knowledge amassed on the subject of God and His Preeminence. Many  learned individuals have tried to define God, but in my humble opinion, they all fall short of the target.

 Man is in possession of a level of intelligence that surpasses just about everything on this planet, yet that intelligence is finite in nature, as is man. If only one of the descriptive terms used to describe God is used, man is already at a disadvantage that term is infinite, how can the finite describe the infinite? 

Some people walking this planet feel that they have the equipment and mastery to fulfill the task of “Putting God in His place” to me that decries a massive amount of misplaced ego, and a word to the wise, be careful of what you say and how you say it, you just might get it!

To these people I proffer another viewpoint. True it is my viewpoint, but none the less a viable viewpoint. The authority for this viewpoint comes from the following sources. 

1.                Merriam-Webster and Zane publishing, my computerized dictionary:

2.              The Encyclopedia of Religion:

3.              Unger’s Bible Dictionary:

4.              Young’s Analytical Concordance:

5.              Wikipedia;

And various web sites of both religious and secular nature. According to these sources man has sought God since before recorded history. There is evidence that

it may be said that almost every known culture involves the religious in the above sense of a depth dimension in cultural experiences at all levels — a push, whether ill-defined or conscious, toward some sort of ultimacy and transcendence that will provide norms and power for the rest of life. When more or less distinct patterns of behaviour are built around this depth dimension in a culture, this structure constitutes religion in its historically recognizable form. Religion is the organization of life around the depth dimensions of experience — varied in form, completeness, and clarity in accordance with the environing culture.”

 This is what is stated in the The Encyclopedia of Religion. 

Man in all his bluster and pomp is still a religious being. There is that in his nature which prompts him to some sort of faith and worship. With or without special revelation from God, he requires the satisfaction and consolation and guidance that come from faith in the unseen and eternal.

To me that says that man is responsible for religion, and the focus of this religion has always been a Supreme Being (some sort of ultimacy and trancendence). With this in mind, the doorway towards open and frank discussion of the validity of God in todays world takes on a whole new meaning.

 I would be totally inhospitable if I did not invite comments and differing viewpoints to make their observations available. So please feel free to join the discussion. I would enjoy hearing from you. There is still much to explore in relation to this subject and I promise I will continue this thread. 

This subject has always caused me to go    HMMM. 

Leave a Response »