Originally posted by thesonofsaulI have no problem with this. I agree, it's a matter of perspective and definition of what is a special event.
As God started the whole mess that for some reason includes you, a miricle can only be defined from the human point-of-view, that is a miricle is merely an event that appears to humans as being out of place, or "special," and thereby affecting reaction to it.
EDIT: formatting fix
Originally posted by Conrau KIn other words, the reason why scientists don't explain things is that they refuse to believe they could have happened in the first place.
First of all say if these things did happen. Scientists then make an observation. They hypothesise and develop a new theory. Thus it becomes natural. Any manifestation of God is thus natural since it occurs in the natural wolrd and can be observed (err duh, since its a manifestation).
With some exceptions, I grant you. I'm vaguely aware of a guy called Velikovsky who tried to explain a number of supernatural passages in the Old Testament by a hypothesis that the planets Mars and Venus didn't reach their current orbits until 500 BC (could be wrong about the date off the top of my head, but it's in the ballpark). I have no idea as to the quality of his theory, but I always admired him for at least trying to EXPLAIN these passages rather than DISMISS them.
Originally posted by howardgeeIf you set up an ant farm, are you responsible for the path of every single ant, or just the ones you nudge?
If God is responsible for every lightning bolt, then I take this to mean that he has predetermined where they will strike. If this is the case, then his redirecting a lightning bolt cannot be a miracle, since he controls them in the first place. If anything it is a mere correction of his earlier mistake.
Why do you have such a problem with the idea of a system being wound up and then allowed to run with occasional tinkering? Is it because you think we all have a notion of God being in charge of a totally clockwork, predetermined universe? And that any further adjustment constitutes an admission of an initial 'mistake'?
For that to be true, God has to be the only person with input into the system. I don't subscribe to that belief. People have wills too, and God can respond to our wills and our actions.
Originally posted by orfeoYou claimed that:
If you set up an ant farm, are you responsible for the path of every single ant, or just the ones you nudge?
Why do you have such a problem with the idea of a system being wound up and then allowed to run with occasional tinkering? Is it because you think we all have a notion of God being in charge of a totally clockwork, predetermined universe? And that ...[text shortened]... ibe to that belief. People have wills too, and God can respond to our wills and our actions.
"Surely, you guessed that my beliefs include the fact that God set up the 'natural laws' in the first place. In that sense, I would regard God as responsible for every lightning bolt - and every flower, and every sand dune, and every atom in your brain."
This sounds pretty deterministic to me.
Originally posted by KellyJayI never even asked for a description of you, but you effortlessly gave me one anyway.
I've asked you what it is you are looking for when it comes to
describing God, you failed to respond directly to that. Since
descriptions can cover a wide range a factors, and all be true, but
not what you are looking for, it would help if you narrowed your
question down to just those type of factors you want to see.
As a description of me I can say, ...[text shortened]... lefty, and so on, with all being true, but none of them
being what you are looking for.
Kelly
Why are you finding such difficulty describing God?
Could it be that unlike you, God does not exist?
Originally posted by orfeo"In other words, the reason why scientists don't explain things is that they refuse to believe they could have happened in the first place."
In other words, the reason why scientists don't explain things is that they refuse to believe they could have happened in the first place.
With some exceptions, I grant you. I'm vaguely aware of a guy called Velikovsky who tried to explain a number of supernatural passages in the Old Testament by a hypothesis that the planets Mars and Venus didn't reach th ...[text shortened]... I always admired him for at least trying to EXPLAIN these passages rather than DISMISS them.
Scientists explain things they have reliable evidence for.
They work on first hand observations and close analysis.
A book written thousands of years ago when man was relatively ignorant is very unreliable secondary historical evidence.
This is of limited appeal to scientists, except as a purely hypothetical method of explaining and an exercise in untestable theorising.
To base your life around such a dubious text is extremely unsound.
Originally posted by howardgeeDo you not understand how different levels of 'responsibility' work? That 'responsibility' for something doesn't mean you actually did it as an individual task?
You claimed that:
"Surely, you guessed that my beliefs include the fact that God set up the 'natural laws' in the first place. In that sense, I would regard God as responsible for every lightning bolt - and every flower, and every sand dune, and every atom in your brain."
This sounds pretty deterministic to me.
I don't know what kind of job you have, but if you ever manage any staff I will pity them - you're going to examine every single thing they do with a microscope because you're 'responsible' for it.
I also wouldn't ever ask you to look after an ant farm...
EDIT: or a plant. If I asked you to look after my plant while I was away, I'd be afraid you'd either completely ignore it or spend every second clutching it tightly. Those appear to be the only options in your book. Whereas a normal person would recognise that walking away from the plant for half an hour doesn't mean that they 'couldn't be bothered'.
Originally posted by howardgeeAh yes, people were dumb and stupid 2000 years ago when they reported on one particular resurrection (it's not the only one that's been reported by any means).
"In other words, the reason why scientists don't explain things is that they refuse to believe they could have happened in the first place."
Scientists explain things they have reliable evidence for.
They work on first hand observations and close analysis.
A book written thousands of years ago when man was relatively ignorant is very unreliable seco ...[text shortened]... untestable theorising.
To base your life around such a dubious text is extremely unsound.
It's entirely appropriate for scientists to assess the observations that are available. To suggest that they work ONLY from first hand observations is a bit misleading though. For starters, imagine what would happen if scientists didn't rely on the observations of other scientists once in a while.
But I can't say I've seen a lot of genuine assessment of whether the Gospel accounts are in fact accurate. The only in-depth examination of the last few days of Jesus' life that I've seen is in a book called "Who Moved the Stone", where the author makes it quite clear he picked that period because it was, apart from the resurrection, largely free of miracles and whatnot.
The book is valuable because the author demonstrates he's prepared to go against his own initial assumptions if the evidence warrants it.
Originally posted by orfeoBut I quote you again:
Do you not understand how different levels of 'responsibility' work? That 'responsibility' for something doesn't mean you actually did it as an individual task?
I don't know what kind of job you have, but if you ever manage any staff I will pity them - you're going to examine every single thing they do with a microscope because you're 'responsible' for it. ...[text shortened]... from the plant for half an hour doesn't mean that they 'couldn't be bothered'.
"I would regard God as responsible for every lightning bolt".
If a politician or employee is responsible for a task and that task goes wrong, then they are held accountable. This is what responsibility is.
Since you think that God is responsible for EVERY lightning bolt, then if a bolt causes death or damage, it is therefore God's fault.
Clearly, it is not the same as me owning an ant farm which is a poor analogy.
Originally posted by orfeo"(it's not the only one that's been reported by any means). " lol. Care to name some?
Ah yes, people were dumb and stupid 2000 years ago when they reported on one particular resurrection (it's not the only one that's been reported by any means).
It's entirely appropriate for scientists to assess the observations that are available. To suggest that they work ONLY from first hand observations is a bit misleading though. For starters, ...[text shortened]... he's prepared to go against his own initial assumptions if the evidence warrants it.
Tell you what better still - why don't you try for another property of God?
Originally posted by howardgeeWow, you actually got it right. Yep, God's responsible.
But I quote you again:
"I would regard God as responsible for every lightning bolt".
If a politician or employee is responsible for a task and that task goes wrong, then they are held accountable. This is what responsibility is.
Since you think that God is responsible for EVERY lightning bolt, then if a bolt causes death or damage, it is therefor ...[text shortened]... God's fault.
Clearly, it is not the same as me owning an ant farm which is a poor analogy.
It's interesting that it's only NOW you bring up death or damage. That hasn't come into the discussion before.
Originally posted by howardgee1. Well, there are at least two others in the Bible for starters. And I think there's a few saints who are supposed to have done the trick more recently.
"(it's not the only one that's been reported by any means). " lol. Care to name some?
Tell you what better still - why don't you try for another property of God?
2. No. I'm done with this. Bye.
A few weeks ago in my prayer God showed me that my best friend Ruud was being attacked by a demon of drugs. In a vision I saw him in a room and all around him there were ghosts attacking his soul. Right after I saw this my heart began to burn with love for him, my whole being surrounded by compassion for him. I picked up the phone and calles him immediately.I asked him how his new job and home are treating him. He said : All is going fine. And he had alot to tell me about his new job and roommate. When he was done talking, I told him what God showed me, then there was silence......suddenly he said that his roommate was coming of drugs and that they are trying to get clean together. But my heart already knew more and my eyes were tearing up. In the conversatietoon we had about his new job and hom he forgot to tell me that his new roommate still uses crack and herione very once in a while. I said: brother, I know you have a hopefull future, but if there are probleem to keep you from that road to your good future then let me know,because I can share the pain with you to ease your pain. He said: ok brother, thanks and we hung up. I immediately I started praying for Ruud and two days later, when I stood before a building where I had an abonnement Ruud crossed my mind. I called him again and his voice sounded very different. “Hey Mis, how are you? I said: are you at work? No, he said, but I am busy. I said to him, and I dont know where it came from, you aren’t dealing are you? Very surprised he said, how do you know that? The fact is..I didn’t know.. And immediately I said: I will take the next train to your home, put the kettle on because it’s training like mad and it is freezing cold. I met Ruud at the corner of a coffeeshop and went to his home. As we were walking many things were crossing my mind. I thought, I had to tell my best friend, my brother with whom I have such a connection, to tell him there really is life after an addiction. But now he is a junkie again and a drugdealers donkey. Eventually we arrived at his house. Suddenly I said to him: Brother now is the time to get clean, not tomorrow not next week and not sunday in church. Today brother I open my home for you there you can recover as long as you need to and I will take care of you with love. Ruud broke down and hugged me and said: Yesterday I felt so broken and alone and I said to God, help me to get out of this misery and send me someone that can send me on the right track,release me from my addiction. Then he looked at me and said: Michel I know God has sent you to look for me. We sat down and all that I could say was, thank you Jezus. When I said my heart was filled with the same love as yesterdayevening we cried together for a good ten minutes. Then we took time to thank God for this wonderful moment, our hearts were filed with joy..then the dealer came in. The dealer suddnely started to share his life story and was touched by the pressence of Gods love in the room. Three weeks later the dealer called me to say that he had quit dealing and that he has gone back to his family. Ruud stayed at my home for seven weeks and it was not easy and he was almost broken, but God heard his prayer and now he is saved and cured from his addiction. He had the will and I had the love , together we leaned our friendship on God and we are more then concurrers in Jezus’name. 25/04/06
Originally posted by childofloveA story about 2 muppets who believe in God.
A few weeks ago in my prayer God showed me that my best friend Ruud was being attacked by a demon of drugs. In a vision I saw him in a room and all around him there were ghosts attacking his soul. Right after I saw this my heart began to burn with love for him, my whole being surrounded by compassion for him. I picked up the phone and calles him immediat ...[text shortened]... ogether we leaned our friendship on God and we are more then concurrers in Jezus’name. 25/04/06
Great. Thanks for that.
Now to return to the thread title - Care to give me a property of God?
Originally posted by howardgeeGod is exaggeration run amok. He is the king of unlimited attributes that assign no actual character. The theist is hardpressed to present even one positive attribute or characteristic of God because to do so would limit Him.
Define God.
Some theists have the balls to admit fully that they have absolutely no idea what it is that they worship so fervently:
"What then, brethren, shall we say of God? For it thou hast been able to understand what thou wouldest say, it is not God. If thou hast been able to comprehend it, thou hast comprehended something else instead of God. If thou hast been able to comprehend Him as thou thinkest, by so thinking thou hast deceived thyself. This then is not God, if thou hast comprehended it; but if this be God, thou hast not comprehended it."
--Augustine
"How can man, an insect on a wayside planet, which is itself of no size or importance, amid a million galaxies that baffle the imagination, put the tiny tape of words around the doings of this august and unimaginable Being who created all that is in the heavens and the heaven of heavens?"
--Weatherhead