DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Religious Convictions
HTML https://religiousconvictions.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Oneoff's
*****************************************************
#Post#: 2866--------------------------------------------------
Why 'Oneoff' for a name?
By: Oneoff Date: August 13, 2015, 4:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Whilst I am unable to comfortably empathise with a single
religion/church/denomination, and cannot accept the
fundamentalist extreme belief that the bible is the “complete
and final, verbally inerrant Word of God”, I nevertheless
instinctively believe in God who is the originator of all that
‘now is’, has ‘gone before’, and ‘is to come’.
If, aside from the above description, I have to be further
‘pigeon holed’ then Deism is perhaps closest to my current
inclination (but I emphasise ‘current inclination’, since even
my tendency towards Deism is not held with dogmatic certainty).
Unless and until I find someone of similar inclination I guess
that ‘Oneoff’ is a username that ‘fits the bill’.
However that is not to say that there cannot be other ‘Oneoffs’
who habor inclinations that differ from mine.
I just hope that an inclination such as mine can be regarded as
being as equally acceptable as that of any other member of this
forum.
#Post#: 2875--------------------------------------------------
Re: Why 'Oneoff' for a name?
By: Kerry Date: August 14, 2015, 6:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Do you really believe truth is a personal variable? To a
certain extent, I do. I think that's why there are so many
religions and denominations. People are busy creating God in
their own image.
Are they right? Well, we don't see God showing up and telling
them they're wrong. It seems then that God, if He exists, does
not impose Himself or knowledge about Himself on people. God
must allow us to believe almost anything we want.
Does that mean God doesn't care or is hiding? Or is it a game
where we imagine something about God and it seems true to us?
Is what we believe about God and see "out there" only a
reflection as in a mirror of what we want to be "out there"?
Is that the way it must be? Is God a reflection of our minds --
or could we be reflections of His?
One thing I do believe is true: Almost any idea you can propose
about God is untrue in one way or another. These ideas are like
dirt on a mirror -- with our minds being the mirrors. We
cannot reflect reality right if we have dark spots on the
mirrors of our minds. It is more important to erase ideas we
have about God than to acquire more.
Sherlock Holmes said, "Once you eliminate the impossible,
whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."
This is also the scientific method of testing an idea to see if
you can prove it's wrong. You can't really prove many things
using science as "true," but you can often prove some things are
not true.
But again, is truth a personal variable? I think so. I think
when Jesus said, "I am truth," he meant he was being true to his
own nature. Most of us lie to ourselves. Lying to others is
bad enough; but the person who lies to himself may be a goner.
If there is a God, obviously He likes diversity since each
person is unique. How then can we believe all these different
people are made in the image and likeness of God?
Personally, I believe each person is meant to be a unique
expression of the God-Nature. The infinity of God includes all
that is -- and all that could be too for all I know -- I suspect
that the whole universe is but a tiny fraction of the mysterious
infinity of what we call God. Only a tiny fraction is
manifested -- but that's just a guess.
#Post#: 2877--------------------------------------------------
Re: Why 'Oneoff' for a name?
By: Oneoff Date: August 14, 2015, 11:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Kerry,
For me, the complete ‘personal text’ would be “as a generality
‘truth’ is more likely to be personally relevant rather than
universally absolute”, but the software only permits 50
characters so I had to scale it down.
Terry (CC) will not agree and I understand his PoV.
However the phrase developed within me at a time when my forum
struggles were mainly with Evangelical Protestants who, whilst
holding different versions of ‘truth’ that they each claimed
were sufficiently ‘absolute’ to justify the setting up of
denominations based upon them, still claimed that there could
only be one ‘truth’, and that it had to be ‘universally
absolute’.
The outworking of that claim was, in itself, so blatantly
self-contradictory that my consequential personal text has
‘stuck’ ever since.
#Post#: 2878--------------------------------------------------
Re: Why 'Oneoff' for a name?
By: Kerry Date: August 14, 2015, 1:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Would it surprise you that David said how God seems to us
depends on us?
Psalm 18:26 With the pure thou wilt shew thyself pure; and with
the froward thou wilt shew thyself froward.
I thought once about trying to study the psychology behind the
various beliefs of different denominations. What is it about
people inwardly that wants to say they have the truth and it's
got to be absolute? Such a study would be general only since
so many people adopt the ideas taught to them almost without
question -- I think a study of this kind might be able to tell
us more about the people who originated the ideas.
For example, take the Calvinists who believe in the "total
depravity" of man. Who could come up with such an idea? I
think someone who took a look at his inner self and saw such
blackness, he concluded he was totally depraved. Furthermore,
I'd say he did not repent when he saw his many sins. If he had
repented, he would have felt better about things and realized he
was not totally depraved. Then he invented a god who would save
him anyway. He went through the Bible and seized on a passage
about predestination and invented a new theological system based
on that passage while merrily ignoring other passages. This
was designed to provide him solace; but it didn't, not really.
He knew he had invented it, so the task was to convince
himself.
One thing I am fairly sure of is that when people get upset when
you disagree, you are making them feel threatened. Their whole
world is threatening to come down around them. It may look as
if they're talking trying to convince others, but they're really
trying to convince themselves. This is both sad and laughable
to me. Do they really think God is going to judge us based on
how many ideas we got right? Never mind the guilt of past and
present misdeeds -- never mind any of that -- just have the
right ideas about things. To me, this is all hot air.
I can sum up my attitude towards Calvinism. If it's true, if
it's up to God if I'm predestined to be saved or damned, it
doesn't matter what I believe, say or do. It's God decision
not mine, so why should I be bothered? If my saying that means
I'm predestined to be damned, it still wouldn't matter since I
couldn't be saved even if I didn't say it.
Calvin was not a pleasant man. I'd say he was an evil man who
invented a mischievous theology that said he would be saved no
matter what evil he did. It was all about "justifying"
himself -- your use of the word "justify" stands out for me.
The sad thing is he found followers and now we have
denominations based on that. I also ask about Calvinism why
God puts the elect into the world to suffer and die? Why go
through all that pain and suffering if everything's been
predetermined? God must enjoy watching even His elect suffer --
and clearly He enjoys seeing the non-elect suffer since this
system says they will burn eternally in hellfire. Yet He
created so many people predestined to be damned? What is He
then, crazy? Or just enjoys watching suffering? Well, we
know John Calvin approved of torture -- perhaps that's why he
invented a god with a sadistic streak?
The question I have in my mind about John Calvin is if he damned
himself with his own beliefs. With his ideas about God, what
would he think if he died and woke up in an unpleasant place?
Would he conclude he hadn't been one of the people predestined
to be saved? Would he curse God figuring he was damned
eternally? Would hate take over completely? Would he become
trapped as the result of the "truth" of his beliefs?
Those are my reflections on the psychology of Calvinism. I
wonder if other denominations have their own psychology too that
could be analyzed?
#Post#: 2880--------------------------------------------------
Re: Why 'Oneoff' for a name?
By: Oneoff Date: August 14, 2015, 2:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Kerry link=topic=328.msg2878#msg2878
date=1439577370]
Would it surprise you that David said how God seems to us
depends on us?
Psalm 18:26 With the pure thou wilt shew thyself pure; and with
the froward thou wilt shew thyself froward.
[/quote]
Without ever having reflected on that verse, I have always said
that a penally minded person would believe in a penal God, a
loving and forgiving man would believe in a loving and forgiving
God, etc.
#Post#: 2913--------------------------------------------------
Re: Why 'Oneoff' for a name?
By: Kerry Date: August 17, 2015, 11:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Oneoff link=topic=328.msg2880#msg2880
date=1439581368]
Without ever having reflected on that verse, I have always said
that a penally minded person would believe in a penal God, a
loving and forgiving man would believe in a loving and forgiving
God, etc.
[/quote]Now then, if you were God and you were loving and
forgiving, what would you think of people who believed lies
about you? For me, any idea which makes me love God more is
likely true; and any idea which doesn't either isn't true,
doesn't matter or I don't understand it. The commandment is to
love God, and I believe we should not hold any ideas which make
us not love Him.
Remember the horrible story when the children of Israel
suspected Moses had brought them out into the wilderness to die?
They didn't trust Moses or God. They had completely wrong
ideas, suspicious minds that created evil where no evil existed.
Yet it's part of free will, isn't it?
Isaiah 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil;
that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put
bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
If our speculations are true here, what we believe about God may
be a form of self-condemnation or self-justification.
If we are penally minded ourselves, maybe God will adopt that
attitude with us. Remember the story about the servant who
forgiven a large debt and who then went out and collared someone
who owed him a small sum?
I really do believe part of salvation is wishing for the right
kind of God. If we really want a God who created a world when
mercy and forgiveness are possible, then we must become merciful
and forgiving ourselves. If we can do that, I believe we are
embracing the God-Nature in ourselves. We are becoming more
like innocent children and more like the God we pant for too.
The penally minded seem to have missed something. They want
forgiveness for their own sins but seem to crave punishment for
others.
*****************************************************