To want to make myself believe in god?

[HopHopHopSkip]

I have always been very logical and so despite going to a Christian primary school, having a very religious mum(though not in a pushy way) and reading the bible when I was younger(the story version I was a bit of a book worm) I have never really got my head around how god could be possible.

But I really wish I had the extra "something" that some people seem to find by believing in god. I'm probably not making much sense, but I wish I could get myself to feel like there's somebody watching out, that there's something after death, that everything happens for what'd ultimately a good reason/what's meant to be so on.

AIBU to try going to church for a bit even though I don't believe in god? Or am I just being silly, is it something you can't 'make' yourself feel?

Out of interest, do you also think the police are immoral to set their dogs on attacking criminals?

As far as I am aware the police use dogs to incapacitate a possible offender to allow arrest so it's a false analogy.

The justice is that God gave both "sinners" a fair warning. One was not treated differently than the other in terms of having the same grace available to them.

So you think the outcome in that scenario is moral? That she should be tortured because her logical mind rejected the claims of the Quran (her parents were Muslim) and he will spend eternity in heaven because he found god, which happened to be the god they talked to him about in prison.

... terrible unbelievable things are happening to them and it's being done in his name. What kind of god is that...

I think this has been (exhaustively) covered on here - and generally: Can you not see that the 'terrible unbelievable things' are being done by people . They do it 'in his name'. It's not God doing it, it's people

Look at muslim fundamentalists, who are especially vociferous that what they do is done in the name of God (Allah). But they're wrong! Misguided! (Mad!!). the muslim community repeatedly protests that eg terrorism is contrary to the God they serve.

Or the christian fundamentalist who landed on an island in a police uniform and mowed down scores of innocent teenagers. He said he did it in the name of God and was glad of the publicity so he could get his God message out there. Insane. Of course.

imo this is what 'Do not use the Lord's name in vain' means - don't do things that are not in my nature and don't misrepresent me, but representing the opposite of who I am; and then say you are doing it 'In my name'.

great time for a typo - not 'don't misrepresent' of course. But don't represent; or misrepresent.

Have you read the whole chapter in context?

I thought I'd made that clear when I said it was setting out rewards and punishments.

It is a beautiful account of chance after chance after chance. More chances than you'd ever give I reckon!

At what point would you lock your husband up and starve him if he didn't want to married to you anymore? Are you suggesting, as I think you are, that if it were you in that situation you'd be inflicting mental and physical torture on your husband sooner than god would?

It is a beautiful account

If your husband said this to you, would you think it beautiful?

headinhands, it looks like you are intent on seeing negatives and looking for Old Testament type teachings that don't reflect Christ. What has all this stuff about "starving" got to do with what Jesus taught?

You seem to be looking through the wrong end of a prism. The Bible says "seek and ye shall find", but if you seek through the wrong end of the prism, with your eyes shut and your heart closed and your mind already made up, then you won't find anything useful or good or instructive.

springytotty it's not about the people, it's about a god who would do certain acts to help people, often for petty reasons, yet when terrible acts are being committed in his name to the people he is supposed to be most concerned about, he does nothing to help them.

It's not about free will or about people being evil (as I did mention!), it's about a god who picks and chooses when he does something, and in doing so demonstrates himself to be uncaring and downright nasty. It's about a god who supposedly did things in the OT, when people were mildly pissing him off, but now does nothing at all when truly horrendous things are happening in his name. That is the point of my statements.

No doubt some christian will come along and mutter something about us not being able to understand god's reasoning and just having to trust in him.

atrcts you didn't respond to the last paragraph in my post about the mistranslation of witches. I did - please see my post at Thu 01-Aug-13 20:11:06

yet will do nothing to help the very people he's supposed to be big on protecting, when terrible unbelievable things are happening to them and it's being done in his name what are you speaking of specifically here?

never mind that I'm actually annoyed at giving him the time of day discussing him on mumsnet You have a free will

Incidentally, I always used to respect other people's views and use a capital letter when referring to the Christian god, but now I've thought about it (thanks to this thread) I will no longer do so. It's up to you obviously, but I must admit its bad grammar so I would always give a name a capital to be true to my literate self

So you think the outcome in that scenario is moral?

Its about consequences; crime and punishment in God's eyes.

That she should be tortured because her logical mind rejected the claims of the Quran (her parents were Muslim) and he will spend eternity in heaven because he found god, which happened to be the god they talked to him about in prison. I have no idea what on earth you're talking about here - what post have I missed?

As far as I am aware the police use dogs to incapacitate a possible offender to allow arrest so it's a false analogy.
I am glad you don't have first hand experience of it, however, in training police dog handlers wear serious arm protectors during training, and most sensible criminals will stop when pursued by the dogs because they know if not then it will hurt because they WILL draw blood.
Its a great analogy because you accept one use of animals to apprehend/shock/cause a healthy fear, but not another. Hmmmm. Would that be double standards?

And yet god expects us to be able to use our messed up morals to acknowledge him as a good guy as opposed to a bad guy You don't really get the context thing do you? Let me explain. I said that compared to a perfect God, our morals are messed up Apart from anything else, we all have different barometers of what's acceptable.
I certainly wasn't saying you work out if God is who He says He is using morals, you seem determined to place words in my mouth rather than interpret context accurately

It's not a name, it's a title, and therefore does not need a capital. E.g. you would write "Queen Elizabeth" but also write "a queen does not always live in a palace". My grammar is correct. His name is JHVH, not "God", therefore no capital required.

In an earlier post I was referring to the attrocities carried out by the church and state, against widows, orphans and disenfranchised people (those very people that Jesus and others said were particularly special to their god and therefore must be given extra care). The hundreds of thousands of people who were tortured and murdered in the name of the Bible and of the Christian god during the witch trials often came from these categories. I am not referring to the free will and choice of those carrying out the attrocities. I am referring to a god who was quite willing to get involved and interfere over minor things in the OT (such as a bit of name calling or sneaking a peak over a shoulder) but in modern times refuses to help those who are most in need when really bad things are happening. I am intrigued by the morals of a person who thinks such a god is worthy of worship.

The Gnostics believe that a god can only ever be two of the following three: all knowing, all loving or all powerful. A god can never be all three at once. I think they have a point.

At what point would you lock your husband up and starve him if he didn't want to married to you anymore? Are you suggesting, as I think you are, that if it were you in that situation you'd be inflicting mental and physical torture on your husband sooner than god would? Was the locking up of husbands in that passage? I missed that. Can you give me the exact reference please?

looking for Old Testament type teachings that don't reflect Christ. What has all this stuff about "starving" got to do with what Jesus taught?

Jesus refered back to the old testament himself so he was clear that he wanted us to see a direct connection between him and the 'scriptures' as he called them.

If I told you about this great new friend I had who was really nice and kind, and then you happened to see some old news reports about my new fab friend killing, starving, torturing and deliberately infecting people with incurable diseases would you still think they were a good person?

If your husband said this to you, would you think it beautiful?

If I was wantonly wayward and hard hearted, I would be very pleased to get the chance to have a peaceful existence before God turned His back on me.

Any undeserved grace is beautiful.

worldgonecrazy en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_God says
The English word "God" is used by multiple religions as a noun or name

in an earlier post I was referring to the attrocities carried out by the church and state The church and State don't always reflect the true nature of God at all.

I am referring to a god who was quite willing to get involved and interfere over minor things in the OT (such as a bit of name calling or sneaking a peak over a shoulder) but in modern times refuses to help those who are most in need when really bad things are happening

You don't have the context of either of those accounts you refer to. If you like I can walk you through it inch by inch to get the context?

In modern times God does help people, however He wasn't giving us any false illusion. In this world we will have sorrow and hardship because it is a fallen world and not perfect anymore.

The world would be a completely different place if God removed all of his favour from us. God is love. God is Light. God is good. If you remove even just those 3 things our existence would be SO much harder!

Claig - You seem to be looking through the wrong end of a prism. The Bible says "seek and ye shall find", but if you seek through the wrong end of the prism, with your eyes shut and your heart closed and your mind already made up, then you won't find anything useful or good or instructive. I think it is safe to say that certain people on this thread have been very busy searching for the atheistic arguments *there are many sites online with the very arguments that are being raked up again and again here). With that in mind, I'd stick my neck and and say Headinhands is very capable of seeking with an open mind rather than cutting and pasting from atheist websites, if headinhands wishes to do so

Was the locking up of husbands in that passage? I missed that. Can you give me the exact reference please?

It was in relation to the starvation but okay, let's make it easier. At what point during a break up with your husband would you threaten to:

Bring sudden terror on him
Give him a wasting disease
Make him blind
Send people to steal his food
Make him terrified that someone is trying to kill him
Make any illness he had 7 times worse than normal
Send wild animals to attack him and his (your) children and starve him to the point that he so that he eats his (your) children?

But I don't need your god to have love, light, good or even grace in my life. I, and millions of others manage just fine without your despot tyrannous egocentric demi-urge.

And to be blunt, it's fuck all to do with context. You can twist the passages to mean something different to what they blatantly mean if you like, though if the god of the bible was omnipotent then he could have just made them easier to understand in the first place couldn't he? But the answer is no, the god of the Bible is petty and nasty, selfish and impotent. And that's the truth of it.

I have thought some more and I don't believe most Christians are actually honouring this Biblical god. Those that spend time in mindfulness and prayer are linking through to the same divine source that all of us who are spiritual find and achieving that same grace. Perhaps that is why there is a sense of connection between those who have felt that connection to the divine, regardless of race, religion or spirituality. (Heck, even some atheists know what I'm referring to, even though they don't believe that the source of that connection is "divine".)

And here's a thought - perhaps, those who are committing such attrocities in the name of their god are actually connecting to the god of the Bible because they are acting exactly like that deity, and that's why that god doesn't interfere? Because he's enjoying it.

If I was wantonly wayward and hard hearted, I would be very pleased to get the chance to have a peaceful existence before God turned His back on me.

What about if your husband used those threats. Would you be grateful to him to?

Headinhands thats ridiculous! Of course I wouldn't threaten my husband if he wanted to leave. But this is not an account of a husband threatening a wife, so once gain, you've taken it out of context.

Out of interest, do you know what actually happened to the people in that account - did they ACTUALLY stoop to that level of did they do the sensible thing and turn around before it go to that point?

Worldgonecrazy If you feel that strongly about taking something out of context then there is no way to reason with you. If a person insists on taking everything OUT of the context then there is little I can do about that.

And I think if all light, love and goodness were removed from the world entirely, you really would notice!

rather than cutting and pasting from atheist websites

That'll be The Bible Gateway then, the Internet's no.1 resource for atheist material :)

?I learnt it all, hidden or manifest,

for I was taught by Wisdom,

by her whose skill made all things.?

Wisdom of Solomon, C1st BCE

I have found that reading the Apocryphal texts, and some Jewish kaballistic texts, has given much greater context to the entire Bible than picking, choosing and twisting passages to mean what I want them to mean. Most of the books are available free at sacred-texts.com.

I can understand the appeal of eternal salvation, as a child it seemed a great idea. But as I grew older I became more turned on by the idea of self responsibility. The carrot and stick is a way to teach children, not adults. I guess we are all at different stages of spiritual maturity.

It was in relation to the starvation but okay, let's make it easier. At what point during a break up with your husband would you threaten to:
Bring sudden terror on him
Give him a wasting disease
Make him blind
Send people to steal his food
Make him terrified that someone is trying to kill him
Make any illness he had 7 times worse than normal
Send wild animals to attack him and his (your) children and starve him to the point that he so that he eats his (your) children?

You seem to be forgetting God started with offering all of the opposite:
Good weather for crops
More than they can eat
Safety
Protection from wild animals
Victory over enemies
Plenty of children
Peace in the land
God's presence among them

The escalations were not in one hit, they followed warning after warning

Headinhands thats ridiculous! Of course I wouldn't threaten my husband if he wanted to leave. But this is not an account of a husband threatening a wife, so once gain, you've taken it out of context.

Can you explain why it wouldn't be okay for a husband to threaten their wife like that and how you know it wouldn't be okay?