1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Afterlife Forums is an online, interactive community designed to give seekers direct access to prominent researchers, to afterlife literature, and to one another in order to foster both spiritual growth and public interest in life after death.

"God"

Discussion in 'Spiritual Growth & Development' started by StoleNelotS, Dec 29, 2010.

  1. StoleNelotS

    StoleNelotS New Member

    I was raised a christian and fell out of it pretty early on. Mainly because of how the bible discribed God: jealous, cold, cruel, and all sorts of nasty things. So how does the "nice" afterlife you talk about work under a horrible god like the one in teh bible? Or is the bible wrong??
     
  2. RobertaGrimes

    RobertaGrimes Administrator

    The afterlife evidence is utterly consistent in showing us that God does exist - in fact, nothing else but God exists! - but the genuine God has little in common with the God of the Bible. The real God is absolutely loving and forgiving and is infinitely powerful energy - God is not human, and never takes human form. God has no human vices, either: God is never jealous, cold, cruel, nasty, or in any way vindictive. So, yes, the Bible gets God wrong in a lot of the details. An easy way to think of it is that the Bible documents man's search for God, so the Bible sees God in human terms: it assumes that whatever is true of human beings must also be true of God, in spades! The words of Jesus in the Gospels, though, are God's eternal search for man. You can feel safe in returning to a Christianity based just in the Gospels, and in worshiping the God of absolute love that Jesus introduces to us there.
     
  3. StoleNelotS

    StoleNelotS New Member

    i dont know about that, cuz alot of stuff in the New Testiment is pretty foul too. Like the stuff Paul says about women and basicly all of revalations. Should I just concentrate on what Jesus says? And throw the rest out?
     
  4. RobertaGrimes

    RobertaGrimes Administrator

    Yes. If you want to know God, don't read the whole Bible; instead, read only the Gospel red letters, which are the reported words of Jesus. When you think about it, the God that Paul espouses is not far removed from the Old Testament's Jehovah: Paul's God is mean and petty and nasty enough to need to punish Jesus for our sins. Christians are so used to this concept that they never stop to think how insulting it is to both Jesus and God!

    Think about it. Your best friend deliberately does something that hurts you - steals and wrecks your car; poisons your cat; whatever. You are very, very angry with your friend, but you say, "I am having trouble forgiving you but I love you too much to condemn you. So I am going to ask my beloved only child to accept responsibility for your actions, and then I'll beat her with a belt and send her to bed without any supper."

    Could you ever do something like that? Of course not. You are mature enough to work through your anger and forgive your friend. And certainly you are not nasty and petty enough to need to punish somebody so you can feel better! ... So, is it possible that you consider yourself to be more mature and more loving and more forgiving than God?

    And look at what Christianity does to Jesus! The Lord tells us repeatedly in the Gospels that He is our ultimate teacher - He insists that we follow His teachings carefully - yet in mainstream Christianity, the Lord's teachings are mostly ignored. Instead, Christianity turns Jesus into a human blood-sacrifice! As the beautiful old Christmas carol says, "Jesus our Savior was born for to die."

    But abundant afterlife evidence shows us a perfectly loving and forgiving God Who never judges anyone. To God, each of us is the holiest and best-beloved child of all. God and Jesus both are so much more than Christianity makes of them: God is the infinitely powerful, infinitely loving Source, and Jesus is His Son Who came to teach us the truth. Jesus said, “Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I say?” (LK 6:46) “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” (JN 8:31-32)
     
  5. Cromulent

    Cromulent New Member

    This is a pretty reasonable approach to Christianity. A pity that so few Christians see things this way. :(
     
  6. Wendygo

    Wendygo New Member

    I don't know if I agree, I mean if you take that approach what keeps you from just ignoring every thing else you don't like in the bible? I'm not a Christian, but ignoring everything that makes God look bad seems like a pretty self serving way to go.
     
  7. RobertaGrimes

    RobertaGrimes Administrator

    Okay, Wendygo, let's take a different approach. Let's ignore everything in the Bible that doesn't agree with modern afterlife evidence (or, indeed, any other kind of modern evidence). If you do that, you find that the words of Jesus in the Gospels are perfectly consistent with the afterlife evidence, but nothing else in the Bible agrees in the same way. When you read the Bible through and reach the Gospels, the difference between those four books and the rest of the Bible is pretty startling!
     
  8. deadwrongbook

    deadwrongbook New Member

    I agree, Cromulent. It is a pity. Ghandi once said something like: "If all Christians were like their Christ, the whole world would follow them."
     
  9. RobertaGrimes

    RobertaGrimes Administrator

    Learning that nearly all the Gospel teachings of Jesus are exactly consistent with the afterlife evidence has been the greatest thrill for me in all my half-century of afterlife research. He told us things 2000 years ago about God, reality, death, and the afterlife that we could not have confirmed by other means until the 20th century. And the odds against chance for all those correspondences are so high that we cannot imagine such numbers! Effectively, then, each proves the truth of the other, does it not? Jesus shows us that the afterlife evidence is genuine, and that evidence proves that Jesus is the real deal.

    Proving that Jesus really knew the truth changes everything! It seems to me to be incumbent now on everyone who claims to be a Christian to read the Gospel words of Jesus as absolute, eternal truth, and then to live by them. REALLY live by them. Let's all work to prove that Gandhi was right ;-)!
     
  10. VioletRose

    VioletRose New Member

    So, I should sell my shirt to buy a sword? ;)

    (Luke 22:36- yes, I know it's out of context. Just a wee joke)
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2011
  11. RobertaGrimes

    RobertaGrimes Administrator

    Poor Jesus! He knew what was coming. His urging of His disciples to carry a sword as they followed Him to the Mount of Olives is interesting, in that it suggests that He thought they would be in personal danger if they were near Him when He was arrested.

    Gandhi also urged us to be the change that we want to see in the world, which is a teaching that is amazingly consistent with what the afterlife evidence suggests about the true nature of reality!
     
  12. Bama

    Bama New Member

    Yep ... it is hard to follow Christians with all the judgement and hell talk you get from that religion .
     
  13. OldManRobot

    OldManRobot New Member

    To be fair, it's not too hard to find judgmental and sanctimonious jerks following any given creed you can name. People are people, after all, and they'll tend to use whatever doctrines they can find to justify the way they were going to behave anyway.
     
  14. BrokenSpiral

    BrokenSpiral New Member

    I don't think so, OldMan Robot, compared to what its holy book actually says, christians seem to be fairly "out there" when it comes to being judgemental and overbearing. That was part of what pushed me away from christianity in teh first place.
     
  15. VioletRose

    VioletRose New Member

    It's easy to mix up cause and effect for things like this. Are they overbearing and judgmental because they're Christians, or do they just use their religion to justify what would otherwise be unacceptable behavior?

    Based on the fact that this sort of behavior seems to occur in every religion, in every country, I tend to favor the second explanation.
     
  16. RobertaGrimes

    RobertaGrimes Administrator

    Having been a devout Christian all my life, I don't like to see Christianity bashed. Not that it doesn't deserve it! There are about 50,000 Christian denominations now, and many of them are utterly certain that the faithful followers of all the others are going to end in a fiery hell. For Christians, God's love is a guessing-game! You can follow the teachings of Jesus your whole life - you can lead a life of loving service - but you are damned if you are not a Catholic or a Baptist or a Mormon or... take your pick. Is there anyone on earth who imagines that what we have now is what Jesus intended?

    Realizing that Jesus told us 2000 years ago things that we could not have learned by any other means until the 20th century has been the most amazing and wonderful discovery of all my years of doing afterlife research. Not realizing that death is an illusion, mind you. And not even learning that we can now prove that God is Love, and nothing but God is real. No, for me the best part has been learning that Jesus is a real eternal being who walked the earth 2000 years ago with knowledge that had to have come straight from God!

    But simultaneously with that discovery, I suffered an awful realization. The religion that I had believed Jesus started doesn't seem to be His religion at all. It is the Apostles' religion, grounded in Hebrew prophesy and twisted and tweaked over 2000 years into all those warring denominations. Indeed, there is no core Christian dogma of which I am aware that is rooted in anything that Jesus is reported to have said! (Well, yes, He taught us love and forgiveness, and Christians repeat His Gospel words; but as has been said by others in this thread, there is no more judgmental group on earth as a whole than modern mainstream Christians.)

    I still don't know what we are supposed to do with this information. I welcome your suggestions! Surely even with its flaws, if mainstream Christianity is pointing new believers to the teachings of Jesus - which we now can prove are factually accurate - then that is something we want to encourage. But there is no afterlife evidence of which I am aware which suggests that you have to be any kind of Christian to make it into heaven! Instead, there is plentiful evidence that following the teachings of Jesus is what counts, even if you have never heard His name.

    If you are a Christian, and if it troubles you to read this, believe me, I understand! It was years before I was able to dare to think what I now say aloud. For me, it came down to having to decide whether I believed the teachings of my church (and I have been both a "saved" protestant and a rigorous Catholic), or whether I believed Jesus of Nazareth. You may be able to hold both in your mind, and if you can do that, then I salute you. I couldn't have them both. But, more and more, I am finding that Jesus is enough.
     
  17. papajohn

    papajohn New Member

    Compared to the amount of proclaimed Christians in the world there is only a speck here. Why then did our loving God allow Paul to be more persuasive than Jesus? Most of the Christian churches lean toward fire and judgement. Maybe the better question is why did he allow it to get so out of hand? One of many stumbling blocks. Being led astray instead of led toward.
     
  18. RobertaGrimes

    RobertaGrimes Administrator

    That is a very good question, my friend! Most Christians believe that the entire Bible is the Inspired Word of God, when a close read of the whole Bible indicates that if that is true, then God must be inconsistent, petty, and irrational. Judgmental and cranky. Demanding love while withholding it. Of course, the genuine God is none of those things! Afterlife evidence reveals a God so absolutely loving and so perfectly forgiving that I have found no evidence in all my decades of looking for it that God ever has judged anyone. Indeed, out of the entire Bible, only the Gospel words of Jesus are consistent with the afterlife evidence, and they are absolutely consistent - the odds against chance for so many consistencies are astronomical. It took me a lifetime of study to conclude eventually - and reluctantly - that mainstream Christianity's doctrines are inconsistent with the teachings of Jesus. If I am right (and indeed we might debate this), then since Jesus is a powerful eternal being who came to us 2000 years ago with knowledge that had to have come straight from God, why on earth did God allow Christianity as it developed to get Him so wrong? Why did God let professed Christians do so many horrible things in His name, from the Inquisition and burning heretics at the stake through the forced conversions of Native Americans and Africans under torture? WHY?

    I don't know why. And it would be good to know. The only answer that I can come up with is that this is another of the things that we cannot understand while we are here because our perspective is wrong and our understanding is simplistic. From the perspective of eternal life, in a reality where time is just illusion and where each lifetime is a relative eye-blink, this centuries-long detour of Christianity might have been planned as just a useful set of earth-lessons for us. For certain, the planting of facts in the Gospels that we couldn't have confirmed until now, and this letting His burial shroud survive until only now can we confirm that it is real - these two ancient time-bombs planted to go off together - that is not coincidental. And knowing that, I believe that even though we have trouble understanding it, all of this still must be part of God's plan.
     
  19. PassedPawn

    PassedPawn New Member

    When you say to just read the red letter gospels, does that mean just the books from Matthew to John or does that also include other books like Acts, etc.? I think there are some books after John that include Jesus' dialogue and not sure if they should be included for reading.
     
  20. RobertaGrimes

    RobertaGrimes Administrator

    Hi PassedPawn! The only books of the Bible which include the recorded words of Jesus are Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. In so-called red-letter Bibles, His words are printed in red so they are easy to spot. Those who heard Jesus speak memorized and passed down what He said as oral tradition, and about thirty years after his death the books which became the Bible's four Gospels were written down based on these oral traditions (along with a few other useful gospels which didn't make the Bible cut, for whatever reason). Given this initial unwritten period, and then given the 2000 years in which we know that the Gospels were edited, it is amazing that the Gospel words of Jesus still agree so precisely with the afterlife evidence! Since there is evidence in the Gospels that Jesus intended His teachings to replace (or "fulfill") the Old Testament, and since the rest of the New Testament was written by ancients who seem not to have understood a lot of what Jesus said, I now read only the red letters in the Gospels. Without the distractions of the rest of the Bible, those words sing today with amazing brilliance!
     
  21. PassedPawn

    PassedPawn New Member

    Ah, ok. Thanks for the clarification Roberta. :)
     
  22. Intbel

    Intbel New Member

    A whole thread entitled "God" - how could I resist?

    When folks begin a conversation about God and I'm not in the mood for it I say "If you want to talk about God, please do, but first define, please, exactly who/what God is? If you are unable to do that, then obviously you don't know what you are talking about."


    This comes across as confrontational but 'tis not meant to be. It makes sense to know exactly what one is discussing, don't you think?


    So, I thought it might be a good idea to come up with such a definition. I offer, then, a definition and in doing so, seek neither agreement or disagreement and seek to cause neither offence nor approval. Just adding to the discussion ...

    First of all, I don't like the term "God" for it has too many religious connotations. Much prefer the term "Great Spirit" which itself amounts to a definition.

    First thinking of 'God' as infinite Life, I soon realised that is inadequate. "Infinite Conscious Life" seemed to do the job and I was satisfied with that for a while. So I began addressing the attributes of 'God' and realised we, individually and collectively, have the same attributes, albeit to a far, far lesser degree:

    "God is all knowing". We know stuff - just not as much.
    "God is all powerful". We are powerful, more than we realise, I think, just not as powerful as God.

    Which ever attribute ascribed to God, we have the same attribute to a lesser degree.

    This then suggests "Man is made in the image of God" could be true. I dismissed that idea, initially,for reasons I'll not go into as this post looks like becoming too long as it is.

    I looked again at the idea of "Infinite Conscious Life" and rather than asking the meaning of Life, asked "What is Life's objective?" and concluded the Life's objective is to express, share, know and experience itself.

    But God is more than Life, even more than infinite Life. There is intelligence and creativity. Ignoring intelligence (dunno anything about intelligence) I focussed upon creation. Why create? How? What is the energy, the drive behind anyone creating anything.
    It took a while, but the answer came. The creative force is, has to be, Love.

    Wow! What a revelation that was! The more I thought about it, the more it made sense. Love is a noun, not a verb. The act of Loving is sharing Love. But why do some have it and some not? Where and how does one get it if one does not have it? These and other questions did my head in for a while until the mists cleared. Love, I decided, is not what we have but what we are. In acts of Love, are we not sharing parts of ourselves? In works of art are we not putting part of ourselves into the work? And if so, what is that part we are putting into the work? The answer has to be Love, does it not? So Love, dear friends, is not what we have but what we are.

    My logic says that if we are, in essence, Love, then God must be infinite Love? Yup, that makes sense, but what of Life? This may be where I'm on shaky ground, but bear with me, please?

    Having long been aware that mostly everything we've been taught has been designed to deceive us and hide truth, I wondered if perhaps we've been lied to about Life? And why would we not have been? We've certainly been lied to about what we are taught is 'death'.

    I suspect "Life" is a deliberate perversion of "Love", the reason for that perversion being to hide from us the truth of Love. So ... using the word Love instead of life, I consider God to be infinite Love. Infinite, intelligent, conscious Love.

    Love's desire is to become fulfilled, to express and share itself. So infinite Love would express itself in an infinite numer of ways via an infinite number of forms and in an infinite number of places!

    "God is in all things" 'tis said and with that I agree. How could it not be so if God, which is infinite Love, expresses itself in an infinite number of ways? Each of us, every lifeform is Love expressing itself. And so is everything else.


    Today, understanding the basics of quantum physics, we know that no thing is what it appears to be. Everything which appears solid is mostly empty space, right?

    I differ. There is no empty space. That empty space is filled with Love. God is in all things right? Right.



    Thus "Love is all there is and everything else is illusion" makes perfect sense. The only reason the illusion seems real is becasuse we are part of it. It is our reality. Our reality is whatever we happen to be experiencing. What we are experiencing when dreaming is our reality at the time, so who is to say what is real and what is not real?

    But I digress ... the task was to define exactly what "God" is and the answer has been stated again and again and again over hundreds of years: "God is Love".

    And so are you.

    Namasté.
     
  23. anonymous

    anonymous New Member

    I agree people often discuss God without really considering what the word means and how it is used and I think that can be a source of confusion because different people in the same conversation may have different ideas of God.

    I believe in God because the NDErs and spirits communicating through mediums say God exists.

    But I think the concept of God from the bible is probably the invention of humankind.

    I think idea behind the God of the bible is an attempt at an explanation of who created the universe, the earth, life on earth, humankind, and who answers prayers. I don't know the answers to these questions but I believe it is probably more than one entity who is responsible for those things. I see these things being done by something like the Celestial Bureaucracy - a hierarchy of beings starting with our spirit guides and upward to more advanced beings all the way up to God.

    One view I've read is that as spirits develop we become part of an increasingly inclusive collective consciousness while retaining our individuality. Eventually we reach the highest level and this collective consciousness, made of individual consciousnesses, is God.

    Another explanation of God is that God the source of consciousness that we all are bits broken off from for the purpose of developing independently.

    Maybe that is the same thing?

    So for me there are two different things people call God. One is the highest level consciousness the other is the entire hierarchy.

    If there is one distinct entity at the top of it all, God, I would still believe that God delegates work - what would be the point of billions of souls on possibly billions of planets evolving over billions of years if they didn't do God's work?
     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2012
  24. Intbel

    Intbel New Member

    Yes! But how to raise the question diplomatically? My English is not so bad, but for some reason seem unable to phrase it without raising hackles.

    Heheh ... I'll not believe something purely on the say-so of others. Though of course, some folks' words carry more weight than others.
    The Bible of itself is a contradiction.

    My current understanding (I say current 'cos who knows what may be learned tomorrow?) is that Love is God and everything is an expression of Love. Thus we are co-creators.

    Yes, I get that and agree with a slight variation and that is that the collective - and I'm talking about all expressions of Life and everything else spread across trillions of galaxies and their solar systems and their planets, suns etcetera - is Love (ie God) expressing and experiencing itself so we are already part of it, no matter our level of conscious awareness or spiritual progress.



    I fully understand and appreciate the concept. That was my understanding for quite a while. Now I don't accept the "broken off" part. "Broken off" suggests separation and I'm unable to go with that.
    I like the 'delegation' except that the implications of that is to personify what is called God. The personification of God is a great error, in my opinion.
    As co-creators we do what we can and with experience we are able to do more until we are able to design and create whole planets and more. Each doing the best it can, each one will always be doing 'work' appropriate to it's learning/development and unique personal aptitude. Some may excel at building while others may excel at designing. Architects, engineers, designers, planners, artists, biologists, chemists ... always something for everyone to do.

    We have a long way to go before we're able to engage in such work. When I leave here, it's probably gonna take me a while just to be able to create "out of thin air" a cuppa tea :D
     
  25. Truth seeker

    Truth seeker Member

    Im seeing very wise words posted here :) as Mikey would say: its all about love! Love is the strongest force in the universe and God its a giant unity of love, so he/she/it is the strongest force in the universe...

    I personally like the definition of God from the book of spirits of Allen Kardec:

    1. What is God?
    "God is the Supreme Intelligence-First Cause of all things."

    10. Can man comprehend the essential nature of God?
    "No; he lacks the sense required for comprehending it."

    14. Is God a being distinct from the universe, or is He, according to the opinion of some, the result of all the forces and intelligences of the universe?

    "If the latter were the case, God would not be God, for He would be effect and not cause; He cannot be both cause and effect."

    “God exists. You cannot doubt His existence, and that is one essential point. Do not seek to go beyond it; do not lose yourselves in a labyrinth which, for you, is without an issue Such inquiries would not make you better; they would rather tend to add to your pride, by causing you to imagine that you knew something, while, in reality, you would know nothing. Put aside systems. You have things enough to think about that concern you much more nearly, beginning with yourselves. Study your own imperfections, that you may get rid of them; this will be far more useful to you than the vain attempt to penetrate the impenetrable."


    If you dont agree 100 % at least it make you think :)
     
  26. Intbel

    Intbel New Member


    Heh heh ... I think too much already.
    Selected partial quote (haven't ignored the rest) 'cos that sums it up.
    "Love is God" - what more do we need to know? I mean, that covers everything.

    Risking the wrath of Roberta you may care to view this which was made some time back. It needs updating in line with my understaning which has changed since then but 'tis still valid.

     
  27. Truth seeker

    Truth seeker Member

    I dont know how Roberta could be mad at the video,it have a very nice message :) we are perfect and part of God and we must give love always...
     
  28. Intbel

    Intbel New Member


    I recall reading in forum rules about not posting videos unless authorised or something along those lines.
    So I authorised myself.

    >evil grin<
     
  29. Celera

    Celera Active Member

     
  30. Intbel

    Intbel New Member

    No body language/eye contact in text, Celera, that is an obstacle.

    The main reason for posting that rant was, apart from sharing ideas, was seeking a critique - it is difficult for one to be objective re one's own thoughts. I'm looking for holes in the reasoning. Not that important, guess we'll al know the truth of things eventually but I wanna know NOW!!! Still, 'tis said that we'll know what we need to know when we are ready to know.
     

Share This Page