Why would a god need middlemen?

[JustWondering]

Nobody changes their mind without a reason. But if there is a good reason I do have the freewill to change my mind overnight.

For instance, when Bush Sr invaded Iraq to liberate Kuwait I thought he had excellent reasons and I whole-heartedly supported it. When some little girl came to Congress and testified about Iraqi atrocities, I totally believed her.

However, I found out much later that Saddam had offered to unilaterally and unconditionally withdraw from Kuwait. Bush just was not willing to accept the withdrawal - I changed my total support for the invasion. Also, I found out later that the girl was a relative of the Kuwaiti ambassador and her story was totally made up. I had no difficulty changing my belief in her story.

So if someone believes that an all-powerful god exists what is the difference how they came to believe it? The belief is real, and that is what takes away a believers free will. Even if the god doesn't exist in reality, it exists in the believers mind, always watching and judging. Furthermore, since the believer likely didn't come by this belief because of credible evidence and logical reasoning, it is unlikely that any evidence or logical reasoning will ever sway them from their belief.

 

[JustWondering]

To you it is a myth [or foolishness], but for us it is a reality.
I really don't need to be an archaeologist to believe. The mere fact that everything exist is enough proof for me.

I am well aware that billions of people base their perception of reality on ancient superstitious mythology. Human beings are irrational by nature, I don't think we should aggravate things by basing our world views on ancient magical stories. Our ancient ancestors lived in a time when they couldn't help being ignorant and superstitious, there is no excuse today for that. The reason so many theists fear and attack science today is that they recognize that education undermines the fragile foundation of their beliefs, which is ignorance. Current trends show people leaving religion, Europe I believe is leading the charge on that. Unless we fall into another dark age I see this trend continuing.

 

[soulsurvivor]

So if someone believes that an all-powerful god exists what is the difference how they came to believe it? The belief is real, and that is what takes away a believers free will. Even if the god doesn't exist in reality, it exists in the believers mind, always watching and judging. Furthermore, since the believer likely didn't come by this belief because of credible evidence and logical reasoning, it is unlikely that any evidence or logical reasoning will ever sway them from their belief.

Your logic is weird. But let me give another example which may be more relevant (this is a true story). A man was a firm believer and worshipper of God. His younger brother became terminally ill with cancer. This man prayed intensely to God to save his brother and spare his life, but to no avail. After the brother died of the disease (this story is probably about 50 years old), the man lost his faith/belief in God and became an atheist. He had complete freewill to change his mind. However, if God himself had come to him and told him that he would not save his brother, the man would have been unable to change his belief.

Like I said before, you are going to have great mental, emotional difficulty when the Christ returns. I suggest you prepare yourself for the shock - it may happen in less than six months.

 

[jonathan180iq]

It seems obvious to me that revealed religions are bogus. Why would a god not announce it's desires and demands directly to the people? Isn't it blatantly obvious that anyone claiming to talk on behalf of a god is either insane or a con artist? If an old man who lived in your neighborhood disappeared for a week and then returned with a stone tablet he chiseled commandments into and claimed he spoke to god, would you believe him?

 

[MJFlores]

I am well aware that billions of people base their perception of reality on ancient superstitious mythology. Human beings are irrational by nature, I don't think we should aggravate things by basing our world views on ancient magical stories. Our ancient ancestors lived in a time when they couldn't help being ignorant and superstitious, there is no excuse today for that. The reason so many theists fear and attack science today is that they recognize that education undermines the fragile foundation of their beliefs, which is ignorance. Current trends show people leaving religion, Europe I believe is leading the charge on that. Unless we fall into another dark age I see this trend continuing.

To you and the others, you would consider the Bible - just a bunch of stories, made up, no substance and no answers.

But to me and where I belong, the Bible is our guide for right living, our basis of faith and our source of salvation of the things to come.

1 Corinthians 1:18
For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

Your topic was:
Why would a god need middlemen?

Because people are sinful and unholy, we would die if God shows himself to us. Even with the prophets, he spoke in different ways. To Moses, in a burning bush -

Exodus 3:3-5 New International Version (NIV)

So Moses thought, “I will go over and see this strange sight—why the bush does not burn up.”

When the Lord saw that he had gone over to look, God called to him from within the bush, “Moses! Moses!”

And Moses said, “Here I am.”

“Do not come any closer,” God said. “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy ground.”

When God creates holy things like the burning bush, people [even Moses] being unrighteous would die, how much more the the invisible God himself?

1 John 4:12
No one has ever seen God;

The fact that God is spirit, invisible - not even the prophets saw God.

 

[ronandcarol]

Why would a god need middlemen?
Your question reveals your own answer, for all of the people who do not believe in Him. Jesus said to go out to the world and make disciples of all men.
Isn't it blatantly obvious that anyone claiming to talk on behalf of a god is either insane or a con artist? No, the ones who talk on behalf of the God of the Bible, are working for the Lord to tell others the Good News of the Gospel. (but watch out for the false ones)
If an old man who lived in your neighborhood disappeared for a week and then returned with a stone tablet he chiseled commandments into and claimed he spoke to god, would you believe him? This is where that 'free will' thing comes into play. I am free to choose to follow and believe him, as you are free to choose to think he is crazy. Those Jews in the desert at the time had seen the mighty acts of the God that this old man was visiting on the mountain. They had reason to trust and believe what had happened. Today we have much more evidence and facts that are written and preached to us that enables us to trust and believe with much more faith.
ronandcarol

 

[JustWondering]

Your logic is weird. But let me give another example which may be more relevant (this is a true story). A man was a firm believer and worshipper of God. His younger brother became terminally ill with cancer. This man prayed intensely to God to save his brother and spare his life, but to no avail. After the brother died of the disease (this story is probably about 50 years old), the man lost his faith/belief in God and became an atheist. He had complete freewill to change his mind. However, if God himself had come to him and told him that he would not save his brother, the man would have been unable to change his belief.

Like I said before, you are going to have great mental, emotional difficulty when the Christ returns. I suggest you prepare yourself for the shock - it may happen in less than six months.

"Free will" is simply the ability to reason and make choices. Our ability to do this comes from the organ in our heads know as the brain, NOT magic. That doesn't go away if you know there is a god. I've already demonstrated this by showing that people in the bible knew god existed and still disobeyed him. Your position is illogical. I've already debunked it.

What is the purpose of free will and faith? There isn't any. According to Abrahamic religions we end up in front of god being judged anyway. Eventually everyone's free will is going to be taken away. So in the end it must not really be that important. Do people lose free will when they go to heaven? Do they become godbots then?

My advice to you if you are going to continue with apologetics is to abandon the free will argument. It is not biblically supported and is easily debunked.

 

[JustWondering]

To you and the others, you would consider the Bible - just a bunch of stories, made up, no substance and no answers.

Correct, and you have yet to provide any evidence or rational arguments to support your position. This is a debate forum not a state your opinion and refuse to back it up forum. I suggest you post a substantive argument or I'm just going to ignore you in this thread from this point on.

 

[JustWondering]

Your question reveals your own answer, for all of the people who do not believe in Him. Jesus said to go out to the world and make disciples of all men.

Prophets and gods from other religions allegedly said tons of stuff too, so what?

No, the ones who talk on behalf of the God of the Bible, are working for the Lord to tell others the Good News of the Gospel. (but watch out for the false ones)

How do you KNOW the first prophet that started this whole ball rolling in the first place was even legit? You don't. If your standards for who is legit is based on stuff said by people talking on behalf of god in the first place, none of it could be legit.

This is where that 'free will' thing comes into play. I am free to choose to follow and believe him, as you are free to choose to think he is crazy. Those Jews in the desert at the time had seen the mighty acts of the God that this old man was visiting on the mountain. They had reason to trust and believe what had happened. Today we have much more evidence and facts that are written and preached to us that enables us to trust and believe with much more faith.
ronandcarol

The free will argument is nonsense that is not biblically supported. It is a desperate attempt by believers to explain why god wants people to know and worship him but doesn't make his presence known to everyone which would be a simple task for god. Unfortunately for you, the argument isn't logical, and is refuted by the bible itself. No where in the bible is free will mentioned, except when it is taken away from someone, yes that happened in the bible. Yet, the most important thing to god that is hammered home, again and again in the bible, is complete obedience. I'm getting tired of debunking this tired "free will" argument, you guys need new material.

 

[Quintessence]

Correct, and you have yet to provide any evidence or rational arguments to support your position. This is a debate forum not a state your opinion and refuse to back it up forum. I suggest you post a substantive argument or I'm just going to ignore you in this thread from this point on.

I thought @MJFlores post was fine - they explained where they are coming from according to their tradition, with substantive and reasoned examples from their sacred text. So what's the problem? I guess I don't understand what it is you want to accomplish with this thread since you seem to have your mind made up about what you believe and appear disinterested in learning about others' traditions.

 

[soulsurvivor]

"Free will" is simply the ability to reason and make choices. Our ability to do this comes from the organ in our heads know as the brain, NOT magic. That doesn't go away if you know there is a god. I've already demonstrated this by showing that people in the bible knew god existed and still disobeyed him. Your position is illogical. I've already debunked it.

What is the purpose of free will and faith? There isn't any. According to Abrahamic religions we end up in front of god being judged anyway. Eventually everyone's free will is going to be taken away. So in the end it must not really be that important. Do people lose free will when they go to heaven? Do they become godbots then?

My advice to you if you are going to continue with apologetics is to abandon the free will argument. It is not biblically supported and is easily debunked.

Actually I think your logic is pretty flawed. If God were stand in front of you, how can you make a choice that he does not exist? It is only because he stays hidden that you have this choice - otherwise you would not be able say he does not exist (because you can see him). That is what freewill means - that you do not have to believe in a god/gods.

I don't know why you care what Abrahamic religions or the bible says, I thought you said all that was bogus (or did I misunderstand you initial post).

 

[JustWondering]

Actually I think your logic is pretty flawed. If God were stand in front of you, how can you make a choice that he does not exist? It is only because he stays hidden that you have this choice - otherwise you would not be able say he does not exist (because you can see him). That is what freewill means - that you do not have to believe in a god/gods.

I don't know why you care what Abrahamic religions or the bible says, I thought you said all that was bogus (or did I misunderstand you initial post).

My logic is perfectly fine, you don't like it because it refutes what you want to belief, which is not supported by a logical argument or evidence. If the logic for your argument isn't flawed than you should be able to answer/produce explanations for the following:

1. If "free will" (freedom to believe in gods or not) is so important, why would god interfere by sending prophets at all? What's the point and where are you getting this from to begin with?

2. Your argument is refuted by the biblical story of Adam and Eve, who KNEW god and yet still disobeyed him.

3. Your argument is refuted by the biblical story where god takes pharaoh's "free will" away so he can send plagues against Egypt.

4. Your argument is refuted by the clear bible message that the biblical god values obedience from his creation above all else, the opposite of wanting "free will".

5. What are your standards for determining what prophets and ancient stories are to be believed and which are bogus?

6. Where does our "free will" come from? How does it work? For example: you are given the choice between two beverages at a meal, when you chose your beverage, what process do you think occurred that lead to your decision?

Why do I care about what the bible says? Because it says a lot of crazy things that lots of people take for truth. Which causes a lot of completely unnecessary problems for a lot of people.

 

[Hawkins]

My logic is perfectly fine, you don't like it because it refutes what you want to belief, which is not supported by a logical argument or evidence. If the logic for your argument isn't flawed than you should be able to answer/produce explanations for the following:

1. If "free will" (freedom to believe in gods or not) is so important, why would god interfere by sending prophets at all? What's the point and where are you getting this from to begin with?

Because it is the only logical way which works at all.

Humans, by a covenant signed off by God, can only be saved by faith. If God shows up to everyone, everyone cannot be saved by faith and thus everyone ends up in hell. If on the other hand God doesn't show up to anyone, humans have no way to know who God is not to speak how to put faith in Him. So the only way which works is for God to show up to dedicated witnesses and for other humans to believe with faith.

My question for you is that if you can't even have the basic intelligence to comprehend the simplest answer to your question 1, How valid are the rest of your questions?


As for your last comment,

"Why do I care about what the bible says? Because it says a lot of crazy things that lots of people take for truth. Which causes a lot of completely unnecessary problems for a lot of people."

My question for you is that do humans know everything in this universe. If no, then how can humans reach a critical truth on time (i.e, in one's life span). To put it another way, if hell exists (for the sake of argument), how can humans reach this truth before he sees it himself while ending up in hell?

The only way for humans to reach this truth is by believing those who know (i.e., those who are told by God in one way or another).


At last, just to show you how crazy a truth can be. A house have a front door facing the front yard, and a back door facing the back yard. When you open the front door and walk out, you have 1/2 chance land on the front yard and 1/2 chance land on the back yard. Similarly, when you open the back door and walk out, you have 1/2 chance land on the front yard and 1/2 chance land on the backyard. Even Einstein had a problem with this truth. This is however is the basis of quantum physics. Craziness to humans' comprehension says nothing about if it can be a truth!

 

[JustWondering]

I thought @MJFlores post was fine - they explained where they are coming from according to their tradition, with substantive and reasoned examples from their sacred text. So what's the problem? I guess I don't understand what it is you want to accomplish with this thread since you seem to have your mind made up about what you believe and appear disinterested in learning about others' traditions.

This thread is to debate the legitimacy of prophets. I'm trying to stay focused (with limited success) on that topic. If MJFlores wants to stay on topic and debate that fine. If not, they're being a distraction to me. I'm well aware that I come off as a jerk to some people, hence my title. But someone has to try to keep things on the rails and its my thread.

 

[soulsurvivor]

My logic is perfectly fine, you don't like it because it refutes what you want to belief, which is not supported by a logical argument or evidence. If the logic for your argument isn't flawed than you should be able to answer/produce explanations for the following:

1. If "free will" (freedom to believe in gods or not) is so important, why would god interfere by sending prophets at all? What's the point and where are you getting this from to begin with?

2. Your argument is refuted by the biblical story of Adam and Eve, who KNEW god and yet still disobeyed him.

3. Your argument is refuted by the biblical story where god takes pharaoh's "free will" away so he can send plagues against Egypt.

4. Your argument is refuted by the clear bible message that the biblical god values obedience from his creation above all else, the opposite of wanting "free will".

5. What are your standards for determining what prophets and ancient stories are to be believed and which are bogus?

6. Where does our "free will" come from? How does it work? For example: you are given the choice between two beverages at a meal, when you chose your beverage, what process do you think occurred that lead to your decision?

Why do I care about what the bible says? Because it says a lot of crazy things that lots of people take for truth. Which causes a lot of completely unnecessary problems for a lot of people.

1. Gods send prophets as guides/teachers to teach us how the world works as well as how to live in it.
2,3,4 - I think I already said I don't believe in the OT, so it does not matter much what it says.
5. I think I already gave the criteria in a previous post - the message from the prophet, the miracles he performs and my personal experience.
6. The process does not matter. Freewill is the ability to decide for oneself without divine interference.

Let me repeat - I don't believe in the OT at all. I think it is mostly made up stories (and mean stories at that), so there is no point in bringing it up.

 

[Quintessence]

This thread is to debate the legitimacy of prophets. I'm trying to stay focused (with limited success) on that topic.

Fair enough. I find it worth recognizing that questions of legitimacy are necessarily in the eye of the beholder. It sounds like you may be expecting others to match your particular standards of legitimacy, which may not match up with their own. In this particular case, I suspect that the standards of legitimacy used by those paths who have prophets are never going to pass your bar. That happens for me with various topics too, so sometimes I aim to let people tell their stories and see if I can grasp where they are coming from, even where I disagree. Why do they see it as legitimate, even if I do not? Some of the answers to that so far have been pretty interesting.

Communing with the gods directly is pretty routine for traditions like mine, so when I think about the revealed religions that limit prophets to special people that's weird to me. I ask questions like "why only these people, and why don't you experience your gods directly for yourself like we do?" I come to answers that maybe are the ones they would tell me, but maybe not. Communing with the gods takes a certain skill set, and not everybody has it. Not everybody wants to, either. Sometimes it's considered taboo. As far as I'm aware, that sort of mysticism is generally frowned upon in the Abrahamic/revealed traditions. They are supposed to follow the traditions set forth by ancient prophets, not their own personal revelations. I'm not sure why, but I bet they feel there must be some value to those traditions in their lives. I can understand the importance of tradition - it creates continuity with one's ancestors and thus meaningfulness. It's sometimes less about the stories "making sense" more about that feeling of shared meaning.

Sorry, I'm rambling.

In the end, you determine what is legitimate for you. If such and such prophet is legitimate to you, that's good enough for me. Your life is your own, after all.

 

[JustWondering]

Because it is the only logical way which works at all.

Humans, by a covenant signed off by God, can only be saved by faith. If God shows up to everyone, everyone cannot be saved by faith and thus everyone ends up in hell. If on the other hand God doesn't show up to anyone, humans have no way to know who God is not to speak how to put faith in Him. So the only way which works is for God to show up to dedicated witnesses and for other humans to believe with faith.

So why didn't god send messengers at the same time to people on different continents so no one was left out of the loop? Oh, that's right! Because gods are invented by men instead of the other way around. Also, why should your mythological stories be taken anymore seriously than the mythological stories of other cultures?

My question for you is that if you can't even have the basic intelligence to comprehend the simplest answer to your question 1, How valid are the rest of your questions?

Your reply to question #1 is hardly intelligent. Why is faith important? As I said in a previous post, Adam and Eve knew god and still disobeyed him. Something I haven't seen a theist who insists on the importance of faith explain away yet.

If you are so intelligent address #2 - #6 from post #172.

My question for you is that do humans know everything in this universe. If no, then how can humans reach a critical truth on time (i.e, in one's life span). To put it another way, if hell exists (for the sake of argument), how can humans reach this truth before he sees it himself while ending up in hell?

The only way for humans to reach this truth is by believing those who know (i.e., those who are told by God in one way or another).

What standards do you use to establish what unverifiable magical claims are believable and which unverifiable magical claims are not? What do you have besides the claims of ancient, ignorant, and superstitious men that hell actually exists?

 

[JustWondering]

Fair enough. I find it worth recognizing that questions of legitimacy are necessarily in the eye of the beholder. It sounds like you may be expecting others to match your particular standards of legitimacy, which may not match up with their own. In this particular case, I suspect that the standards of legitimacy used by those paths who have prophets are never going to pass your bar. That happens for me with various topics too, so sometimes I aim to let people tell their stories and see if I can grasp where they are coming from, even where I disagree. Why do they see it as legitimate, even if I do not? Some of the answers to that so far have been pretty interesting.

Communing with the gods directly is pretty routine for traditions like mine, so when I think about the revealed religions that limit prophets to special people that's weird to me. I ask questions like "why only these people, and why don't you experience your gods directly for yourself like we do?" I come to answers that maybe are the ones they would tell me, but maybe not. Communing with the gods takes a certain skill set, and not everybody has it. Not everybody wants to, either. Sometimes it's considered taboo. As far as I'm aware, that sort of mysticism is generally frowned upon in the Abrahamic/revealed traditions. They are supposed to follow the traditions set forth by ancient prophets, not their own personal revelations. I'm not sure why, but I bet they feel there must be some value to those traditions in their lives. I can understand the importance of tradition - it creates continuity with one's ancestors and thus meaningfulness. It's sometimes less about the stories "making sense" more about that feeling of shared meaning.

Sorry, I'm rambling.

In the end, you determine what is legitimate for you. If such and such prophet is legitimate to you, that's good enough for me. Your life is your own, after all.

If god/s exist and it is possible to communicate with them in some way, I don't think that ability would be limited to a handful of "chosen ones" in all of humanity. Its more logical to me that such an ability would exist to a degree in everyone.

 

[JustWondering]

1. Gods send prophets as guides/teachers to teach us how the world works as well as how to live in it.

You start with the assumption that god exists and sends prophets though. Which is circular reasoning when you consider that it is only the prophets word that this is the case to begin with. That doesn't seem shady to you?

2,3,4 - I think I already said I don't believe in the OT, so it does not matter much what it says.

Do you believe in the new testament?

5. I think I already gave the criteria in a previous post - the message from the prophet, the miracles he performs and my personal experience.

If I personally witnessed someone who claimed to be a prophet perform miracles that would be extremely compelling. However, if I only have stories from years ago (thousands in some cases) that I never witnessed, that's not compelling. Keep in mind that people of conflicting beliefs the world over have personal "experiences" that reinforce their beliefs. The human mind and senses are fallible. Which is why analyzing the raw data without bias is the best way of determining the truth of something, whatever it is.

6. The process does not matter. Freewill is the ability to decide for oneself without divine interference.

Sending prophets is interference. Also, the idea that a god would send prophets with an "important" message to one group of people and not to ALL others, raises a lot of doubts as to whether said prophets are legit.

Let me repeat - I don't believe in the OT at all. I think it is mostly made up stories (and mean stories at that), so there is no point in bringing it up.

What prophets are you willing to claim are legit?

 

[soulsurvivor]

You start with the assumption that god exists and sends prophets though. Which is circular reasoning when you consider that it is only the prophets word that this is the case to begin with. That doesn't seem shady to you?

Like I said before, we take the word of eyewitnesses when sentencing someone on trial, so this is no different.

Do you believe in the new testament?

Yes, but mainly the words of Jesus in the NT when he is quoted.

If I personally witnessed someone who claimed to be a prophet perform miracles that would be extremely compelling. However, if I only have stories from years ago (thousands in some cases) that I never witnessed, that's not compelling. Keep in mind that people of conflicting beliefs the world over have personal "experiences" that reinforce their beliefs. The human mind and senses are fallible. Which is why analyzing the raw data without bias is the best way of determining the truth of something, whatever it is.

This is why there needs to be multiple witnesses

Sending prophets is interference. Also, the idea that a god would send prophets with an "important" message to one group of people and not to ALL others, raises a lot of doubts as to whether said prophets are legit.

Sending prophets is not coercive interference. You can choose to disbelieve. He sends prophets to all people. Only some of these prophets may become known internationally.

What prophets are you willing to claim are legit?

In the west, Jesus may be the only fully legit one. Muhammad is a lesser one. There may be others like Zoroaster that I don't know that much about. In India, there are multiple ones - Krishna, Rama, Ramakrishna, Ramanna Maharishi, Shirdi Sai Baba etc.