• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why does God care about some mammal species floating around in the middle of nowhere?

Jos

Well-Known Member
It doesn't make sense to me, and millions of other people, because we don't kill just to survive, or to defend territory, or because of some instinct.
Actually we kinda do, many reasons are similar to those of animals.

So that kind of reasoning seems to me, another excuse of man, conjured up to address the question of why there is suffering, and his refusal to investigate any answer that is related to a divine creator.
Or maybe it's just a conclusion from looking at the perceived facts of reality

They chose not to be rescued.
Well not everyone knows about the rescuer, not everyone feels as though they need the rescuer and not everyone sees any reason to believe that there's a rescuer so I don't blame people if they choose not be rescued and in some cases it's not a choice since they may not even know that there maybe a rescuer.

Rather, I believe, some people are like spoiled children - meaning those that want to have their own way.
Maybe but still that's some not all.

To me, God's is perfect.
He is creating a world, in which only righteousness will dwell.
So at the end of the day, only people of right heart, will be drawn to him - humble, honest, and hungering for truth, and righteousness.
All three of these must be present in a person.
Once they are, God will draw them to his son, and draw close to them.
There are nonbelievers too that value those things but they are drawn to other things that help with growing those qualities.

They may be two different things, but the principles are not different, imo.
Would you mind explaining the difference please. How is one "extremely difficult for fallible humans to do while the other isn't difficult to do and isn't impeded by fallibility"?
Well one has to do with finding and interpreting spiritual truth which can very easily be misunderstood or misinterpreted by imperfect human senses, if it exists while the other doesn't require understanding or interpreting an easily misunderstood or misinterpreted truth and very easy to do with a fallible human brain at least in most cases and can even be argued to be aided by the fallible brain of man.

Why did you see the need to mention it? Were you not making a point?
I was making the point that most scientists accept it in response to your claim that a lot of scientists don't accept it although granted a lot doesn't mean most but still not many seem to support according to polls or at least that's what I heard.
 
Last edited:

Jos

Well-Known Member
How can you get to know and understand a person? You can learn a lot through their actions.

In this time-based causal universe, God's actions can be seen. When you understand God's actions, the view will not only change; everything will add up perfectly.

I am not talking about following religious books or beliefs that others say come from God. I am talking about what actually exists and is going on all around us. God's actions.

There is a lot to Discover. On the other hand, the more one understands; the better reality will look.

Yes, this world is a Masterpiece!!
It's amazing how believers would admonish nonbelievers for looking at the world and then drawing conclusions about God since they don't have the big picture and could be looking at things wrong yet it's not a problem for believers to do it, what a double standard.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Unfortunately you saying so does not make it true. I go by the Bible. Can you give a verse that says animals have spirits? Or is this just your belief based on some idea you heard somewhere?
Well bully for you! The Bible also says snakes talk and that the earth is flat.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Actually we kinda do, many reasons are similar to those of animals.
We kill just to survive, and defend territory? Really?
I don't know about that. Is that the case with you? How many people do you know does that?
How many people do you know kill from instinct? Do you?

Or maybe it's just a conclusion from looking at the perceived facts of reality
I don't mind seeing those 'facts', as I have not seen them before.

Well not everyone knows about the rescuer, not everyone feels as though they need the rescuer and not everyone sees any reason to believe that there's a rescuer so I don't blame people if they choose not be rescued and in some cases it's not a choice since they even know that there maybe a rescuer.
I'm not sure I agree, but I can't officially prove it. Time will reveal the truth, I believe.

Maybe but still that's some not all.
Of course, it can't be all. Some don't complain, and want their own way.

There are nonbelievers too that value those things but they are drawn to other things that help with growing those qualities.
Oh, I was sure we were talking about people whom God would rescue. Sorry.

Well one has to do with finding and interpreting spiritual truth which can very easily be misunderstood or misinterpreted by imperfect human senses, if it exists while the other doesn't require understanding or interpreting an easily misunderstood or misinterpreted truth and very easy to do with a fallible human brain at least in most cases and can even be argued to be aided by the fallible brain of man.
I probably misunderstood you. I really thought you were saying there is a difference between understanding spirituality and choosing to do evil.
To me, choosing to do evil, is basically deciding that one would take that path.
Understanding spirituality also depends on choice - the choice to get to know what spirituality is all about.
Once one embarks on a study, they will grasp what it is all about.
They might not agree with it, in the same way they may decide that they probably should not do evil.
That's how I see it.
However, you probably are thinking more of deciding which spiritual path is correct.

I was making the point that most scientists accept it in response to your claim that a lot of scientists don't accept it although granted a lot doesn't mean most but still not many seem to support according to polls or at least that's what I heard.
A minority can still be many, so it is not a claim. It is a fact.
I can have a ten thousand marbles, and someone have ten billion.
Because I have a minority, doesn't mean I don't have many.
 

Bird123

Well-Known Member
A wonderful world in your opinion, someone could argue the opposite.


It looks like people teach themselves.


Free choice is crucial to learning. People may not be teaching themselves but they are choosing what lessons they want or need to learn.
 

Bird123

Well-Known Member
It's amazing how believers would admonish nonbelievers for looking at the world and then drawing conclusions about God since they don't have the big picture and could be looking at things wrong yet it's not a problem for believers to do it, what a double standard.


I am not talking about beliefs. With beliefs, one can bend the story toward one's will.

Just like all the physics of this world add up completely so does the people factor. Physics is a lot easier since the people factor has so many more variables.

Start putting the puzzle together. Sure one could make a mistake, however that will be discovered when it does not add up or does not fit.

I'm not talking about beliefs. I'm talking Math!

AS I see it, one could never come to understand God through blind beliefs. I have found no religion that really understands God at all. On the other hand, each have bits within them.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Yes it is easy to say the other person is wrong when you are not able to answer a question.
The answer is, O Best Beloved, that the Bible is not the be-all-end-all of correct information — though you won’t accept that. You’ll make excuses for it’s errancies while claiming that it has all the answers we need. In fact, it does not. Not even the earliest followers relied on it alone.

The real question is: why would the Bible concern itself with the interior life of animals, when it’s the account of OUR relationship with the Divine?

So you needn’t be so smug about calling out my “baseless” belief. Yours are just as baseless.
 

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
The answer is, O Best Beloved, that the Bible is not the be-all-end-all of correct information — though you won’t accept that. You’ll make excuses for it’s errancies while claiming that it has all the answers we need. In fact, it does not. Not even the earliest followers relied on it alone.

The real question is: why would the Bible concern itself with the interior life of animals, when it’s the account of OUR relationship with the Divine?

So you needn’t be so smug about calling out my “baseless” belief. Yours are just as baseless.
At least I give a basis for my position. You seem to say that your opinion is corect just because you believe it. If you can cite a source for what you say then others may consider it.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
At least I give a basis for my position. You seem to say that your opinion is corect just because you believe it. If you can cite a source for what you say then others may consider it.
Your basis is also "just because you believe it." Saying "the bible doesn't address it" isn't good enough. What's your theological basis?

Mine comes from years of studying both the texts and the theological positions/constructs that have been put forward from them. Based on the Bible -- and theologians such as Teilhard de Chardin, George MacLeod, and Meister Eckhart.
 

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
Your basis is also "just because you believe it." Saying "the bible doesn't address it" isn't good enough. What's your theological basis?

Mine comes from years of studying both the texts and the theological positions/constructs that have been put forward from them. Based on the Bible -- and theologians such as Teilhard de Chardin, George MacLeod, and Meister Eckhart.
Thank you. I do appreciate your answer. And I will lok into some of it.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Your basis is also "just because you believe it." Saying "the bible doesn't address it" isn't good enough. What's your theological basis?

Mine comes from years of studying both the texts and the theological positions/constructs that have been put forward from them. Based on the Bible -- and theologians such as Teilhard de Chardin, George MacLeod, and Meister Eckhart.
Still, clever apologists or not, none of this supports the authority of the Bible.
 
Top