Due to popular demand, I've decided to again tackle the subject of what may or may not be an accurate description of the Bible god. I think it's safe to say that most Christians would reject or at least not affirm that the god they believe in can be accurately described as "The Invisible Man In The Sky." They probably feel that "TIMITS" is not a name that most people can respect because it makes the Bible god appear to be mythological or even the product a a child's imagination.
While I think the name TIMITS fits well, another member here disagrees.
Might have a problem here. Just because something is unseen does not mean that it is invisible. My brother lives on the other side of the country; I cannot see him, but he is not invisible.
God dwells in the spiritual realm (in unapproachable light). We may not currently see Him; but that does not mean He is invisible; nor does it mean that other spirit beings cannot see Him. As well, what would be the point of God saying, 'No one can see me and live'... if He was invisible, if no one could see Him, ever? Would He not have said instead, "No one can see me because I am invisible"?
"No one can see me and live" implies rather than that He is too powerful a being for us to physically (stand in His presence and) see Him. At least not in this vessel (the body that we currently inhabit).
Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy
This argument is very easy to disprove. The Bible god is indeed invisible. Just read Colossians 1:15:
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.
Question for Debate: Would anybody else like to affirm or deny that the Bible god is The Invisible Man In The Sky?
tam wrote:You would like to think that it is insignificant, but it is proof positive that your acronym is false. You are downplaying it, but that is exactly what that diagram says.
Very well. If TIMITS is inaccurate, then maybe you can fill us all in on what the Bible god is really like.
I am going to refer you back to post 72 and something you ignored (you ignored a lot of that post actually; DI does the same thing):
There are only so many hours in a day to address your lllooonnnggg posts. If they were more concise, then I'd be more willing to address all the issues you raise.
The abode of God is heaven, and heaven is not the sky. Which is exactly what everyone who professes to be Christian on this thread has stated and you have denied.
Where exactly is heaven then? How far away is it, and what is the direction we would need to travel to get there? Obviously we can rule out the sky. Is there something about the sky that the Bible god would not go there? Why does he avoid it?
Nor is God a mere man... which is another thing wrong with your acronym.
But TIMITS isn't a "mere man" either. He's a man with magical powers who talks to some special people and reveals secrets to them. Isn't that what the Bible god is like?
Just because you cannot see this place does not mean that it does not exist. Just because you do not know where this place is, does not mean that heaven does not exist.
Maybe so, but it sure helps the credibility of your claim that the Bible god lives in heaven if we can at least in principal see heaven and know where it is. Many people throughout the eons have come up with "mystical realms" that have never been proved to exist. The Biblical heaven, if not located in the sky, fits right into the category of these mystical realms. If all those other realms don't exist, then why believe in heaven?
(Oh, and a diagram is merely an artistic rendition of what those verses state.)
In what way is it inaccurate? Personally, I see a lot in it that is wrong, but it does appear to be consistent with Biblical cosmology.
But the point of this thread was to discuss your acronym. Not to discuss the existence of God.
Actually, the existence of the Bible god relates very strongly to the TIMITS model. If the TIMITS model is accurate, then the Bible god has a basis in primitive, outmoded cosmology and almost certainly does not exist. So I understand why many Christians would deny the TIMITS model: they want the existence of the Bible god to at least be possible.
The very thing that I and others have stated from the start.
Tam, I'm discussing this issue with you, so let's leave the crowd out please.
What does the shape of the earth - and what people might have believed about it - have to do with God?
Very simply put, if the Bible god authored a book that posits a flat earth, then he goofed. The Bible god as a perfect being cannot err. We then encounter an internal problem with the Bible god that is fatal to his existence.
But you seem to have a problem with the possibility of people growing in their understanding of God. Why? When that is something people (hopefully) do? Grow in their understanding of things?
So people cannot get it right the first time? I see it takes time to get the Bible god right. To me it seems reasonable that a perfect being would make himself clear from the outset. Is the Bible god unable to explain himself clearly from the start?
But there is no discrepancy between science and God. The only discrepancy comes from our (mis)understanding of one and/or the other.
Understood, but as I see it a more likely explanation is that science has revealed knowledge of the cosmos that falsifies at least older versions of the Bible god. Christian apologists and theologians then either deny the scientific discoveries or tell us that they "misunderstood" the Bible god.
So it looks like the Bible god's existence is made plausible to believers by changing him to fit our current knowledge.
You think there is no place for punishment for an all just God?
Absolutely. In fact the very concept of punishment as a solution to anything is extremely ignorant. We're already talking about an ignorant barbaric mentality the moment we speak about punishing anyone for anything.
Soooo, you don’t think rapists should be punished? I’m not exactly how to proceed in conversation with you at this point. I’m pretty sure you did not think your statement through.
RightReason wrote:
Obviously, all those things are possible and hardly something I would call contradictory.
Well, you and I then have dramatically different views on things. If you don't see the concept of punishment as a solution to anything as being a contradiction to genuine intelligence then you and I are living in dramatically different mental worlds.
Riiiiiiight . . . so you wouldn’t punish the person who mows down pedestrians in his car? There would be no punishment for the kid who continually cheats on his exams?
RightReason wrote:
It reminds me of an immature teen accusing his parent as being cruel and overly strict because he just got caught doing something wrong and punished for it. Yeah, I’m sure it isn’t about his parents wanting what is best for him and others. I’m sure they are just monsters.
Well, they certainly aren't infinitely wise if they think that punishment is a positive or constructive solution to anything.
All I can say is wow. Just wow.
In other words, this very religion may actually be responsible for why these parents have accepted such an ignorant and barbaric means of attempting to solve their problems.
And apparently you are supporting this kind of ignorance today.
With ignorance like that . . . who needs intelligence? LOL! I seriously don’t think you actually mean any of what you’re saying. It has to be the most unintelligent thing I have heard in a very long time.
RightReason wrote:
Quote:
That's fine. But you just said that it requires an act of faith.
So them my question to you would be to ask, "Why in the world would I want to place my faith in the idea that humans are to blame for the ills of the world?"
Because it has been revealed to us and I see it as true. There are lots of things that I might not want to believe, but end up being true. There are also things I think appear one way and then I realize I didn’t have all the information.
But now you are attempting to argue just the opposite of "faith". Now you are arguing that you have simply been convinced that it "must be true" whether you like it or not.
Not at all. Please re read. I really am beginning to think perhaps English is not your native language. How old are you, may I ask?
RightReason wrote:
You judge God according to natural ‘rules’. You fail to recognize their might be (supernatural) explanations beyond your understanding so you treat God as if He were a mere human, having the intellect of a mere human and couldn’t possible know more than us or have information we are not privy to. I stand by my original comment, you judge God according to man’s ways because you do not accept the supernatural. You think a God sending a flood upon the earth is equivalent to a human being do so. You reduce God to how you think He should act according to what you think is fair. Again, like a small child screaming, “That’s not fair�. You fail to know God and congratulate yourself for knocking down the straw man you have created for Him.
I don't create any straw man concerning the Biblical God character. All I do is point out what these fables claim about their obviously fictitious God
Sorry, again you are leading with your opinion/view that God is fictitious. You have established no such thing.
and why those claims are not only self-contradictory but also not compatible with the very concepts of omnipotence, omniscient, infinite wisdom, and infinite intelligence.
Name one example of God’s behavior not being compatible with omnipotence, omniscient, infinite wisdom, and infinite intelligence. I think what you mean, again, is you don’t like that God doesn’t act/do how/what you think He should. You then turn around and make the fallacy of thinking because He doesn’t do things your way He lacks intelligence. LOL!
this is nothing more than a very sly (and clever) underhanded trick by the Biblical authors to take the pressure off having to defend the obviously flawed Biblical fables and instead turn the readers attention to imagining that this invisible imaginary God actually exists and that HE could explain why the Bible is so ignorant and stupid.
Riiiiiiight . . . and why exactly would they do this again? Give up everything? Sacrifice their lives? With no gain of money, power, or fame?
Parents who punish their children are already indeed quite ignorant themselves.
I just have to keep re posting this quote of yours. Maybe seeing it in black and white will show you the ridiculousness of it.
RightReason wrote:
Sorry, again it is you who sees Him this way not me. I find no inconsistency or untrustworthiness. Is it inconsistent to say I am loving, but then I refuse to allow evil to go unchecked? I don’t think so, but apparently you do.
It's a straw man on your part to say that I would allow "evil" to go unchecked.
Oh? So, how exactly would you accomplish that without punishment? Please provide a specific example. Thank you.
So now you are apparently convinced that you either punish people to teach them a lesson or "Do nothing about it at all".
There’s our cute little straw man again. Tsk. Tsk.
All I have been suggestion is that there are far more intelligent, constructive, and productive ways of dealing with behaviors. At no time did I ever suggest that parents should just ignore the behavior of their children.
Well, we parents are all ears . . .
RightReason wrote:
Quote:
Don't you think the creator should take a bit of responsibility for the results of the things he's creating.
I think you don’t understand love, freedom, God.
So how do love and freedom justify an irresponsible creator?
Do you understand what love is? It must be given and received freely. Could God have created a bunch of robots forced to serve Him? Sure. Is that love? Part of allowing someone the freedom to choose you. To do good, is allowing them the freedom not to.
The Bible has you convinced that the ignorant barbaric practice of punishing people is the best method of teaching people how to behave properly.
Another straw man. There are multiple ways to teach and help others. There is also a place and a need for punishment. Punishment can be an act of love and quite frankly, I am stunned that you wouldn’t know that.
We'll just need to let this stand and let the readers decide for themselves.
Divine Insight wrote:Absolutely. In fact the very concept of punishment as a solution to anything is extremely ignorant. We're already talking about an ignorant barbaric mentality the moment we speak about punishing anyone for anything.
Then later in the same post, you wrote:
Divine Insight wrote:It's a straw man on your part to say that I would allow "evil" to go unchecked.
Nowhere did I ever suggest such a thing. In fact, this actually demonstrates just how powerful this religion has a hold on you. You have apparently accepted that if we don't "punish" people to teach them a lesson, then there must not be any other possible way of dealing with the problem.
Who appears to be twisted here? What has a hold on you that you cannot see the flaw in this thinking?
What does this show of your underlying belief system?
RightReason wrote:
Soooo, you don’t think rapists should be punished? I’m not exactly how to proceed in conversation with you at this point. I’m pretty sure you did not think your statement through.
I'm pretty sure you never actually read my post. Either that or you simply did not comprehend it.
Your above comment only serves to prove my point.
You have apparently been convinced that delving out punishments is the only way to solve a problem.
And since you are also clearly defending Christianity and the Bible I can only conclude that this is precisely where you have gotten this ancient barbaric and useless idea.
What do you hope to solve by punishing a rapist?
If you continue to deal with your problems in this way then you will end up being as ineffective and inept as the Biblical God.
All you've done here is confirm my assertion that people who believe in the Biblical God tend to embrace that same kind of ignorant barbaric behavior. Behavior that never results in a positive constructive solution to anything.
Keep in mind, the Biblical God has failed miserably to address the problem of sin in any effective or constructive manner. In fact, according to the Bible the Biblical God will need to condemn the vast majority of humans that he as ever created simply because he is so utterly inept at being able to solve anything in a constructive intelligent manner.
Follow the Biblical God and you'll go down that same fruitless path of extreme ignorance and ineptitude.
[center] Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]
Divine Insight wrote:Absolutely. In fact the very concept of punishment as a solution to anything is extremely ignorant. We're already talking about an ignorant barbaric mentality the moment we speak about punishing anyone for anything.
Then later in the same post, you wrote:
Divine Insight wrote:It's a straw man on your part to say that I would allow "evil" to go unchecked.
Nowhere did I ever suggest such a thing. In fact, this actually demonstrates just how powerful this religion has a hold on you. You have apparently accepted that if we don't "punish" people to teach them a lesson, then there must not be any other possible way of dealing with the problem.
Who appears to be twisted here? What has a hold on you that you cannot see the flaw in this thinking?
What does this show of your underlying belief system?
You'll need to explain yourself better than this FtK.
Where is there any problem in anything I said?
Apparently there can only be a problem if you have been convinced that punishing people is the only possible way to deal with any problem.
Otherwise how can you suggest that there is anything wrong or "twisted" in what I said?
[center] Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]
You have apparently been convinced that delving out punishments is the only way to solve a problem.
Nope. Not sure what you’re reading. I believe no such thing. Nor do I erroneously believe that there is no place for punishment, or some extremely odd notion that punishment is barbaric and useless like you keep describing it. Scientific research actually discredits your claim.
What do you hope to solve by punishing a rapist?
Uuummm . . . I am really curious as to what you would do with a rapist?
If you continue to deal with your problems in this way then you will end up being as ineffective and inept as the Biblical God.
Uh huh.
All you've done here is confirm my assertion that people who believe in the Biblical God tend to embrace that same kind of ignorant barbaric behavior. Behavior that never results in a positive constructive solution to anything.
Uh huh.
Keep in mind, the Biblical God has failed miserably to address the problem of sin in any effective or constructive manner. In fact, according to the Bible the Biblical God will need to condemn the vast majority of humans that he as ever created simply because he is so utterly inept at being able to solve anything in a constructive intelligent manner.
Seriously, what Bible do you read?
Follow the Biblical God and you'll go down that same fruitless path of extreme ignorance and ineptitude.
I’m just gonna let your post linger a little on this thread for all to enjoy . . . it is interesting to say the least.
Keep in mind, the Biblical God has failed miserably to address the problem of sin in any effective or constructive manner. In fact, according to the Bible the Biblical God will need to condemn the vast majority of humans that he as ever created simply because he is so utterly inept at being able to solve anything in a constructive intelligent manner.
Seriously, what Bible do you read?
The one that represents Christian theology.
Are you unaware that Jesus himself has proclaimed that only few will make it into eternal life?
You shouldn't need to have a Ph.D. in mathematics to figure out that this means that the vast majority of humans are condemned to death.
So even Jesus has preached that the Biblical God is a "Loser Creator" who loses the vast majority of souls that he creates.
The biblical God is a "Loser God", there can be no doubt about this. Jesus himself has confirmed this to be the truth.
I don't know if you are aware of this, but there are other world religions that have Gods who don't lose so much as a single solitary soul that they create.
But this certainly can't be said of the Biblical God. The Biblical God is an extremely inept creator who clearly loses the vast majority of souls he creates by his own proclamation.
So don't try to tell me that I don't know what the Bible has to say.
You'll need to take this up with Jesus, not with me. I'm not the one who made the claim. Jesus made the claim, and he's supposed to only speak the TRUTH.
In fact, I'm surprised that you aren't already aware of this if you are a Christian. I knew this back when I was a Christian.
[center] Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]
Divine Insight wrote:Absolutely. In fact the very concept of punishment as a solution to anything is extremely ignorant. We're already talking about an ignorant barbaric mentality the moment we speak about punishing anyone for anything.
Then later in the same post, you wrote:
Divine Insight wrote:It's a straw man on your part to say that I would allow "evil" to go unchecked.
Nowhere did I ever suggest such a thing. In fact, this actually demonstrates just how powerful this religion has a hold on you. You have apparently accepted that if we don't "punish" people to teach them a lesson, then there must not be any other possible way of dealing with the problem.
Who appears to be twisted here? What has a hold on you that you cannot see the flaw in this thinking?
What does this show of your underlying belief system?
You'll need to explain yourself better than this FtK.
Where is there any problem in anything I said?
Apparently there can only be a problem if you have been convinced that punishing people is the only possible way to deal with any problem.
Otherwise how can you suggest that there is anything wrong or "twisted" in what I said?
The problem is that you are directly contradicting yourself, and you believe it is a valid reason to support your argument. You state that punishment for wrongdoing is "barbaric" and "ignorant". Then you say it is a strawman to suggest that you would let evil go unchecked.
As soon as you desire to "check" or correct evil, you are instituting a form of punishment. When an individual is removed from society and placed in a prison for a crime, they are being punished by having their freedoms restricted. Even if you only wanted them to have counseling. This is still instituting your will over their will as a result of their behavior.
If you assert that individuals do not need to be punished, or there are alternatives, please present an example. Also, clarify how this would check or discourage evil behavior.
tam wrote:You would like to think that it is insignificant, but it is proof positive that your acronym is false. You are downplaying it, but that is exactly what that diagram says.
Very well. If TIMITS is inaccurate,
There is no 'if' timits is inaccurate.
Your acronym is inaccurate.
Your acronym is inaccurate regardless of whether or not I 'fill you in' on what God is really like. But in fact in my first post on this thread I did not just say what was wrong with your acronym, I also shared what was true instead. So I already did what you are asking me to now do.
then maybe you can fill us all in on what the Bible god is really like.
In addition to what I have shared, God (who is not called 'bible god') is as Christ reveals Him to be. Christ is the living image of the living God. If you want to know God (the God and Father of Christ), then you need to know Christ.
And if we want to know what God wants of us, we need only listen to Christ.
The abode of God is heaven, and heaven is not the sky. Which is exactly what everyone who professes to be Christian on this thread has stated and you have denied.
Where exactly is heaven then? How far away is it, and what is the direction we would need to travel to get there? Obviously we can rule out the sky.
And there you go. You, yourself, admit your acronym is incorrect. The evidence you used (the bible and the diagram that you posted) disproves your acronym.
Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy
If one wishes to use that acronym that is fine with me, because it serves to indicate what the user considers to be the most significant characteristics of a given deity. Thus, it says as much about the person using the acronym as it does about the one to whom the acronym is being applied. I do not use that acronym in referring to the deity of the Bible, because I see the elements that make up that acronym as contextually driven and not the most important overall character characteristics of that deity. That said, this is not uncommon. Every name for that deity is contextually driven and I contend that there is no name that actually embodies the character of the deity.
