Is God getting more remote?

[unknown soldier]

I've noticed a trend in Christian theology and apologetics. Nowadays apologists tell us of God's deeds a long time ago in a singularity far, far away when space, matter, and time came into being as instigated by God (the Christian-apologists' version of the Big Bang). It's an amazing idea but not something most of us can identify with from everyday experience.

It wasn't always so, however. I understand that in the Bible days God was much more "up close and personal." You could literally hear his footsteps in a garden, see him as a pillar of smoke by day and fire by night, and see him cast fire down from the sky. Later on he even joined us in the guise of a man! You could actually kiss him, and at least one of us did.

So why has God become so remote these days? It seems to me that a remote God is much harder to check out than an intimate God. I think many people will agree that it's one thing to believe Christ rose from a tomb thousands of miles away twenty centuries ago, but if I told you my uncle rose from the dead in a cemetery near my home this morning, you probably wouldn't take my word for it. Such a close-up miracle claim would be much easier to debunk than anything in the Bible. Biblical miracles are safely hidden away in the mists of time and space making the job of the apologist a bit easier.

[unknown soldier]

That's a novel anti-apologetic. I never thought of pointing out that black holes can last much longer than Christ's legacy.

Reality is more scary then fiction. Human imagination has been rather poor in comparison with what really lurks out there in the cosmos. Pointing out the reality of black holes and the insignificance of past (now extinct) gods really shows a pattern, points to a prediction and also the insignificance of present gods(Yahweh-Jesus, Allah).

To paraphrase Shakespeare: "There are more things in heaven and earth, Christian, than are dreamt of in your religion." You are correct that what people imagine is often rather pale when compared to just how strange reality can be. Perhaps the biggest difference between religion and reality is that religion centers on human concerns while reality doesn't care one bit about us. That's why we fail to grasp reality until we set aside our imaginations and open our eyes to what's really "out there" not caring if it's good for us or not. No religion ever created any myths as awesome or strange as black holes, for example. Thinking of black holes has nothing to offer us except knowledge, and therefore it serves little purpose in religion.

I'm still wondering, though: Why must God be inside of Christians? If he would perch on their shoulders, then we'd all know he's there!

It’s not more different then saying I have an imaginary Siamese friend an invisible pink unicorn that only I can see and cannot by any kind of scientific equipment.

Some apologists attempt to counter such comments by pointing out that while almost all of us give up silly childhood fantasies when we reach adulthood, most of us retain belief in God. Apparently, then, belief in God is fundamentally different from belief in Santa or the Easter Bunny. After all, adults, unlike children, know better than to believe in silly things, now don't they?

Trying to make unfalsifiable claims is frequently found among religious people arguments.

I've had some Christians taunt me by pointing out that I cannot disprove God. They don't seem to realize that they cannot disprove the Tooth Fairy, yet they still doubt the Tooth Fairy. Besides, the inability to be able to disprove God is more of a liability for Christians than it is an asset.

Saying unfalsifiable claims are true is illogical but that does not stop them.

Actually, many Christian claims are falsifiable; it's just that Christians will not accept the falsifications, or if they do, then they become atheists like we are.

The more the time passes by the more the excuses pile up: Genesis is a metaphor, Noah’s story is a metaphor, everlasting torment and anguish in a firey hell is just metaphor for eternal separation from god, Deuteronomy’s barbaric laws only apply to the past, the perfect Yahweh-Jesus cursing a tree and beating the merchants is just a metaphor, Yahweh-Jesus ordering, condoning genocide/mass murder/mass killings is k cuz’ saving the children(even though they killed the children too)or just cuz’ he is the Creator.

The more liberal Christians argue that way. When it come to God and Christ, however, metaphors just don't apply!

[nobspeople]

I've noticed a trend in Christian theology and apologetics. Nowadays apologists tell us of God's deeds a long time ago in a singularity far, far away when space, matter, and time came into being as instigated by God (the Christian-apologists' version of the Big Bang). It's an amazing idea but not something most of us can identify with from everyday experience.

It wasn't always so, however. I understand that in the Bible days God was much more "up close and personal." You could literally hear his footsteps in a garden, see him as a pillar of smoke by day and fire by night, and see him cast fire down from the sky. Later on he even joined us in the guise of a man! You could actually kiss him, and at least one of us did.

So why has God become so remote these days? It seems to me that a remote God is much harder to check out than an intimate God. I think many people will agree that it's one thing to believe Christ rose from a tomb thousands of miles away twenty centuries ago, but if I told you my uncle rose from the dead in a cemetery near my home this morning, you probably wouldn't take my word for it. Such a close-up miracle claim would be much easier to debunk than anything in the Bible. Biblical miracles are safely hidden away in the mists of time and space making the job of the apologist a bit easier.

To me, a lot of things considered 'of God' has been replaced by knowledge. While this doesn't mean "God doesn't exist", it sure cast light on the possibility; dare I say make it more likely.
Christians would/may say 'God works more intimately' now (for some reason 'now' it's more important to do this than 'back then') which, to me, is another excuse to the question you asked.
To me, it shows that any Christian god (God) that exists is entirely within the people and, as such, not real as it's touted to be. It means, again to me, we create God within ourselves and, as we learn and grow, the need for God changes - sometimes leaving altogether for some people.

[unknown soldier]

To me, a lot of things considered 'of God' has been replaced by knowledge. While this doesn't mean "God doesn't exist", it sure cast light on the possibility; dare I say make it more likely.

The first time I can remember hearing about what you're saying here was when I became acquainted with Carl Sagan's work. He said: "The more we learn, the less there is for God to do." So "God" is at best a placeholder for knowledge. When we are ignorant, we say: "God explains it." When we discover the facts, God is dispensed with.

Well, not everybody dispenses with a God when we learn the facts. If need be, faithful Christians will dispense with the facts if doing so will preserve their faith. This practice is known as "apologetics."

Christians would/may say 'God works more intimately' now (for some reason 'now' it's more important to do this than 'back then') which, to me, is another excuse to the question you asked.

Some Christian apologists explain this phenomenon as resulting from God's miraculous work being for the most part completed. He already parted the Red Sea, made a donkey talk, and raised his son from the dead. We can read about those wonders in the Bible, and there's no point in God doing it all over again. You might agree with me, though, that reading about a wonder is not quite like actually being there. Some people know better than to believe everything they read.

To me, it shows that any Christian god (God) that exists is entirely within the people and, as such, not real as it's touted to be. It means, again to me, we create God within ourselves and, as we learn and grow, the need for God changes - sometimes leaving altogether for some people.

I suppose a real God could exist "within" those who believe in him (whatever that may mean). I'm not sure why he would do so, though. If he's inside of some people, then he is much like a God those people merely imagine.

That's the darndest thing about God: He acts like he's made up.

[alexxcJRO]

To paraphrase Shakespeare: "There are more things in heaven and earth, Christian, than are dreamt of in your religion." You are correct that what people imagine is often rather pale when compared to just how strange reality can be. Perhaps the biggest difference between religion and reality is that religion centers on human concerns while reality doesn't care one bit about us. That's why we fail to grasp reality until we set aside our imaginations and open our eyes to what's really "out there" not caring if it's good for us or not. No religion ever created any myths as awesome or strange as black holes, for example. Thinking of black holes has nothing to offer us except knowledge, and therefore it serves little purpose in religion.

The reality of black holes paints with a rather wide strokes the image of inhospitality and insignificance in regards to our place in the universe and relation with it.

Some apologists attempt to counter such comments by pointing out that while almost all of us give up silly childhood fantasies when we reach adulthood, most of us retain belief in God. Apparently, then, belief in God is fundamentally different from belief in Santa or the Easter Bunny. After all, adults, unlike children, know better than to believe in silly things, now don't they?

Special pleading, double standard is always boring.

I've had some Christians taunt me by pointing out that I cannot disprove God. They don't seem to realize that they cannot disprove the Tooth Fairy, yet they still doubt the Tooth Fairy. Besides, the inability to be able to disprove God is more of a liability for Christians than it is an asset.

They doubt things they can’t disprove and believe things no one else can disprove. It’s kind of laughable.

Actually, many Christian claims are falsifiable; it's just that Christians will not accept the falsifications, or if they do, then they become atheists like we are.

I did not said many are not. (Ex: intercessory prayer )
Was talking of those that are not.

The more liberal Christians argue that way. When it come to God and Christ, however, metaphors just don't apply!

They only use the metaphor card only when the Bible contradicts other parts of the book or well-established science or our current moral values.

[nobspeople]

[Replying to unknown soldier in post #14]

Thank you for the response.

I suppose a real God could exist "within" those who believe in him (whatever that may mean).

I've noticed many people have experiences they attribute to God (or a god) or Satan. In many of these experiences, God/god/Satan acts exactly as those people expected, but not always as others of the same faith expected. So it makes me wonder if what people call 'God' is within them (aka being a part of them) and no where else.
It could be God/god/Satan working in ways we don't understand. But, for me, I work with what I got now. In these instances I see a person/people having experiences. I could attribute those experiences to God/god/Satan/whatever, but I don't see any of those things so, working with what I have (the people) I make those judgements.

I believe the human mind is capable of a lot more than we think, though I don't believe it's infallible and perfect. I've seen people do mazing things with it, and I've seen it crash and burn and destroying people in the process.
Of course I have no proof of my opinion, just something I wonder about.

[unknown soldier]

I've noticed many people have experiences they attribute to God (or a god) or Satan. In many of these experiences, God/god/Satan acts exactly as those people expected, but not always as others of the same faith expected. So it makes me wonder if what people call 'God' is within them (aka being a part of them) and no where else.

You are correct that God seems to be very much like each believer. I think "God" is basically the believer given super powers.

It could be God/god/Satan working in ways we don't understand. But, for me, I work with what I got now. In these instances I see a person/people having experiences. I could attribute those experiences to God/god/Satan/whatever, but I don't see any of those things so, working with what I have (the people) I make those judgements.

Many of the apologists here like Tam chide me for my "supposition and opinion." But I, like you, must work with what little I have to make conclusions about Christianity. It's not our fault that the evidence is so weak for God and Christ.

I believe the human mind is capable of a lot more than we think, though I don't believe it's infallible and perfect. I've seen people do mazing things with it, and I've seen it crash and burn and destroying people in the process.
Of course I have no proof of my opinion, just something I wonder about.

I think belief in God is simply the human brain making a mistake. But unlike many other mistakes, theism appears to be a willful mistake.

[nobspeople]

[Replying to unknown soldier in post #17]

Many of the apologists here like Tam chide me for my "supposition and opinion."

Insecurities of their own faith I believe. What other reason would exist? Surely, but them doing this it doesn't manifest a desire to accept their version of their belief.

theism appears to be a willful mistake.

I've always found it ironic that those that CHOOSE a belief system often argue against people (gay people, for example) who, by in large, have no choice available to who they are internally. Maybe these people are jealous that they had to choose their belief while others get who they are thrusts upon them?