The kingdom of God.

[Checkpoint]

Some seem to think it is entirely future, while others give the impression they are always thinking of it as present, and to not be looking at the future in kingdom terms at all.

Jesus had much to say about the kingdom, including this:

Luke 16:

6 The Law and the Prophets were until John; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone is being zealously urged into it.

So, where do you stand as to whether it is present, future, or has both a present and a future aspect?

On what basis?

According to which scriptures?

[marco]

What about the first cause god you accept exists?

If our God "has no limits", then we cannot limit him or "reduce him" in saying he has reactions or expresses feelings.

To do so is to be contradictory.

I think Aquinas spoke of the first cause God - I didn't.

I am sure you are making a point with the statements that follow but I fail to see what it is. I said that ascribing feelings to God is to humanise him, and so we would, in contradiction, make it seem as if he is limited.

[Checkpoint]

What about the first cause god you accept exists?

If our God "has no limits", then we cannot limit him or "reduce him" in saying he has reactions or expresses feelings.

To do so is to be contradictory.

I think Aquinas spoke of the first cause God - I didn't.

I am sure you are making a point with the statements that follow but I fail to see what it is. I said that ascribing feelings to God is to humanise him, and so we would, in contradiction, make it seem as if he is limited.

Maybe.

I think you said, on the basis of logic, that a god exists.

Yes?

If so, can we, do we, know nothing about him/her/it?

[marco]

I think you said, on the basis of logic, that a god exists.

Yes?

If so, can we, do we, know nothing about him/her/it?

I cannot see how the existence of God is deduced through logic. We can postulate the existence of almighty beings to account for the existence of matter, but we are left with the problem of how gods came to be.

In effect we are "building" gods from our imperfect human imagination and naturally they will go only part way to explaining what we want. I accept that for many this part-way situation is sufficient. I prefer to say "I don't know" - nor am I expected to know. It would of course be ludicrous if - were there a God - this being wanted to punish me for my ignorance. But again, a punishing God is one invented by man. The one invented by Muslims is even more terrifying than Yahweh - he eternally burns the skin of unbelievers and replaces it so that his sadistic fun can last perpetually. It is a sad reflection on man that he has made such a thing.

[Checkpoint]

I think you said, on the basis of logic, that a god exists.

Yes?

If so, can we, do we, know nothing about him/her/it?

I cannot see how the existence of God is deduced through logic. We can postulate the existence of almighty beings to account for the existence of matter, but we are left with the problem of how gods came to be.

In effect we are "building" gods from our imperfect human imagination and naturally they will go only part way to explaining what we want. I accept that for many this part-way situation is sufficient. I prefer to say "I don't know" - nor am I expected to know. It would of course be ludicrous if - were there a God - this being wanted to punish me for my ignorance. But again, a punishing God is one invented by man. The one invented by Muslims is even more terrifying than Yahweh - he eternally burns the skin of unbelievers and replaces it so that his sadistic fun can last perpetually. It is a sad reflection on man that he has made such a thing.

You earlier said a god exists, didn't you?

If so, how did you reach that conclusion?

[marco]

You earlier said a god exists, didn't you?

If so, how did you reach that conclusion?

I have not held the existence view since boyhood. If I am discussing Yahweh I am discussing a character, like Hamlet, who does not exist but has been created. I am completely convinced Yahweh is a human creation, endowed with human failings. Thankfully the biblical monstrosity does not exist.
,
The "kingdom" we are discussing here is an archaic term that belongs to an age where kings were dominant. So God's creators looked around human society and chose king as a title, though Emperor would have done. Jesus is called the Prince of Peace and Mary, occasionally is titled Queen of Heaven. In this terminology I suppose Gabriel owns a dukedom.

[Checkpoint]

You earlier said a god exists, didn't you?

If so, how did you reach that conclusion?

I have not held the existence view since boyhood. If I am discussing Yahweh I am discussing a character, like Hamlet, who does not exist but has been created. I am completely convinced Yahweh is a human creation, endowed with human failings. Thankfully the biblical monstrosity does not exist.
,
The "kingdom" we are discussing here is an archaic term that belongs to an age where kings were dominant. So God's creators looked around human society and chose king as a title, though Emperor would have done. Jesus is called the Prince of Peace and Mary, occasionally is titled Queen of Heaven. In this terminology I suppose Gabriel owns a dukedom.

It is apparent that I have somehow misread you.

Thank for a very clear post.

I do not agree with you, but I do wish you well.

[marco]

It is apparent that I have somehow misread you.

Thank for a very clear post.

I do not agree with you, but I do wish you well.

Sometimes when we hold opposing views it looks as though we are in opposing armies, instead of being travellers in a strange land seeking the right path. If indeed you have hit on the right path, proverbially narrow, then you will be sympathetic with my wilderness wanderings.

I return your good wishes.

[Checkpoint]

It is apparent that I have somehow misread you.

Thank for a very clear post.

I do not agree with you, but I do wish you well.

Sometimes when we hold opposing views it looks as though we are in opposing armies, instead of being travellers in a strange land seeking the right path. If indeed you have hit on the right path, proverbially narrow, then you will be sympathetic with my wilderness wanderings.

I return your good wishes.

So well put, Marco.

Both of us are in such armies and are such travellers.

It is indeed a strange land we walk in, with so many pluses and minuses and unknowns.

You walk the path by sight, by what seems right and light through your physical eyes and ears.

I walk by faith, having chosen something and someone beyond the physical to guide me along the path through my unseen spiritual eyes and ears.

Different paths, different boyhoods, different choices made in adulthood.

[JehovahsWitness]

The "we" are are those who believe in an immortal, omnipotent deity. .. I hope this helps.

Yes thanks, very helpful.


In the end I believe that God's kingdom is indeed an expression of God's love for mankind. He knows we (humans) crave just and balanced government and leaders free from corruption.



JW

[IaLoaou]

None of you have ever entered into the kingdom of God.

True or false?