Points to Ponder

If what you wrote is true and people take on non-physical characteristics why do they need a gaudy bejeweled golden cube with a high wall around it? Why do they need a water river of life and fruit for healing?

BTW, since it's all imaginary you can go cheap and just pave your streets with gold. However, the writer said that all of his city is pure gold except for the jewels.

Revelation 21:18 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation 21:18&version=CEB;NLT;CEV;MSG;NKJV

 

Have you ever seen gold that was "as clear as glass" or "crystal clear"? No? Then I guess the 'gold' used in that city is not the same type of 'gold' that we see here on this planet. So with that thought in mind (bringing out what the scripture actually says as opposed to preconceived ideas) what else would you like to comment on? "crystal clear" and "as clear as glass" would mean that it is transparent. I have never seen any gold that is transparent.

 

Have you ever seen any "souls"?

If you believe some things why can't you believe everything?

 

As a matter of fact, I have. My own. [not a pretty sight]. Ever hear the expression "soul searching"... or how about "soul mate". How does one know that another can be or is a "soul mate"? Questions that you are presumably not ready to answer with any level of intellectual honesty.

Some things have not been presented to me in such a manner as to compel my mind to accept them as true. Others have compelled my mind to accept them as true.

 

Do you know that it's not a good idea to marry your "soul mate"? The consensus is that people are less forgiving when they have problems with such a person than if it was someone else that ticked them off.

 

Well, the popular opinion is not all inclusive. My wife used to remind me all the time that we were soul mates. She was right. 28 years with her proved to me that there could never be another woman as sweet and wonderful as she was. She is still my soul mate even though she has left the drudgery of this physical world.

 

since all supernatural claims have precisely the same amount of evidence (zero), you're left with making a choice based on packaging, or some other inconsequential. advertising types love it when folk are swayed by the slick blurb, or the bright wrapper. the product itself can be total crap, but it'll sell regardless.

 

Wrong again. You have rejected evidence of the supernatural, so in your mind such evidence don't exist.

 

if by 'your mind' you mean the entire body of scientific and psychological enquiry since the dawn of time, then yes, I have rejected the 'evidence'.

 

Wrong again. I have made the matter personally applicable to you. YOUR MIND. Not the minds of countless thousands of people that have existed "since the dawn of time".

 

knock yourself out. I know it makes you feel better about things to fiddle with semantics, but don't you ever ask yourself why you cling to a dogma that reduces you to this?

wouldn't you rather do as we do, and accept the findings of all those scientists and other specialists over such a long span of time, all tried and tested and verified? you'd be able to relax and let the truth speak for itself. nothing to hide or to hide from, nothing embarrassing, no contradictions, no grandiose claims that can't be backed up, no falsehoods, no wondering what those voices in your head really are? etc etc. give it a try ... you know you want to

 

Reduces me to this? This what? Presenting questions and scenarios wherein you and others are found to be at a loss for words and forced to make assaults on the messenger as opposed to discussing the issues at hand? I consider that an elevation in my status.

Why would I want to accept the findings of those scientists who have used the scientific method which was founded upon assumptions? You have provided a very nice list of things that are essentially based upon a belief (having accepted something as true without proof- - - assumptions) and have never even considered revealing the truth that those things you promoted were based upon assumptions. That is deceptive behavior.

 

you're reduced to running around the outside, throwing pebbles into the ring in the hopes that one of them will distract an actual player from the game at hand. like a child whose parent has spent too long talking (to a grown up) on the telephone, so starts knocking over the furniture. I think I speak for more than just myself when I say it can be painful to watch - especially in a man your age. I would hope for more dignity for you, Incorporeal.

on that, there's a valuable lesson in humility in accepting verified facts (verified repeatedly, by many people), no matter how much they may not suit us personally. it's very liberating, AND brings some small modicum of dignity to adult life.

 

Ohh goodness me.. you seem to have a dislike toward me or my character. Such a shame. Now back to the topic.

 

Since no one has seen God and he supposedly lives in a ball of light why is he depicted as an old guy with a long beard?

 

The artist who did the first conceptualized image of God was a non-theist?

 

Maybe the artist was depicting his grandpa.

 

Or maybe even his great Auntie Christy.

 

As it says in 1 Timothy 6:16 (ERV) =

"God is the only one who never dies. He lives in ​

light

so bright that people cannot go near it. No one has ever seen him; no one is able to see him. All honor and power belong to him forever. Amen.​

"

So, if no one has ever seen the God character how did the writers get all of the dialog attributed to him? And why do people think he looks like these characters? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God

https://www.google.com/search?q=picture+of+god&client=aff-maxthon-maxthon4&channel=t27&tbm=isch&imgil=ihJKhBwUtj5rvM%253A%253Bhttps%253A%252F%252Fencrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com%252Fimages%253Fq%253Dtbn%253AANd9GcQszneUq01g06KvYlhVppBEUI0rP7Kr8RvuLzzcrqdZrCRU19x8gA%253B2184%253B3064%253B3kc1qEuu3Bl9WM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fen.wikipedia.org%25252Fwiki%25252FGod&source=iu&usg=__uOXAoJji3clG31UbkVBNiOSNxg8%3D&sa=X&ei=4p3ZU_CaOq2JiwKVi4HgBg&ved=0CDQQ9QEwBA&biw=1294&bih=672#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=kPJmUlO022p_fM%253A%3BEetiQZUvpntB_M%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fimg2.wikia.nocookie.net%252F__cb20091023011201%252Funcyclopedia%252Fimages%252F3%252F3a%252FGOD!!!!.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Funcyclopedia.wikia.com%252Fwiki%252FGod%3B797%3B479

 

Ever hear of the term "artists conception"? A similar question could be asked Where did the first image of an electron come from?

 

All the artist had to do was to paint a blob of bright light, like the sun. Evidently the writer thinks that God lives in the sun. So when Jesus was called the son of God the writer got it wrong as it should have been the sun of God.

 

Perhaps, however there is a higher probability that the original artist did not think in terms as you are thinking.

 

That's because all gods are imaginary. People who believe in gods create them in their own images. The problem is that such images brainwash observers and are grossly misleading according to the believes' own fairy tales. So according to 1 Timothy 6:16 such depictions of the God character are just pure BS. But they do influence people, mainly negatively, in their beliefs.

 

I have no doubt that the picture (the original) was purely imaginative. I would also suggest that the first artist who did an image of God was not a real 'Theist' (at least not one who worships the God of Abraham). Reason, a real Theist would not violate that commandment 'Thou shalt make no graven images'. As to the influence... again I have to agree at least in part... some people could conceivably be influenced in a positive manner.... I don't know of any poll that has been taken that would substantiate either side of a "mainly" or less "mainly" claim.

 

Consider the images of the Jesus character. When most people look at this image or a similar one they will immediately identify it as Jesus.
http://edge.ldscdn.org/ml/jesuschri.../images/quote-image-the-only-true-god_v03.jpg

How can people claim that they see Jesus in a piece of toast or in a door panel? The only physical description of him is in Revelation 1:13-16.

Even muslims claim that certain drawings represent Mohammed although though the drawings don't include physical attributes that describe Mohammed in Islamic literature.