Test of Faith

[incomplet_]

Lately I've been scared into running to God for protection. There have been a heap of frightening coincidences that have me left wondering about, and afraid of, the existence of demons. And as far as I'm concerned, if I believe in demons, I must also believe in God

Comments

[incomplet_]

"if the universe is 'monochotomous' - and there is no struggle between good and evil - then I have nothing to worry about because anything and everything is all part and parcel of the one cohesive, neutral - and therefore safe - whole"

This chain of logic I don't follow. That is, I don't understand why dichotomy-of-good-and-evil' --> safe in your view.

OK. If the universe is 'monochotomous,' there's no dichotomy of good and evil; there's only neutrality and neutrality is safe.

As for the second part, if the universe is comprised of a God/non-God dichotomy, God can always protect you against evil, as long as you permit that protection (and as long as you're in good standing with God). Well, at least that's how it works according to the scriptures. And I know people who've encountered demons and successfully protected themselves by calling on God (well I guess they're not really protecting themselves but you get what I mean).

Of course, I am aware that this doesn't mean calling on God will work every time in the same way that having only seen white swans doesn't mean there's no such thing as a black one. But I use the term 'God' quite deliberately, referring to the God that is described in biblical scriptures. That God does protect you every time you call on Him (provided you've got good standing with Him, of course). So even if the universe is dichotomous - even if it is the interaction of God and non-God - by living according to that little 'infinite unconditional compassion etc.' thing, I'll have good standing with God, and hence I'll be safe.

(Does that answer your questions?)

So I guess my main concern now is whether the scriptures are right, because if they're wrong (e.g. if evil can conquer good!), AND if the universe is in fact dichotomous, then I'm a little bit lost!

[ataxi]

I'm not a believer in supernatural events or agents myself.

Your philosophy is reminiscent of the idea that whether or not there is a (Christian) God, one might as well be faithful, because one loses nothing by doing so and gains protection, blessings and an eternity in Paradise if God does happen to exist. Which is a justification for Christian life that Christians disapprove of quite strongly ...

I hail more from the "If God exists, then He knows I'm a hypocrite" school of Adrian Mole.

The bit I still don't get (sorry) is that if the universe is "monochotomous", so there is no struggle between good and evil overarching our lives, then doesn't that imply no God, no demons? And in what sense is such a condition "safe"?

[incomplet_]

if the universe is "monochotomous", so there is no struggle between good and evil overarching our lives, then doesn't that imply no God, no demons?

Yes, exactly. And the 'safe' thing I suppose in essence is about being unsusceptible to the powers of dark forces, like being invulnerable to possession and stuff like that.

And the justification you see me as having isn't quite right. It's not that I'm living the faithful Christian life because there's nothing to lose and possibly something to gain. I am living according to an ideology which I passionately believe in and which I arrived at of my own volition, and I want more than anything to follow it, although I'm scared of not being safe. And reassuring myself of safety in my ideology or philosophy or whatever you want to call it is all this is about.

I'm not about to call myself a Christian or begin attending church for the sake of the fringe benefits. Through considering everything I've experienced and learned, I've reasoned my way, without much of an incentive, to a belief system - about which I feel very, very strongly - that happens to be in line with much of Christian morality, and so I happen to fall into God's favour (if He exists), because I have independently chosen a system of interaction with the world which He condones, and I've done so regardless of whether or not He even exists! I could see why you'd have a bone to pick if I'd gone to the bible and gone, "Hey shit what if all this stuff is true, man I'd better start praying quick smart!" But that's not the case at all.

[ataxi]

Sure, sorry, didn't mean to be patronising, it's just what it reminded me of.

I don't have any bones to pick. It's interesting to me that you care whether the hypothetical Christian God would approve of your conduct at all, however: like me you have your own reexamined roughly-in-line-with-consensus-morality worldview, unlike me you aren't happy simply with asserting it?

By the way I'm fairly sure that, theologically speaking, merely living a Christian life is insufficient to acquire the X-God's forgiveness/blessing/etc. Explicit faith in the X-God is also required for those who have been exposed to any teachings about His existence. The only people who get off lightly are those who have never been taught about Him. So you might not be safe!

Getting a bit random here :-)

[ataxi]

Yep. A Christian friend lent me an awful book (The Case For Faith) last year that was supposed to "help" one understand how an all-loving God can be reconciled with eternal damnation. Unfortunately it was a load of crap that just skirted the issue.

tangential

[peppermintspice]

There are some strains of Jewish mysticism that deal with this concept rather well, one being that the God that created the world and the trees and thus set up the conditions in which man erred/sinned is not the LORD. (Seen in that light, the switch from the OT jealous God to the NT merciful God makes more sense.) The concept of tikkun is one I relish.

I would disagree that the bible states God will condemn human souls to eternal torture. True, a lot of Christians can believe that and seemingly back it up, but when you look at the time it was written, and the concrete languaging of the Bible as a whole, it becomes obvious that Biblical writers often spoke of intangible things in tangible ways. Many seeming dichotomies I find in the Bible dissolve when viewed through a metaphysical lens, one that sees the resurrection as happening to astral bodies, not physical ones, and that the new heaven and the new earth could be due to a planetary vibrational shift. Ok I think that's the end of my train of thought. . . hopefully not too confusing *grins*

Re: tangential

[pothv]

JC is not the only mortal who has come back from the dead. Nor the only one to do so on the third day. No one seems to have come back to their own bodies after three days, however. Often returns after that time are seen as possession and require a host body of some kind, or a magically created body. Most of the latter seem more like stories to me, by the same token the JC story may seem like a story too.

There have been many recorded instances of reincarnation where small children have remember where they came from previously, and after exhorstive tests, no explanation can be found to justify the use of languages or knowledge the kids have. Ex-family members, from the previous incarnation, have only been able to verify the knowledge of the child before the child moves on to their new incarnation.

The halo around JC is, I will grant, more likely to be an astral vision of energies pouring out of the chap.

As far as a vibrational shift, it seems more likely that the gods escaped from another realm. Try following the path of the summarian gods and see what you get :-D