Comments on I could never hope to understand God

Go to The Reverend Kooka Speaks About Religious Bulls#!t - Add a comment - Go to I could never hope to understand God

I think you should follow what you love!

John, Jesus' disciple, said that "God is love".  But you must realize that John was one of Jesus' closest friends.  Jesus didn't have every person in Galilea, Judeah and Jerusalem hanging on his skirts all the time.  How can you "give your life" to someone so far removed from you? 

You can appreciate his teachings, which I do.  You can reverence his memory, which I do, and you can go to church or not go to church, but it doesn't matter to Jesus.  He said there were a lot of hypocrites there, and his closest friends seemed to hang out elsewhere.

So, what does it matter - if you find that a group of Christians "calling you home" is confusing and offensive, because home is where your heart is, then follow what you love!  It's all fine and good for people to believe in love, but when they don't prove it to you, you don't have to feel guilty about it.  Love is love.

posted by TARZANA on June 6, 2004 at 7:53 AM | link to this | reply

Understanding God

Spirit will tell us some things,but Spirit seems to always leave some mystery. After years of searching,finding,spiritual practice,reading and reading,listening and listening,there is still mystery.

My personal advice is to keep doing all of the above,but,most importantly,listen! This is a skill we must work to develope. Listen to each other and listen for the voice of Spirit. You may hear a real voice,recieve a sign in some form,or an intuitive nudge,or have a dream. You may recieve a verbal message from another human being. The universe is nothing if not diverse. It is all multifaceted.

For those who remain Atheists and agnostics,it's okay honey. It's all in the game and no one should condemn you. We are all one in my book and my book is "our" book. There is more than one way to skin a catfish!

The greatest thing is,you guessed it,LOVE! Yes,dear,the Beatles were right! So party on Dudes,in love. Gita

posted by Gita on June 6, 2004 at 6:38 AM | link to this | reply

shawn

Open you your eyes, just once, and you will see that I clearly do what you seem to think I do not do. I point out ways that I see as better all the time. I promote the idea of free thinking. I do what I can to get people think for themselves and seeing possible flaws in things and seeing possible alternatives. It is a very positive thing to do. You must at times break things down in order to explore them better and see the flaws, and then find the way to fix them. That is what I do here.

The only reason you see anything I say as negative is because you are by far one of the blindest people on Blogit and can not see beyond you flawed, limited and out right idiotic beliefs in order to open your kind enough and come to the simple truth that a person can see the world differently than you and it is not a negative thing.

I have had many Christians say I make good points. You seem to be one of the few who never gets my message or seems to understand what point I am trying to get across. Other Christians do. Once more I can only figure the problem to be with you.

The only reason I keep calling you narrow minded is because you keep proving yourself to be narrow minded. But then again to you everything is either black or white, and white is what agrees with your views and black is what disagrees with your views. You have made that very clear to me. The only way I could ever write any thing positive in your eyes is if I were to just say that you are right and I have been wrong all this time.

Well, that ain't going to happen.

posted by kooka_lives on June 3, 2004 at 11:00 AM | link to this | reply

Kooka

Negative is the constant tearing away and dismantling that you do in your posts. Positive would be taking a firm stand on something and demonstrating why that something is better. You are therefore clearly a negative person. And each time this is pointed out to you all you can do is whine that you are misunderstood or that people are just too narrow minded to see your perspective. The readers here can read your blog and see for themselves, I have no need to convince them. It is you that I wish to convince. Write positive posts and see where it leads you.

posted by telemachus on June 2, 2004 at 9:23 PM | link to this | reply

Fat Guy

First of, I am just glad to see people like you who wish to debate and really debate, unlike Shawn there who half the time I don't think even he knows what he is talking about.

I have never talked against the basic ideas of the Bible, because there are some good stuff there. Although I do think we could find much better ways to teach our children those lessons. And all the real good lesson are in the New Testament. We could really just throw out the Old testament all together, since that has some of the worst lesson I have ever seen and can only serve to confuse and cause harm. In fact the OT is where most of the arguments against gays comes form, yet how many of those people wear clothes made of more than one type of fabric?
What needs to be updated is the nature of the lessons. If God is all-knowing he would be able to see this and come down and fix the whole thing. Beyond the simple fact the it is far to obvious that these are man made stories (Another thing God would need to come down and prove), there is also the unrelatability of them. That was such a different world, that most of the stories, even though the lesson still may hold true, the story itself is something that is by far hard to relate to.

We update dictionaries very often because we are always changing, and our words change with the world. Maps have to change as the boundaries of countries rearrange themselves. We change our laws to fit in with the changing needs. We update all the time because we know that the outdated version are not as useful as they once were. This is a simple truth. If the Bible is to be taken as a source of knowledge, then it is very outdated now and needs to be updated. God has yet to do this for some reason. The only reasons I can think of are, one he is not real, two he is not all-knowing or all-powerful, or three he does not care. I of course go with choice number 1.

posted by kooka_lives on June 2, 2004 at 5:48 PM | link to this | reply

I see you guys are still at it... oh joy, what a positive war it is!

posted by cmoe on June 2, 2004 at 5:42 PM | link to this | reply

Shawn

I would bet just about any amount of money that I am by far a much more positive person than you. I have a very, very positive out look on life. I love life and I Love living it. In the end things will work out for the best. Everyone who knows me knows I am a positive person. In fact, I would love to know where you are getting the idea that I am negative at all. Now I am realistic at times, because unlike you I am not so blind that I do not see how things really are. And all is gray, but that is not a negative thing. Chaos is the way of nature, but that is not a negative thing. Death happens and it is not a negative thing all the time. There is no God and that is not a negative thing.

I thought you had no clue before this, but just saying such a thing proves my point beyond a doubt. You are blind and you see anything that does not agree with you beyond belief narrow views of life to be negative.

posted by kooka_lives on June 2, 2004 at 5:35 PM | link to this | reply

Kooka

It all boils down to whether you want to be positive or negative.  All I’m saying is for you to stop being a negative.  Don’t be antimatter.  It’s like looking for Easter eggs but deciding not to look down at the grass because you are already convinced that no colored eggs could possibly exist in grass.  You can’t know unless you look.  You are already predisposed against God for some reason and you have to get over that.  But you know; even if you choose not to believe, stop being negative.  You will gain so much in your life just through that accomplishment alone.

posted by telemachus on June 2, 2004 at 3:52 PM | link to this | reply

Seek and ye shall find.

Does this need updating?  This idea that those who seek in earnest will discover truths which lead them to enlightenment?  If that truth comes clearly in the message/story of Jesus, then what needs to be updated about that?  The bible says there is no greater love than if a person lays down his life for a friend.  This is what Jesus did for all.  What needs to be updated about that?  Yes, there are parts that are outdated, but they aren't the spiritual parts, the parables, the poetry.  They are the parts people try to put up against new, better stated information.  I have no problem with that.  But why would God need to update the spiritual?  Spiritual truths are universal.  Love is universal.  Those who seek to understand this need no updating.  Those who seek to discredit spiritual truths by pointing out flaws in OTHER parts or teachings of the Bible are operating according to their own agenda.  If the goal is to wipe something out while pretending you aren't really trying to wipe something out, then the dishonesty will undermine the efforts.  It is the open, honest seekers whom God is able to reach. 

posted by Fat_Guy on June 2, 2004 at 1:04 PM | link to this | reply

shawn

SO basically you are saying I need to invent a 'God' form my imagination then.
After all when I do as you say, that is normally when I get some of my best story ideas.
I am unclear as to where I have said anything about 'God' needing to be physically though. Even in any form of a spiritual being, God does not work. The Bible shows him to be too much attached to the physically world for that to work. Traditional religious teaching can not give a logic example of a form of 'God' that can work. There are too may contradictions and gaps in logic.
Also go and read my ideas. I do not believe in any form of Spiritual life. We have a spirit and it is part of who we are, but once the body dies (Or sometimes when the mind dies firsts) that spirit is gone.

posted by kooka_lives on June 2, 2004 at 10:25 AM | link to this | reply

Excellent post

posted by Star5_ on June 2, 2004 at 8:48 AM | link to this | reply

speaking of archaic

?
?
?
people write "the bible" all the time.
only thing, it isn't canonized.
sort of like St. Christopher.
now you can't put his statue in your car any more because he isn't a saint and he can't protect you -- I guess God says so huh.
mr. boy there is trying to say that kooka is right -- and the thing is that basically kooka is right -- he's basing his arguments on these tomes that are a long time ago done -- and we've got to remember that it was one man in the first or second century that decided what it is that we read in our bible. The rest was either discarded or hidden away somewhere (to be found in the 20th Century and that certainly is not all of it).

Christianity is based on that. That's Mr. Lives' argument.

But nobody can disagree that within these tomes lie several eternal truths, if you can call them that. within the tomes of many of the religions of the world are found similar eternal truths.

you've got take a few verses sothat you can understand all these writings -- in the Old TEstament, it is written (paraphrase) "I speak othese people with a halting tongue and stammering lips" and in < I think it's Hebrew in the New Testament, it is written that truth is revealed, "here a little and there a little" the beginning of Hebrews says "God, who at sundry times and in diverse manners, spake . . . "
we have tosift through all the dross to distill the truths. The truths are spoken differently to different people, I believe according to their culture, so that the same god has spoken through all the major religions in some manner, albeit differently.

Humans overlay these truths with that with which humans love to overlay truths: human perception; thus, we have these diverse religions highly adulterated with all the additives, the human ideas.

The Old Testament is mainly a history of how the Jews reached a certain point. The writers believed that God was behind their efforts, just as the Greeks believed Zeus and Hera's marital squabble was instrumental in starting and preserving the Trojan War.

The New Testament was a similar record -- mainly letters addressed to someone else at another time -- in my blog I'll have to bring up a few passages and see if our devout Christians observe them and what they have to say about them.

Both are based on certain real events, though, and we cannot deny that.

We disregard the writings and beliefs of humans and distill religion down to its purest form, then we can go on without all this squabbling.

posted by Xeno-x on June 2, 2004 at 8:23 AM | link to this | reply

EVERYBODY'S SAYING THE SAME THING!!!

Hey, guys! All of you stop for a minute!! ALL of you!
Do you see what you're saying.
You're all saying the same thing, only in different terminology.
Now, I think that's pretty good!
You all found the same part of the elephant, only . . .
You all think it's something else.

posted by Xeno-x on June 2, 2004 at 5:52 AM | link to this | reply

EVERYBODY'S SAYING THE SAME THING!!!!

posted by Xeno-x on June 2, 2004 at 5:50 AM | link to this | reply

Kooka

The age old dilemma for us.  Stop looking for God as a physical, external manifestation and start looking for God within yourself.  . Your continued efforts to uncloak a storybook physical God are going to be unsuccessful.  It is only within yourself that you will find God.  When you are still, do not be distracted by anything.  Do not study your nipples or anything like that.  Just be still and focused only on that which you seek.  Be diligent and much will be revealed to you.  Instead of concentrating only on reasons why God does not exist, try for once to concentrate on reasons why he does exist.  Be positive, not negative.  Seek diligently, study, and concentrate on the reasons for God.  It is only through internal realization that you can comprehend anything of this realm. 

posted by telemachus on June 2, 2004 at 5:18 AM | link to this | reply

Fat Guy

Wouldn't you think that if there was God and he wanted us to worship him and such, that he would update the stupid thing every few hundred years?
Is he is all knowing, then he would know that in time his words would need to be updated. Yet he has not shown up to correct any of this. So either he is not real, or he does not care.

If you take all the pointless 'God' stuff out of the Jesus story and make him into just a man and go with the basic lessons, then you might have something. The problem is with making him so much more. I am not into worshiping anything or anyone. To me that is a degrading thing to do. It can weaken a person self worth to raise anything to the point of worship. I have seen this first hand.

Learning from the teachings of Jesus and the Bible are one thing, although in the OT there is a whole lot of really bad lessons that can be learned if one is not careful, but to worship figures that are clearly mythical is not healthy.

posted by kooka_lives on June 1, 2004 at 6:59 PM | link to this | reply

Why do you ask the Bible to be more than it can be?

I find it interesting and problematic that you want the Bible to speak in a language and from a time period other than that from which it comes.  I mean, it's like you're wondering why the Genesis account says nothing of how the cardiovascular system works, and therefore must be false when it says that God created men and women.  The Bible is a cultural product.  It is the work of 40some authors from three continents spanning 3000 years or so.  It isn't one book.  It's a spiritual handbook with some history intermingled, and a lot of lessons, which if taken with our current cultural awarenesses in tact, has much value to share with the world, even today.  And the teaching that Christ is the Way (the Tao) which transcends religion should be a welcome break from religion to you, it would seem.  Jesus never asks anyone to pray a sinners' prayer or convert to a religion.  Instead, he says "I am the way"which means he essentially takes the entire responsibility for saving us onto himself.  And he pays the price for all of humanity, both past and present.  I agree that Christians often see the smallest, most exclusivist truth that the Bible has to offer, but this doesn't mean the larger truth, which folks like you and me more readily see, can't also be found by those who wish to take faith issues seriously.

posted by Fat_Guy on June 1, 2004 at 6:39 PM | link to this | reply

editormum

I have often said that It would not surprise me if there was a guiding hand in some of that, but it is obviously NOT the God of the Bible. By studying the Bible and looking at the real world, it becomes very obvious to me that the Bible is myth. The God there just has too many limits when he/she/it claims to have none. Now there could be an alien intelligence of something that inspired the Bible by coming down and claiming to be all-power and all-knowing and impressed Moses into beginning the Bible. And I find that idea to be far fetch, just not as far fetch as the all-power, all-knowing God. The idea of God that we are given does not make any sense to me at all. All the logic behind it is flawed.

Even with the rest of what you said, it still comes down to that one book as being the whole base of the belief in God.

posted by kooka_lives on June 1, 2004 at 3:38 PM | link to this | reply

fat guy

I ask questions, it is that simple. As with so many others I am trying to figure it all out. The only way to do that is to question things. You are not the first to try to approach with me. I question to man other things as well for this to be part of 'God' trying to get through to me. I also do not see it as an obsession. I talk about it here because I like to debate and it is always interesting to see what others have to say. I rarely have time outside of blogit to debate it with anyone. I am much more obsessed with Star Wars and such than I am with God, yet I do not believe that Yoda is trying to tell me something.

posted by kooka_lives on June 1, 2004 at 3:29 PM | link to this | reply

I understand this completely and I actually agree.

posted by RAYS_OF_ME on June 1, 2004 at 11:28 AM | link to this | reply

Again, I think there is something missing.

Some commenters have touched on it, but no one has come out and said it directly. Man cannot "understand" G-d because man is a finite being, rooted in space and time, whereas G-d is an infinite being, one whom space and time do not limit. Asking man to "understand" G-d is like asking your dog to understand mathematics. While the dog might be able to distinguish that two claps means "sit" and three claps means "lie down," the dog cannot carry this "understanding" of numbers any further. It cannot learn calculus, or even basic addition and subtraction.

Man can gain some knowledge of G-d based on the things which He has left as evidences of Himself. I can understand reluctance to depend solely on the Bible for knowledge of G-d, especially if one is skeptical that there is a G-d. But there is much else to recommend a benevolent Supreme Being. As one of your commenters said, it's rather difficult to imagine flour, sugar, water, and oil suddenly whisking themselves up into a batter and depositing themselves into a cake pan. And, if you can bear with me quoting the Bible for a moment, there is a tremendous parallel between Genesis's record that "the earth was without form, empty, and darkness covered the abyss" and the idea of the unformed universe swirling about before the explosion of the Big Bang. The difference is that there is nothing to direct and organize the force of the Big Bang into light, dark, planets, stars, etc., whereas, with the creation account, G-d takes the formless matter that is swirling about and speaks what He wants it to do, and the matter does it. "Let there be light." Could that not be the source of what science tells us was a huge explosion of matter?

As I do not want to overwhelm your comments section, I ask that you join me at my religion blog for a continuation of this discussion.

posted by editormum on June 1, 2004 at 7:43 AM | link to this | reply

got a lot of people wanting to convert you
ha!
you are doing all right
you know that already and proably are peeved that I'm interjecting here.
you can take care of yourself.
i know that
i'm just talking to these other people -- for their benefit not yours
they don't know when to quit.
the idea of discussing god is great -- it's just about the most important thing in the Universe.
but to keep on trying to pick your brain and to think that you are mindful of god in the back of your mind -- they'd have to be mind readers -- that wasn't included in too many miracles - Yeshua according to the gospels did that a few times.
then again this is reading minds from a distance.
but it is true -- god, whatever you want to call it, is too enormous to imagine -- amorphous, etc.
people want to bring the concept of god into a little vial that they can carry around in their minds, then if someone has a problem with this god, then they expand god to infinity and say god can't be explained.
god can't.
the best thing for us to do is to live and move and have our being (as the prayer says) within this god, whatever it is, and to do so in such a manner that all that we touch is made better by it.
it's not a concept of god that does this
it is a concept of holding sacred all that one touches.
which is god.
all that one touches.
Yeshua said this in essence many times.
many people don't listen to this because they're tuned to their own frequency and not to the frequency of the sacredness of Existence.

posted by Xeno-x on June 1, 2004 at 5:57 AM | link to this | reply

always enjoyed your writing

been busy this week but enjoyed your posts

posted by wannarideher on May 31, 2004 at 8:33 PM | link to this | reply

I appreciate the discussion we're having.

I really do.  Thanks for being willing to respond to my ideas. I enjoy reading your posts.  I would like to comment on something you just stated in a comment to my last post.  You said our minds/spirits don't continue on after we die.  If you really believe this, then I would have to ask you what "mind/spirit" is?  If it's directly connected to our molecular structure, as in "part" of our biology, then why would it not continue the same way other matter does?  If it is not connected to our molecular structure, then are you saying "spirit" actually exists in some form?

Also, have you ever considered your own obsession with the God question as a kind of evidence that He/She/It is, in fact, trying to get through to you?

Hope to hear back from you.

posted by Fat_Guy on May 31, 2004 at 7:47 PM | link to this | reply