Well, first off, no one is saying "Saul" never "loved" God before He became "Paul." What he did not do is "know" Jesus. Prior to this time Paul was actually a Pharisee who had studied the Old Testament under the tutelage of Gamaliel, the greatest rabbi of the day. By this time Phariseum had disintegrated from it's pure beginnings into factious, quite often ceremonious, faith. What God did was to choose a man who did love him, even by Paul's own accounts and knock him off that high horse he was riding into damascus, introduce him to Jesus, and use him as a method to save gentiles. God knew what He was doing. The Holy Spirit leading Paul to write the most amazing letters now contained in the New Testament is His showing His love for us all. God wants not just our knowledge of Him - he wants: Mat 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. Paul with his prior existing dedication to faith, was the right man for the job, and God knew it.
Lets say I go along with that, but the bible claims Jesus blinded Paul, and God's servant healed him. Christians say Jesus is God, so if Paul hated Jesus he also really hated God, so even if he believed he loved God, according to christians' belief he really did not. Paul had to see a miracle to become a christian. My question remains unanswered: So God can just do the same thing again correct? Then what's stopping him?
The thing you aparently don't realize is that it was Jesus who knocked Paul off his horse. The person, Ananias, whom you refer to as "God's servant" himself says as much in Acts 9:17. Nor, as Ananias himself explains, was it Ananias who repaired Paul's sight which is your contention, but the Lord Jesus: Acts 9:17 ...Brother Saul, the Lord, [even] Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. Faith in Christ was as yet new to mankind, but a few years old, actually, it had yet to be spread, and Paul was to become God's chief method, his main vehicle of this spread of His gospel to the gentiles. The Holy Spirit had only just before been revealed to mankind on the day of Pentacost. Indeed, it would have been impossible for Paul to have had much of a personal relationship with our Lord as Paul was not even raised in Israel (never to have witnessed the actual ministry of Jesus) but rather in Tarsus. Then, later as a young disciple of Gamaliel, a young man dedicating his entire life to the Lord, he would only have known of Jesus through the eyes of the Pharisees, and I presume you know already how that probably went. But, again, you stretch history when you assume that Paul hated the Lord. His religious upbringing, passion and background do not agree. In fact, Paul describes himself as "an hebrew of the hebrews" and "of the Tribe of Benjamin." (Phil 3:5) which is where he derived his name "Saul" in honor of the first king of Israel who also came from the tribe of Benjamin. We also know, that in keeping with jewish law he was even circumsized "on the eighth day." Hated God? Hardly. Tarsus, you should know, was also a pretty big deal back then, a giant trade mecca and the cultural and intellectual hub of that part of the world, so much so that it was granted Roman citizenship. Yes, Paul, was a Roman citizen too. (In all this we can see how God was grooming him to one day actually go to Rome and preach the Gospel of Christ). Another thing you do not understand is that for someone to truly be able to preach the coming of the Lord before jew and gentile alike, let alone in Rome, he would have to be familiar with the Bible. Very familiar. And it is this very familiarity, the sum total of an entire life spent in the study of the Scripture, by which Paul could finally prove that the prophecied messiah had indeed come. Again, unlike the first apostles, Paul was a man of letters, and a man who could argue both faith and defense in front of the highest courts of the day, before Festus, in Athens... God knew what He was doing. So when you write: Christians say Jesus is God, so if Paul hated Jesus he also really hated God you're not really hitting the nail on the head. In fact, to follow Paul's own words we again find a hint and road map which reflects Pauls own conversion from Saul to Paul, from jew to gentile: Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
this are just some randon thoughts and ramblings imo opinion and experiences people that are "religous" and try to "follow God's commandments" are better people (in general) than people who are atheists or fundamentalists and do believe that religion is a guide towards that, whatever your beliefs are. btw, I'm atheist but try to live like there is a heaven I'm trying to get to
I am a Christian but I see more "faith" in political parties than Religion. Whether you are left or right, conservative or liberal (How Americans call them), It can be considered a Religion. So IMHO an Atheist is one who does not believe in anything, not only God. There is a difference between a Church and a Religion. The Vatican is led by humans which make errors like all of us. You must look at the Vatican way of thinking (philosophy), just like what a person does when he/she choose a political ideology.
I have been thinking of this since I first read it and wanted to wait until God gave me the industry to show by example that this statement is fundamentally and crucially in error. It came to me right as New England intercepted the Jets for a touch-down. So I ran up to my office in "preparation" for the Giants game. Here's what you are not getting. One must still have a prepared heart to receive these miracles. Look at Pharoah. Moses had already prophecied some pretty weird shit, not your mundane, run-of-the-mill famine, earthquakes, etc. No, Moses warned Pharoah to "let my people go" using frogs, flies, blood red rivers, and finally the deaths of every first born male in Egypt. Yet Pharoah still did not believe for he was not ready to receive. He did not have a prepared heart. But my favorite comes right from the gospels of Jesus themselves. Now in these day the Pharisees did follow Jesus eveywhere hoping to trip him up. And after witnessing many miracles they had the audacity yet to ask Him for a sign. Mar 8:12 And he sighed deeply in his spirit, and saith, Why doth this generation seek after a sign? verily I say unto you, There shall no sign be given unto this generation. And remember now, mind you, because they did see these miracles which Jesus was performing, they actually acknowledged them as such, but they had not prepared hearts, so they said instead that these miracles (which they acknowledged) came from the devil: Luk 11:15 ...He casteth out devils through Beelzebub the chief of the devils. What kind of miracle would they have believed? This is why Jesus told them when they asked for a sign after witnessing such that to them "no sign would be given." Yet, as proof of my theory we find that when John the Baptist, who was imprisoned by Herod, sent his disciples to inquire of Jesus whether He was the One, Jesus told them to: Luk 7:22 ...Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached. The very same miracles the Pharisees witnessed and yet were told that no sign to them would be given, are the very same signs which Jesus used to prove to John's boys that He was the one. Their hearts were prepared. Paul's heart was prepared also on his way to Damascus, though he did not know this until it occured. Did you not realize that there were others on the same train with Paul when this occured? Yet no mention of them is ever made after this event. They were not prepared.
What if god was having to much fun laughing at the world? Especially the religious people. PS, Big Bang=a grain of sand.
I've always believed that Jesus had to get a big kick out of us. My favorite painting of Him is called "the Laughing Jesus" and depicts Him with His head rolled back, just roaring with laughter. I've always imagined it was at us. As for "religious" people, I don't think that He laughed at all at them. Fact is I think He disliked them immensely for all their ceremony and self-serving hypocracy. The Bible tells us He did not consider that any laughing matter at all. Incidentally, if there was a big bang, from a little grain of sand, or whatever point you were making, can you prove to me that God did not make it happen? I see where it says He created the earth, but I do not see where it describes His methodology.
Can you explain further on this? In what sense do you feel that religious people are better people in general?
If god is not real., what is god then?., Its like saying sky isnt real., There is nothing called as sky., but why do you call it as sky!
IMHO Spiritual People are better people. Religious people are mainly idiots. Yes there is a difference. As for the methodology god used to create the universe, looking at it from a liner space time perspective, he withdrew himself/infinity from himself then injected his energy/light into his absence/shadow and split himself into many elements (while still remaining one) Energy=Thought=Vibration
imo god doesn't exists it's just made up by people to explain the unknown...to give a reason why we exist, why the sun goes up every day, to give people hope... but seriously... a god... some thing that can do anything...? sorry but in my opinion thats just bull... just my opinion... don't be insulted by it or anything
I believe/know a higher power exists. I have had enough proof in my life. However I think the concept of god as created by religion and people is a crude attempt to understand something larger than they are willing to comprehend. So they Dumb it down and replace spirituality with dogmatism and fairy tales.
You can't really make up your own private definitions for words. I believe that the closest word to describing a person who does not believe in anything is "skeptic." Atheists simply do not believe in any gods.
The evidence provided in this thread appears to support that view. I'm an Atheist too. I'm just trying to not die.
The only thing is I am alittle confused by this. Aren't fundamentalists religious people by your definition of "religious?" Also, I think you should know that people of faith do not consider themselves "religious." In our circles when someone is called "religious" it tends to mean "ceremonious." I know this is probably confusing to you, it still is to me But I thought you might like to know.
What is the only thing we know of in the universe that is eternal? Energy. It can't be created or destroyed. What is a key property of energy? It can be converted into matter. Can energy take on a conscious form? Last I checked, we are made out of energy. Could a functional "brain" exist without matter and just in energy form? So did God create all the energy in the universe or does all the energy in the universe make up God? If we are made out of God then can we become God? Maybe, if God gives up all his energy to you. These ideas make up "New Age" thinking like "we are all God," "the universe is one" etc. Which may be true to an extent. The danger is thinking yourself more than you really are and coveting what you can never be.
As an Atheist, I am the supreme being in the Universe. No other creature has surpassed the achivements of man. No other creature possesses mans intellect, or adaptability. No other create competes with man in either art or science. I RULE!