Saturday, February 02, 2008

How We Live

A God directly involved with us but only after death is a God who must be just as dead. Such a dead God in heaven is not worth bothering while we are still alive on this earth.

As an atheist, I love this life. I love this world. Our world. I do not care for what’s nothing out there after I am dead. Neither do I give a hoot to what was nothing out there before I was born.

If I allow one kind of fear to dominate me, all other kinds will dominate me also. I will have none of it. Fear is forever busy and needs to dominate victims. Poch Suzara

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

You're incorrect in every sense of the word. God is not dead in life and only active in the afterlife. I am now completely convinced that what parts of the Bible you HAVE read were skimmed through or taken out of context.

If you're convinced that God only appears to us after death, you must have lost half of the pages of your bible somewhere. What about the Holy Spirit being with us at all times and guiding our actions? What about "Christ waiting patiently outside your heart's door?" What about being able to communicate directly with the Almighty at ANY time through prayer?

If you think that we Christians expect God to verbally answer us after we pray to him, ("Uh, yes my child? What is it?", etc. etc.) you're being silly. God communicates in different ways. Maybe a sign in your life that's more than just a coincidence. Maybe a miracle, like your cancer disappearing overnight. Maybe a feeling in your heart that you have to do something, and the result of your actions lead to an amazing situation for the better. Maybe an immediate response to your current plight. I once prayed to God when I was locked out of my car. I called the cops to help me out, but I waited forever. I prayed for help, and instantly, an officer drove up!

The point is, God leads through every second of our life. Every triumph, every downfall.

The difference between Christianity and other religions is that in other religions, people search for God.

For a Christian, God searches for you!

Poch Suzara said...

Comment in my Blog

“The difference between Christianity and other religions is that in other religions, people search for God. For a Christian, God searches for you!”
Wow, what’s this ecclesiastical garbage? God is suppose to be everywhere and people are either busy searching for God or God is busy searching for people? But God has never been omni-present anytime anywhere. In fact, only always omni-absent all the time everywhere. Poch Suzara

Poch Suzara said...

Comment in my Blog

“The difference between Christianity and other religions is that in other religions, people search for God. For a Christian, God searches for you!”
Wow, what’s this ecclesiastical garbage? God is suppose to be everywhere and people are either busy searching for God or God is busy searching for people? But God has never been omni-present anytime anywhere. In fact, only always omni-absent all the time everywhere. Poch Suzara

Anonymous said...

First of all, I have nothing to do with an ecclesiarchy. I'm not a catholic. I used to be. Catholics pretty much have it right, but they are very legalistic in their faith and have lots of rules that aren't necessarily needed.

Anyway...

You can easily say that God is absent everywhere- that's because you're rejecting him. You're refusing to see him at all. If you opened your eyes for once, you might see him in the most unlikely places.

For the final time, you're not an atheist! Are you a bitter former catholic turned off to religion by pointless legalism? Either way, you're an agnostic, you know God is there and you choose not to follow him.

erebusnyx said...

"I prayed for help, and instantly, an officer drove up!"

I believe you're implying that your praying caused the officer to appear (through the intervention of a deity). Unfortunately, such a conclusion is a post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. When aboriginal people dance for rain and it does rain, it doesn't imply that their rain dance caused the downpour. Similarly, the fact that B occurs after A doesn't imply that A caused B. You need more than temporal precedence to evince the causal connection.

Mere co-incidence does not imply causality. It may just be fortuitous (or regrettable) coincidence.