Who is God?

I have to confess (no joke intended) that I have not read the whole of this thread. Apologies if I am repeating a point previously made.
Two interesting implications have been made that are perhaps worth rational challenge Alison

One is that it is some merit in suffering in silence. Is there? It appears to me that this is a trick played on the poor and sick by the rich and powerful - don't whinge, don't say it's not fair - just put up with it and you will be rewarded in heaven. For those of us who are not believers this just looks like a confidence trick. It suits rich and powerful nicely - you can use, abuse and exploit them and tell them suffering is good for their souls. Many political movements have been started by people who refused to suffer in silence. Trade unionism. Civil rights. Feminism - I could go on.
The other was that there is some merit in doing good works and talking about it.
Is this central to Christian ethics? And if so, why? I can't remember if there is a new testament origin? Seems to me that there are some humble Christians that hide their light under bushels (is that the reference?) and some who are very un-humble. Evangelists shout about their faith. Sally army march down the street. The Pope has the trappings of a very wealthy emperor. Is there a conflict here between trumpeting your faith and hiding your good works. Why?
But there is surely, faith or not, some virtue in talking about, say voluntary work. It might encourage others. I have talked here in the past about being a school governor. What is wrong with that? Why would it be somehow more virtuous not to talk about it?

Or to mention how you have helped your children where it helps to explain your devastation when they are, at best, unappreciative.

Oh that's great coming from you Nanadogsbody. It was after your post comparing someone's religion with believing in fairies at the bottom of the garden that started things going awry!

Can't you really see how that would be offensive?

Beautifully put, Jess. Having watched fom the sidelines, it's been at times amusing, and some moments have been like watching an inevitable car crash. Hopefully, the issues underlying the differences of opinion are now exposed, and Greatnan can feel able to post her opinions without being accused of things she hasn't done. It isn't personal to state your beliefs nor to be challenged about them. In last night's opening ceremony, Stephen Hawkins reminded us about curiosity and it's value in science and humanity. Curiosity is what has led me to believe there is no God (note: I am not accusing Christians of lacking in curiosity!)

See, when that's a perfectly acceptable way of stating non-belief.

Others take note.

You're absolutely right Jess. The Church deliberately worked with the secular powers in the Middle Ages (and later) to maintain the power hierarchy. Each man born to his station at the behest of God was used to stop people complaining and trying to better their lot in life. Kept the serfs in their place.

The early Church had female leaders but after a few centuries they decided to change the role of women and make sure that they were always subservient to men. This still happens today.....only male priests in the RC Church. To make this more palatable they introduced the cult of the obedient virgin....something that women were supposed to aspire to.

It seems to me that the basic teaching of Jesus was that we were all supposed to be nice to each other and help each other when necessary. Seems a pretty good way to try to live. Unfortunately other men have perverted this teaching into a huge religious machine that I doubt Jesus would even recognise as being based on his teachings.

Greatnan Please read the post again. There is no reference to atheists! I have said it before but you didn't appear to take it on board. I was defending Christians not attacking anyone else.

It seems to me that for some reason completely unknown to me you do not like me and seem to think that whatever I post is directed at you. When I choose to say something to you I use your name.

Thank you Nannym, Nanadogsbody (I like the name!) and *MiceElf for your support and for reading my posts as they were intended to be read. Also my thanks for all the PMs of support.

As ever, it all depends on what you mean by God. It's very easy to set up a straw man and demolish him.

There are, I suspect, but I may be wrong, many thoughtful enquiring Christians and others of different religious traditions, on this site, who are not lacking in intelligence and who are well able to see to see the failures of the institutional church.

That does not make them disrespectful of agnostics or atheists. However, the level of 'debate' on here does seem to be simplistic and lacking in depth and rigor. But maybe this isn't the place for it.

If I may respectfully suggest it to members who may be interested in matters such as this, there is a website called Ship of Fools. It is for debate on all matters religious, and there are many, many atheists on there who post regularly and debate with enthusiasm and rigor - and are responded to by those who disagree.

Elephants don't even notice ants and step on them. Hmmm sounds like God.

MiceElf, a simple faith would be fine for me.

And unpleasant posters are even better on stepping on people!

That was to "vampy"

I never said I was a good christian.

Like your suggestion, MiceElf. On the other hand, there are lots of people fighting the cause on Ship of Fools and not so many on Gransnet. It was the weirdly consensual nature of the 'religion and spirituality' threads that first caused me to put finger to virtual keyboard.

Lilygran!

At no point have I ever been unpleasant to anyone.

Gramps called me 'vampy' and I politely asked him not to which he kindly agreed to. Either you did not read that post or you have chosen to call me a name which you know I dislike.

I have never commented on your faith. I have no idea if you are a 'good' Christian or not. In fact I have no idea what constitutes being a 'good' Christian.

The thread is entitled 'Who is God?' and I have given my views on the nature of God. To me God is an insecure, egocentric bully who pretends to be all caring but actually leaves the vast majority of humanity in varying states of suffering.

Other people are entitled to their opinions. They might see Him as a wonderful being. It's a personal choice which I have no problem with. Each of us sees God in our own way.

It seems you take offence where none is intended.

Gramps - I have avoided this thread because I have little interest in the topic. I was moved to respond to your post late last night but too tired to write coherently. You have 'bared your soul' to us - not in an attempt to evangilise but rather to explain what has helped you through life, in the hope that it might be useful to others. Whilst the thread has been (insert word of your choice) you came back calmly, attempting to draw some concensus from the debacle. I am saddened that no one has responded to your second post and just wanted to say that you are not to blame for any animosity that has been generated. You have been a perfect Gentleman - RESPECT

I did read your post. I chose to call you by a silly sounding name.

Sorry.

It's a very nice poem.

Alison said thanks for sharing it And Soop

And I say it too Gramps

I've gathered from my reading of this thread today that putting belief in fairies at the bottom of the garden alongside belief in other imaginary figures (gods, for example) is seen as offensive to some people. I've taken that on board. I have no intention, ever, of offending people when I state what I think. There is now a problem. If I want to avoid people taking offence at what I believe, I can't actually say what I believe. Hmmm. There is a way round this problem though. If people decide not to take offence because someone else believes something that they think is wrong, just as I (and no doubt many others) have decided to do, then there won't be a problem. Neither will there be any censorship.

If anyone wants to think that my view about all imaginary beings is ridiculous and not worthy of respect, please go ahead. I will not be offended. Why should I be? It makes no difference to my belief, nor to me. It is just something I might note in passing: xyz thinks this belief of mine is bullshit. Fine. No problem. xyz's thinking that, or saying it, is not offensive or insulting. I accept that how one says things can make a difference, but I also think it's worth making allowances – not everyone is a brilliant writer, especially in the heat of the moment during an online discussion.

In short, once again, it's not wrong to say what you think. It's not wrong or offensive to say that a belief or and idea or an argument is stupid, if that's what you think. Some ideas are stupid. The thing is to say why you think they are stupid and then people can say why they think you are wrong, and so forth, to and fro. Holding a stupid idea does not make the person holding it stupid and nobody has said that it does.

Respect bags

That's exactly my view in a nutshell, bags.

Making offensive comments, wrongful or personal accusations or suggestions that are illegal are not on, and this is covered by forum etiquette. We can complain/report posts, and GNHQ will delete such posts.

Although I have to say, it seems very rare for GNHQ to delete a regular member's post.

I apologise to all those who found my quote from Douglas Adams offensive. I especially apologise to JO for daring to question the belief in a god thereby causing all this bitterness and aggression, as she states so clearly.

Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

Hope I have that correct its years since I studied Latin.