Part II

God spent the time outlined in the Old Testament trying to teach humans what "Holy" means, that they weren't, and what not being holy has meant for the human race.

Don't believe there is a universal penalty for harming oneself and others? There is, whether or not humans believe it. Can't see the universal law one is violating? The human brain can't. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist. If an infinite "mind" tells us that there is one, should we with our finite minds contest that?

Why should God care if humans suffer the consequence of their violence? Why should he bother to send the Word who is Jesus (" before Abraham was I AM")?

Whether an individual believes or not, the latter will face a judgment, because he is a Holy God (one of his attributes is Justice, of which we are not capable). He wishes to spare each and every individual from what they will inevitably suffer. He is Holy -- he will allow humans to exercise their free will to do violence, but not forever.

Only God, whose ways are above (strange to) ours, would put up with humans and their arrogance about how much of the reality he created their finite minds can comprehend, of the infinitude that he is, in order to save them from the consequences of their behavior. He knows humans don't know what transgression is i.e. sin, don't think they do it, and if they do, think "so what?"

He exists independently of human thoughts and before them. He has put up with the rebellious human mind for millenia. One of his "ways" or characteristics is that he is "longsuffering" or patient with those he created. He suffers because he hates our violence and suffers with those we are violent towards.

He is good, in ways we can't comprehend, part of the meaning of "Holy". He hated Esau, a human prototype, who put himself before God's ways (hunger before God's birthright). God's ways -- Love your neighbor just as you do yourself. Esau's likely life choice -- violence towards others.

Sells,

Your animus is unnecessary, I feel no ill-will against religionists, Christian or otherwise. Rather, I am merely saying a forensic approach needs to adopt wide considerations [alternative possibilities: null hypotheses].

Else, one becomes sucked-in by centipedal forces. One can falsely come to believe, they know, The Truth. However, one can make a commitment to any truth, which can be only tentatively held, in the knowledge disconfirmation might exist just around the corner.

A Forum on "How does God exist?", I put, should posit the multifarious ways, as to, "How God [or Gods] exist?". It's not a matter of attitude [arrogance], it is about acheiving broad investigative pursuit. Being thorough.

"One cannot see the face of the mountain from the inside" - Confucius

Sells, my friend, please, come out into the daylight, and look around. There are other highly plausible explanations, to at least thoughtfully and systematically consider.



O.

Snout:
Read the Link..
"However, this identification is not yet fully confirmed, and might be considered equivocal. We hope to pursue our efforts in extracting DNA (if it exists), amplifying it and carrying out genetic sequencing, but his work takes time..."
DNA yet not confirmed.My point is to raise the prospect of life in the whole universe and there is very high probability.NASA and all agencies are very positive about it in recent years.Once found, all Earthy God hypothesis, events ,miracles ,verses would become void .
Again, if "something" is to be called God/Close to God/Messenger/Son of God,he is not definitely not some medieval Jesus,Mohammad,or some Earthly God[s].
He has a very larger scope and applicability and goes beyond human->earth->solar system->galaxy, etc.He may be a formless,infinite,invisible, controller.

Go to ward in a childrens hospital and then tell me there is a god

What does an imperfect world/creation e.g. disease have to do with whether or not there is a God? It has everything to do with man's choice to do violence.

Genesis: "cursed is the earth because of you (man)" -- man's choice
to follow himself had and has consequences,both spiritual and physical, because basically he is following a finite mind (his) that believes every issuance from that mind (human thoughts) accurately reflects reality. Human thoughts do not and cannot. Finite minds produce finite thoughts, which are imperfect. This applies to scientific hypotheses as well.

To what extent does man's decision to produce harmful chemicals end on end cause disease, deformity? What about sources of radiation? What about radioactive wastes?....

Genesis: "replenish the earth" -- we don't do this, we only take from it, generally speaking, and disrespectfully, as we believe we can do that with "things" which we perceive of as devoid of what we are (precious vs. just a thing).

Finite thoughts ("That's just a thing, you can do with it whatever you want") produce finite results -- disease, decay, limited resources, etc. There is an ecological web of life, which few care to recognize, that if violated, produces disease, natural disasters.

Mankind, in its lack of self-awareness about what it is doing, can blame God for a lot of things, but that doesn't make it true. It just illuminates the arrogance and pride-of-self (as if the self knows it all) of mankind.

Mankind does not want to be told what it is doing wrong....

Any religion that kisses mankind's rearend (REKs) should be suspect, because that is just what God doesn't do. Hence, no one reads the Bible, much less approach it with humility as if it might be the word of an entity with an infinite mind.

God doesn't flatter humans because they cause a lot of problems. They sin. And there are consequences to that. World violence for example.

Why doesn't God step in? He has, but no one wants to believe -- take that free will and finite mind and listen only to the REKs.

Also see notes and/or cassette tape,The Ways of God, Part 7 He uses our (adult) suffering (google Charles Stanley)