Originally published at: The God I serve - Sixguns Firearm Fraternity
Unashamed explanation of the God I serve…… submitted by Paul Moreland I don’t know who wrote it…. nope, it wasn’t me. Wish I DID have that power of expression. If blatant expressions of faith in God offend you, please read no more. He is the First and Last, the Beginning and the End! He is the keeper of Creation and the Creator of all! He is the Architect of the universe and The Manager of all times. He always was, He always is, and He always will be… Unmoved, Unchanged, Undefeated, and never Undone! He was bruised and brought healing! He was pierced and eased pain! He was persecuted and brought freedom! He was dead and brought life! He is risen and brings power! He reigns and brings Peace! The world can’t understand him, The armies can’t defeat Him, The schools can’t explain Him, and The leaders can’t ignore Him. Herod couldn’t kill Him, The Pharisees couldn’t confuse Him, and The people couldn’t hold Him! Nero couldn’t crush Him, Hitler couldn’t silence Him, The New Age can’t replace Him, and Donahue can’t explain Him away! He is light, love, longevity, and Lord. He is goodness, Kindness, Gentleness, and God. He is Holy, Righteous, mighty, powerful, and pure. His ways are right, His word is eternal, His will is unchanging, and His mind is on me. He is my Redeemer, He is my Savior, He is my guide, and He is my peace! He is my Joy, He is my comfort, He is my Lord, and…
Heard a preacher explaining just that recently,
The preacher was explaining to those who ask,why we have free will if it leads to people making poor choices, even harm to self or others?
The explanation is that’s the only way you can have love is if you have free will also not to love.
The preacher went on to explain children are born needing to be taught goodness, that evil is inherent, kindness is learned and a sign of love, requires more work than our natural inclination.
That supports the idea His goal is to have a relationship with us as He’ll know we do love Him if its not in our programming to love Him yet we choose to serve Him of our own free will.
Very true 
AMEN brothers! This is a very well said piece. Thank you both for it.
The OP appears to connect with mostly his emotional faculties. There is nothing wrong with emotional worship. It fulfills His will that we “love the L.rd your G.d with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your might” (Deut. 6:5). G.d after all “desires the heart” (Sanhedrin 106b) and it is written, “But the L.rd looks on the heart” (I Sam. 16:7). Pure simplicity is precious.
My connection to G.d is currently more intellectual, more like water than like fire. This also is legitimate, as the verse says, “Know this day and take unto your heart that the L.rd is G.d; in the heavens above and upon the earth below there is nothing else” (Deut. 4:39).
Being in the cerebral zone at the moment, I appreciate Maimonides’ descriptions of G.d.
- “The foundation of all foundations and the pillar of wisdom is to know that there is a Primary Being who brought all existence into being… If one would imagine that He does not exist, no other being could possibly exist.” (Yesodei HaTorah 1).
- “[I]t is apparent that He is one with His attributes and His attributes are one with Him, to the extent that we can say that He is the Knower, He is the Knowledge, and He is what is known. He is life; He is the one living, and He is the one who draws down life to Himself. The same applies with regard to His other attributes. These concepts are difficult to comprehend.” (Shemoneh Perakim 8)
Note: Tanya ch. 2 explains that this statement only applies in the lower worlds where it is possible to be discussing Divine attributes. However, there are higher levels of existence where all is one in a more extreme way, and the concept of differentiated attributes (heaven forbid) in G.d is simply inapplicable.
I particularly like Maimonides’ description of G.d as “the First Cause” in his Guide for the Perplexed (ibid. Part II, ch. 1). Even if, to make a difference, false beliefs exist in forces of evil as independent forces rivaling G.d; such adherents will still acknowledge a First Cause. As the Tanya explains:
- “[T]he essence and root of idolatry is that it is regarded as an independent entity, separate from the holiness of G.d. [Idolatry does] not [necessarily imply] an outright denial of G.d, as it is stated in the Gemara that the denizens of the [spiritual] realm of kelipah [unholiness] call Him the “G.d of gods,” [(Menachos 110a), showing that the forces of unholiness do not deny His existence per se.] Rather, [the statement indicates idolatry because] they consider themselves, too, to be separate entities and independent beings. In doing so, they separate themselves from the holiness of G.d, since they do not nullify themselves before Him. For, the supernal holiness only rests upon that which is nullified to Him.…” (Tanya ch. 22).
From the secular side, there is a great book written by Stephan Meyer, called Return of the God Hypothesis. It is written to show that science totally supports a God created universe. Meyer does not specify which God, but in as much as he’s a Christian, it is obvious which way his convictions lie. But the book is a review of scientific data to demonstrate why all the other “theories” fail and a God-Creator doesn’t.
It is my sense that everyone, believer or not, should read this book. To those with faith, it gives more support to that position; to those without faith, it may give them pause.
Mere Christianity - C.S.Lewis
18 posts were split to a new topic: Continued from - The God I serve
I thought your comment that the Protestants were in rebellion to the RC church interesting. Hx, as I know it, was that Luther was NOT “rebelling” from the RCC but pleading that it return to its worshiping ways of old. Recollect Luther was in the times of the Borgias being popes, a solid insult to any faithful Christian of any persuasion. Luther did not wish to leave the RCC; times and circumstances took hold of the whole issue. It was the German prince that saw an opportunity to get out from under the RC yoke by creating a separate church and used Luther as the political scapegoat to do so, thereby gaining economic freedom of the RC control.
One can also argue that Luther gave the RCC a chance to reform and remain a viable Christian organization. Borgia as pope hardly exemplifies Christian behavior, and repudiation of the monetary collection system and the obvious gross misbehavior of the pope was necessary for the RCC to survive as a Christian church.
Interestingly you also make no mention of the Roman church leaving the council of churches in about 1060 or so (can’t remember the exact date). Those “remaining churches” were mostly the churches established by Paul and are collectively known as the Orthodox churches. They predate the Roman “franchise”. by a substantial time frame and cannot be dismissed as irrelevant. And while there are significant similarities, there are important differences. (Like denial of the whole concept of Original Sin, an Augustine creation based upon a faulty translation of Paul and Roman law.)