The Fruit of the Vine (Poetry)

[Tuberload]

An eternal hand closes around the grape as it walks a warn down rut of a path
The love of God being pressed out of a seed not open to bribery
Offspring of the bondwoman carry about golden tablets engraved with new laws
The rejected grape never satisfying its righteous requirement
As its blood flows from the winepress vat
There is no room for boasting in its old skin
A lifeless stare gazes into the eyes of its Redemption
At last faith can have its way

-- Tuberload

[Sidoh]

This poem makes it sound like the love of God is some obvious trait of the universe.

God's existence is not an obvious trait of the universe.  Therefore, God's love is not an obvious trait of the universe.

Sorry for completely ignoring the literary value of your poem, but that's not what I see in it.

[Tuberload]

To the one who is willing to see God, both His existence and attributes, can be clearly seen in that which He created. To those who would rather worship there own ideas or the product of there own hands instead of God, they choose to allow themselves to live in a darkened state of mind and heart (Rom 1.18-23). To go beyond our ability to see Him clearly in His creation, God has demonstrated His love in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. True it is an idea that seems foolish to the world, but to one who has encountered the living God in a tangible way and been filled with His Spirit it is the wisdom of God (Jn 3.16, 1Co 1.18-30).

As to the poem itself, it speaks about a personal experience of ones process of salvation, not some attribute of God that is to be clearly seen. You would have to get into the Greek of Rom5.3-5 to develop the imagery of the rutted path and God's love being pressed out of the grape. The grape is a person who is being proven fruitful in the Lords vineyard. The love is being squeezed out of the seed, which is Christ in him, a love which is tangibly experienced and displayed over time because of the work of the Holy Spirit within the believer as he endures trials through the eyes of faith. It is not the laws of man or the church that brings about a true salvation, but the work of a living God within and a believers willingness to die to his life that he may truly experience life as given by God.

[Sidoh]

To the one who is willing to see God, both His existence and attributes, can be clearly seen in that which He created.

There are a few ways I generally respond to a claim like this.

I was religious for 18 years of my life.  I sincerely believed in the existence of God.  However, in retrospect, his existence was never "clear" to me.  For this to be true, I require meaningful, tangible evidence.  This is why I gave up the belief: there is none.

Not really.  This is a form of argument from design.  Instead of regurgitating all of the counter-apologetics, here:

http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Argument_from_design

To those who would rather worship there own ideas or the product of there own hands instead of God, they choose to allow themselves to live in a darkened state of mind and heart (Rom 1.18-23).

I'm not sure if you were just quoting a bible verse verbatim here, but these are the kinds of accusations that really grind my gears.  I don't worship anyone's ideas.  I don't, in fact, worship anyone in the place of God.  I don't "choose" to not believe in God.  I am a type of person who naturally cannot believe in something that has no evidence.  It may have taken me 17 years to realize that there is no evidence for the existence of God, but when I finally did, my faith rapidly faded.

To go beyond our ability to see Him clearly in His creation, God has demonstrated His love in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. True it is an idea that seems foolish to the world, but to one who has encountered the living God in a tangible way and been filled with His Spirit it is the wisdom of God (Jn 3.16, 1Co 1.18-30).

You seem to be making yourself into some kind of martyr.  Yes, I'm going to criticize your beliefs.  I think they're entirely unjustified, and you flaunt them around as if they're obvious facts and that everyone around you is silly for not realizing what you've so clearly convinced yourself of.

Are you suggesting that any atheist has never "really believed in God?"  I'm pretty sure this is a beautiful example of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy.

An aside: what evidence do you have for the existence of God?  What arguments have you used to convince yourself God is real?  That Shiva, Zeus, or Allah isn't?

As to the poem itself, it speaks about a personal experience of ones process of salvation, not some attribute of God that is to be clearly seen. You would have to get into the Greek of Rom5.3-5 to develop the imagery of the rutted path and God's love being pressed out of the grape. The grape is a person who is being proven fruitful in the Lords vineyard. The love is being squeezed out of the seed, which is Christ in him, a love which is tangibly experienced and displayed over time because of the work of the Holy Spirit within the believer as he endures trials through the eyes of faith. It is not the laws of man or the church that brings about a true salvation, but the work of a living God within and a believers willingness to die to his life that he may truly experience life as given by God.

I was not interpreting it as an attack on non-believers.  However, it does seem to be an attack on yourself.

[rabbit]

If he follows the Bible like he's supposed to, he accepts that there are, in fact, many many more gods, but he chooses to worship God above all.  Also, Allah = God, so eh?

[Tuberload]

I was going to just sit back in silent amazement and allow you to be king of the hill. I have however decided to clear up confusion...

There are a few ways I generally respond to a claim like this.

I was religious for 18 years of my life.  I sincerely believed in the existence of God.  However, in retrospect, his existence was never "clear" to me.  For this to be true, I require meaningful, tangible evidence.  This is why I gave up the belief: there is none.

Not really.  This is a form of argument from design.  Instead of regurgitating all of the counter-apologetics, here:

http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Argument_from_design

I am sorry. However I was not attempting an argument from design, rather suggesting that contrary to what you know both my personal experience and the Bible of which has authority in my life says you are wrong. If God has not been willing to reveal Himself to you in the tangible manner that you require then I sure am not going to sit here and prove Him for you. Maybe you will be unsatisfied with this but I am just the carrier of a message. The rest is between you and God. My relationship with God and the evidence He has given me is more than sufficient for a continued walk. You see I am not trying to convince men with cleverly crafted ideas and human wisdom, I am trying to create a context in which one might encounter the living God. If that encounter should prove not to take place then I am going to move on and trust God in His wisdom to remain hidden.

I'm not sure if you were just quoting a bible verse verbatim here, but these are the kinds of accusations that really grind my gears.  I don't worship anyone's ideas.  I don't, in fact, worship anyone in the place of God.  I don't "choose" to not believe in God.  I am a type of person who naturally cannot believe in something that has no evidence.  It may have taken me 17 years to realize that there is no evidence for the existence of God, but when I finally did, my faith rapidly faded.

Please take a moment to grease your gears because you completely pulled an accusation out of what I said that was not there... I said individuals who would rather worship there own ideas... To further clarify my meaning, I see my main mode of worshiping God as seeking to know His ways and then walking in them as opposed to walking according to my own ways. Hence the worshiping of ones own ideas as opposed to the worship of God.

Evidence comes as a God given reward for faith. I am fine with your choosing to reject that. You don't choose not to believe...whatever. If that is your philosophy in life you can have it.

You seem to be making yourself into some kind of martyr.  Yes, I'm going to criticize your beliefs.  I think they're entirely unjustified, and you flaunt them around as if they're obvious facts and that everyone around you is silly for not realizing what you've so clearly convinced yourself of.

Are you suggesting that any atheist has never "really believed in God?"  I'm pretty sure this is a beautiful example of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy.

An aside: what evidence do you have for the existence of God?  What arguments have you used to convince yourself God is real?  That Shiva, Zeus, or Allah isn't?

Where and in what way did I suggest you or anyone else is silly? Am I not allowed the same confidence as you demonstrate in the flaunting of your beliefs or would it be better for me to look at my feet and stutter? A martyr? Better yet a living martyr? All it took was a poem...so what exactly is your point?

In the way you are suggesting belief in God, no that was not my suggestion at all. Now if we want to use the Bibles definition for belief in God then yes, and if they truly did believe in God at one point then there is no hope for them because they have trampled underfoot the Son of Man and put Him to a public shame therefore making repentance, which is a gift from God, impossible for them a second time. In which case I am in no way involved in the matter. Genuine belief biblically suggests the perfection of what Jesus came to accomplish in the believers life. I do not even claim to fully believe in God in this sense. According to the bible a simple acceptance or idea of the possibility of a god or the God is insufficient and not genuine belief.

If you are going to continue in the trampling of my garden spend a little more time trying to understand what it is I am saying and a little less time puking all over the place.

I was not interpreting it as an attack on non-believers.  However, it does seem to be an attack on yourself.

An attack on non-believers...where do you get this stuff? You lashed out at me for a poem which suggested the personal experience of a believer in the Holy Spirit in the trials of life. I in fact see all you have presented as nothing more than a circular argument. I have done nothing but poetically express a personal experience which is backed by the Bible and Spirit in which I draw inspiration.

An attack on myself? More and more you demonstrate lack of understanding in the faith I profess. I am not sure what your 18 indoctrinated years accomplished but I truly hope that the years you have left are much more fruitful in your natural path.

After sifting through the logorrhea before me I have found two things worth noting: an assertion that God can not be proven as to exist based upon a criteria which rejects the context in which God has chosen to reveal Himself, and a finely tuned inability to communicate.

[Sidoh]

I am sorry. However I was not attempting an argument from design, rather suggesting that contrary to what you know both my personal experience and the Bible of which has authority in my life says you are wrong. If God has not been willing to reveal Himself to you in the tangible manner that you require then I sure am not going to sit here and prove Him for you. Maybe you will be unsatisfied with this but I am just the carrier of a message. The rest is between you and God. My relationship with God and the evidence He has given me is more than sufficient for a continued walk. You see I am not trying to convince men with cleverly crafted ideas and human wisdom, I am trying to create a context in which one might encounter the living God. If that encounter should prove not to take place then I am going to move on and trust God in His wisdom to remain hidden.

When you said "God can be seen in his creations", you weren't meaning to suggest that it appears that the world is designed, and therefore God exists?  Please excuse that misinterpretation if that wasn't the case.  This is practically a knee-jerk response I see from creationists whenever I have these kinds of discussions.

I appreciate your response here.  While I'm rather convinced God isn't going to do anything to do something to convince me he exists (probably because he doesn't exist), I appreciate that you recognize you don't have any objective, non-personal reason to believe in God (else, you'd tell me, right? :)).

I'm not sure if you were just quoting a bible verse verbatim here, but these are the kinds of accusations that really grind my gears.  I don't worship anyone's ideas.  I don't, in fact, worship anyone in the place of God.  I don't "choose" to not believe in God.  I am a type of person who naturally cannot believe in something that has no evidence.  It may have taken me 17 years to realize that there is no evidence for the existence of God, but when I finally did, my faith rapidly faded.

Please take a moment to grease your gears because you completely pulled an accusation out of what I said that was not there... I said individuals who would rather worship there own ideas... To further clarify my meaning, I see my main mode of worshiping God as seeking to know His ways and then walking in them as opposed to walking according to my own ways. Hence the worshiping of ones own ideas as opposed to the worship of God.

I apologize.  I thought you were criticizing atheists for worshiping their own ideas instead of God.

Evidence comes as a God given reward for faith. I am fine with your choosing to reject that. You don't choose not to believe...whatever. If that is your philosophy in life you can have it.

That's not how it works.  Even if this were true, it doesn't matter.  I cannot fulfill the prerequisites for faith.  This is just how I am.

Where and in what way did I suggest you or anyone else is silly? Am I not allowed the same confidence as you demonstrate in the flaunting of your beliefs or would it be better for me to look at my feet and stutter? A martyr? Better yet a living martyr? All it took was a poem...so what exactly is your point?

No, I don't think you're allowed the same confidence.  The only thing I'm confident about in this context is I don't know.  I don't know how or if the Universe began.  I don't know if God does or does not exist, and I posit that you don't either.

If you are going to continue in the trampling of my garden spend a little more time trying to understand what it is I am saying and a little less time puking all over the place.

I'll admit that I'm being abrasive, and that I've made a few mistakes in interpreting what you say, but I'm unconvinced that this is entirely my fault (though it's probably mostly my fault :)).

An attack on non-believers...where do you get this stuff? You lashed out at me for a poem which suggested the personal experience of a believer in the Holy Spirit in the trials of life. I in fact see all you have presented as nothing more than a circular argument. I have done nothing but poetically express a personal experience which is backed by the Bible and Spirit in which I draw inspiration.

You're taking the word "attack" to mean something more er... violent than I meant it to.

Er... I've given a circular argument?  Point it out.

An attack on myself? More and more you demonstrate lack of understanding in the faith I profess. I am not sure what your 18 indoctrinated years accomplished but I truly hope that the years you have left are much more fruitful in your natural path.

What my 18 indoctrinated years accomplished?  Natural path?

After sifting through the logorrhea before me I have found two things worth noting: an assertion that God can not be proven as to exist based upon a criteria which rejects the context in which God has chosen to reveal Himself, and a finely tuned inability to communicate.

Speaking of logorrhea... ;)

It's not as if I handpicked my standard of evidence such that it necessitates a disbelief in God.  This seems to be what you're suggesting -- that's not it at all.  It's a doctrine of skepticism: if there isn't a good, tangible reason to believe in something, don't believe it.

It's the same doctrine you use to reject pixies, unicorns and big foot.

I understand that you've had a personal experience with God.  How do you know it was the Christian God?  How do you know that if you professed your allegiance to Allah, you wouldn't have a similar revelation?

[Towelie]

I understand that you've had a personal experience with God.  How do you know it was the Christian God?  How do you know that if you professed your allegiance to Allah, you wouldn't have a similar revelation?

This was already said, damn it:

God is Allah. Allah is God. They are the same god. Islam is based off of Christianity, which is based off of Judaism. They are all founded on the same god.

Change Allah to something like... the greek gods and answer that, Tuberload. lol

Another question:

How do you know that what you feel, or what you perceive as being God, isn't just something that your mind created, since the mind is powerful enough to do this, in order to cope with your struggles? You needed someone to love, and to turn to, and since you apparently didn't have any person to go to, isn't it entirely possible that your mind created this sense of God, which, in your situation, you had no problem giving yourself up to?

[Sidoh]

This was already said, damn it:

God is Allah. Allah is God. They are the same god. Islam is based off of Christianity, which is based off of Judaism. They are all founded on the same god.

Their origins do not matter.  They are distinct religions.

[rabbit]

God is Allah. Allah is God. They are the same god. Islam is based off of Christianity, which is based off of Judaism. They are all founded on the same god.

Completely wrong.  Muslims stopped believing in profits first, then the Jews, and then the Christians.

[Towelie]

Completely wrong.  Muslims stopped believing in profits first, then the Jews, and then the Christians.

This is completely irrelevant to what I was saying. They are all founded on the same god. The Islams believe Jesus wasn't a prophet, but they still think his teachings have value and worth. But, we aren't talking about prophets. We are talking about the god that is worshiped.

Their origins do not matter.  They are distinct religions.

They are distinct religions, but they still worship the same god. They may have different theological views about this god, but they still worship the same one.

[Sidoh]

They are distinct religions, but they still worship the same god. They may have different theological views about this god, but they still worship the same one.

They worship a God that has "the same" origin.  The God described Islam is not the same described in Christianity.  Just because they were derived from the same ideas does not mean they are the same God.

Regardless, you missed the point.

[Towelie]

They are distinct religions, but they still worship the same god. They may have different theological views about this god, but they still worship the same one.

They worship a God that has "the same" origin.  The God described Islam is not the same described in Christianity.  Just because they were derived from the same ideas does not mean they are the same God.

Regardless, you missed the point.

so, back when Islam was relatively new, why did they convert others but leave Christians alone? Christians definitely didn't see it this way, though.

[Sidoh]

They are distinct religions, but they still worship the same god. They may have different theological views about this god, but they still worship the same one.

They worship a God that has "the same" origin.  The God described Islam is not the same described in Christianity.  Just because they were derived from the same ideas does not mean they are the same God.

Regardless, you missed the point.

so, back when Islam was relatively new, why did they convert others but leave Christians alone? Christians definitely didn't see it this way, though.

Again, the origins don't matter.  I don't care if the same person started both religions.  It doesn't matter how things were 2,000 years ago.

Presently, both Christians and Muslims think members of the other religion are wrong, and are going to hell or its equivalent.

You pointed out something completely irrelevant (not to mention wrong :p), and it derailed what I was getting at.  Thanks.  YOU JERK. :(

[Towelie]

They are distinct religions, but they still worship the same god. They may have different theological views about this god, but they still worship the same one.

They worship a God that has "the same" origin.  The God described Islam is not the same described in Christianity.  Just because they were derived from the same ideas does not mean they are the same God.

Regardless, you missed the point.

so, back when Islam was relatively new, why did they convert others but leave Christians alone? Christians definitely didn't see it this way, though.

Again, the origins don't matter.  I don't care if the same person started both religions.  It doesn't matter how things were 2,000 years ago.

Presently, both Christians and Muslims think members of the other religion are wrong, and are going to hell or its equivalent.

You pointed out something completely irrelevant (not to mention wrong :p), and it derailed what I was getting at.  Thanks.  YOU JERK. :(

You're looking at their specific theologies, damn it. Origins DO matter in what I am pointing out.

According to Francis Edwards Peters, "The Qur'an insists, Muslims believe, and historians affirm that Muhammad and his followers worship the same God as the Jews (29:46). The Quran's Allah is the same Creator God who covenanted with Abraham".

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah)

The fucking Qur'an states that they worship the same god. Need any more proof? :P