Can You Trust God?

Forethought: I always find it intriguing that we look only to the New Testament to understand what it means to be a Christian. I’ve seen some people outright reject reading the Old Testament altogether because Christ’s ministry is all that is necessary to understand what it is God wants, and who God is.

Anyways, here’s my thoughts for the day:

We often speak of God as someone we can place full trust in. Have you ever considered what that means?

Look to the 10 Commandments and we assume that everything is clean cut. But there is one particular commandment that may not be fully understood.

‘anah sheqer ‘ed rea’
Or “Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness against thy neighbor”

We simplify this to “Thou shalt not lie”, but that’s not really what it is saying. It’s saying not to condemn someone for something they didn’t do. The key is “‘ed”, which speaks for testimony, evidence, witness in the context of seeing something take place.

Understanding this is key to understanding the value of full trust in our Father. Because, as much as we would like to believe God does not use lies himself, the truth is far from it. God has, at least once, used deception to bring about His Will.

1 Kings 22:19-23
Then Micaiah said, “therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on His Thrown, and all the hosts of heaven standing by, on His right hand and on His left. And the Lord said “Who will persuade Ahab to go up, that he may fall at Remote Gilead?” So one spoke in this manner, and another spoke in that manner. “Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord and said “I will persuade him”. The Lord said to him “In what way?” So he said “I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets” And the Lord said “You shall persuade him, and also prevail. Go out and do so.” Therefore look! The Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these propehts of yours, and the Lord has declared disaster against you.”

As you read the rest of the story, you find that it is true- Ahab followed the advice of his prophets and was destroyed in the process.

We believe that healthy trust is built simply on honesty. But that is not what a trust in God is about, it’s about trusting in His vision. It’s about believing that once we surrender completely to God, whatever God puts us in position to do, it’s not meaningless- that He will make our role count.

Simply moving to make the bare minimum commitment to being a follower of Christ is simple when compared to the reality of becoming a Servant of God. The level of trust, even when God uses deception such as the story in 1 Kings, is something a true Christian has to come to grips with. And that is the most difficult task of all.

Not many people know this about me, but I am a Red Letter Christian. This doesn't really mean much, though, in terms of spirituality. Basically, it means that one follows the teachings of Christ... but that's it. Nothing else in the Bible matters. In my case, this is mostly because I do not interpret the bible as a literal thing in any sense of the word. Funny enough, the Methodist Church (the place I attend) has the same view: United Methodist Church on the Bible . We are not biblical literalists; we believe that humans were inspired to write and tell these stories, inspired by the spirit of God, but were not guided directly by God's hand. Because of this, human society can evolve beyond the text of the Bible. And, much of it can be seen as outdated.

I realize this is a problem for many Abrahamic believers, but.. oh well. This worldview makes more sense to me, anyway. That is my real justification for ignoring much of the Old Testament. I find what does work, and I use it... but, ultimately, I'm concerned with the spirit of the life that Jesus Christ lived. His generosity and his unwillingness to be anything more than who he was.. it is inspiring.

This passage, then, is really indicative of a lesson we should all learn: even when we are perfectly in line with the Force... we can end up destroyed. Just because we listen to the Force and try to act in accordance with it does not mean we will come out on top. We are used in many ways. It is up to us to create our own life anyway. From the Sith perspective, I have to say that sitting back and being a pawn in the universe's game is ill-advised. Life is complex and requires that we participate in it. Trust in the Force doesn't mean accepting defeat; it means grabbing life by the horns and being open to being flailed about in the arena! It is only when we move with the bull, remain loose yet steadfast... only then will we life with grace and openness. The Force may whip us around... put us in ruin... it could do anything.

It is, surely, hard to accept this. We believe that when we live our best life, we will be rewarded. This is not the case. In fact, we must take our reward.

For me, God, or the idea of God, is beyond comprehension. Many people that debate the validitity of the Bible ususally use the arguement that, over the years, the translations have changed more and more until the final product is not what it once was, and many things are lost. And to that I have to agree. Translations change, it is not possible to maintain perfect translations across languages, cultures, and ages.

But in the end I have a simple philosophy. God is benevolent and loves his children (or at least that is what I beleive). We are bad children, we dig in our heels and fight against Him all the time, but he still loves us and guides us. So, despite tranlation issues and changes in some messages, I believe one simple truth. He loves us and has our best intentions in mind.

We can look to Job, whom God allowed the Devil to openly attack and make his life miserable. He lost everything, his family, his wealth, even his health. But he refused to lose faith in his God, because he knew it was a test. Can we consider this a cruel and unusual punishment? Yes, but I believe his final rewards will be all the greater for his undying faith.

As a being that, I believe, is outside of time and physical space itself, we cannot possbily be able to understand the full picture. We aren't meant to. Walk by faith, not by sight and all that.

So can we trust God. Yes. Is it easy? No, and it never was meant to be. But then again, all things worth doing are never easy.

As Arisaig said, the idea or concept of God is beyond our comprehension, I have being lately thinking that everything that we would like to do for God should be done through doing it to others. I think that God is in the things he created, the universe, so if we want to make God happy we should make other happy, or the world a better place.
So trusting God is trusting in ourselves first and then trusting on others, and that "everything else shall be added unto you"

The Bible and scriptures are a good basis on which to look for answers, but we need to put that answers in context or ourselves and the people around us, to be proactive and factors of change around us.

It's true, too much attention is placed on the New testament and not enough on the Old. I actually don't like to make the distinction though. It's all one scripture. However, a local church that I watch on TV every Sunday is good about referring to the Old and New equally.

As much as I believe in God, I still have doubts, problems trusting God. Anyone who says they don't have doubts is lying. Anyway, too many bad things have happened to me in my life that I have trouble trusting that God is looking out for me. I kind of feel like he made me broken from the beginning.

So yeah, I'm sure he's out there. I've felt his presence before, but just haven't found him any time in probably a decade.

Aharon wrote: It's all one scripture.

Not exactly. It's about 66 cherry-picked scriptures rolled into one book. This is important because it shows the different authorship (or purported authorship) of each book, giving us context to the stories themselves.

what about all the Christians that God DIDNT save from the lions?
maybe youre one of them?

trust in god but for gods sakes dont stop rowing, tie your camel, and remember to keep your powder dry

Anyway, too many bad things have happened to me in my life that I have trouble trusting that God is looking out for me.

Hubris beyond contemplation to imagine that God is looking out for you

And twice that to imagine that you can comprehend what is best for you in the way that the infinite and almighty does.

God is many things (including but not limited to all things)

however, despite the infinite and all things that God is, God is NOT a giant hand that will descend from the skies to stop a car crash, or pull smoke from your lungs, or rearrange your genes to make you taller, smarter, or less prone to this, that or the other woe.

Ever since I saw Tangled, I cannot help being reminded of the central conflict in that movie when ever someone uses the "But perhaps you hate a thing and it is good for you; and perhaps you love a thing and it is bad for you. And Allah Knows, while you know not." line. Oh, you want to venture out of the tower (i.e. think and judge for yourself)? Please, don't be naive. You're little still and dumb and ill equipped, what with being less than perfectly omniscient of all that awaits you out there (and of course we make no effort to educate you on any of it, lest you get cocky and try walking out all the same). No, better stay inside, trust mother instead. Mother knows best.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fi8kYcl2Y38

Why is it that we recognize the relationship between Rapunzel and her witch mother as abusive from that scene alone, even without the context of the latter exploiting the former for her magic hair (analogous to an addict's relationship with his drug), something for which the victim is at worst to be pitied and at best to be liberated, but yet if the every same occurs between a believer and their religious dogma - or indeed a specific character like a God they believe in - it suddenly becomes something to be respected and left alone and even envied sometimes?

or indeed a specific character like a God they believe in - it suddenly becomes something to be respected and left alone and even envied sometimes?

If they believe in God as a Character, then perhaps they do need to be liberated.

If they believe in God the same way most people believe in Gravity, then I don't see the harm.

Sure, I suppose there are people who don't view God as a character, but as a force of nature instead. But are they the ones typically questioning God's motives, or even asserting that it has one? Now I haven't conducted any studies on this, but it appears to me that by far the majority of people who believe in a god or more, do believe it to be an agend with power and a will of its own. I would also assert without any further proof that within the context of this thread, we are not primarily concerned with conceptions of God that are not persons by these crucial charcteristics for they would for that reason not be subject to our trust or distrust as an aspect of relationships between persons.

I am furthermore rather confident in saying that insofar as a person, who believes in a personal god for the way most people believe in gravity, exists, they have not done enough to inform the rest of mankind of it yet. I for one have yet to meet anybody like that. But regardless, even if anybody does, what I am criticizing is this specific kind of relationship (or treatment thereof) where the victim is either themselves convinced that blind uncritical trust is paramount or is advised by others to not question or criticize the other party. Whether they believe in that party the way most people believe in gravity should in my humble opinion be unimportant in evaluating the healthiness of that relationship.

"Those who never rebelled against God or at some point in their lives shaken their fists in the face of heaven, have never encountered G-d at all." -- Catherine Marshall

I cannot speak for other texts, but readings of the Christian scriptures encourage questioning and discovering and testing of spirits, rather than a blind obedience.

Furthermore, to the title question, one can trust G-d to be G-d always, in the same way that I can always trust Gisteron to be Gisteron. That speaks nothing of the relationship that Gist's plans may have to my well-being, but knowing him I feel he would attempt to minimize active harm upon my person if he perceived his machinations would lead toward it. Trusting that someone has our best interests is different than trusting them to be who and what they are. That's why scripture encourages us to know G-d, to understand His heart and actions as best our finite minds are able, to love what He loves and to act how He would act. Putting our wills in accordance with G-d's will removes any conflict of interest that may exist there, and G-d's plans will work toward a better future for all, rather than just ourselves.

This is the way G-d is spoken of in Christian scripture.

Perhaps a better question is "can you trust yourself?"

I admittedly no longer attend a Christian church and I haven't claimed to be a Christian in decades, but I was once on board with the idea that God was infallible and whether we understood his motives or not, he could be trusted to do what is best for all mankind even if it seems wrong at the time. What I have discovered for myself over time is that in my life, it doesn't matter if I can trust God completely if I cannot trust myself to act accordingly. Trust in God, or the Force, means nothing if I do not have the will to trust in them when all evidence says I shouldn't.

The example of Job was used earlier, and it may help to illustrate my point. Job put his complete faith in God despite being punished over and over. God was testing him, and Job placed his trust in his God throughout. More importantly, though, Job did not waiver from his personal convictions. He followed God's word despite all of the evidence to the contrary. It would seem that God had abandoned him, but he remained steadfast in his belief that God could be trusted. This was not through the will of God. It was his will; he decided to remain faithful. When he was finally rewarded, he gave God due credit, but I would say that Job was rewarded for being true to himself. He fought through the hardships. He made it happen for himself.

There is a reason I didn't ask the question "Can you trust yourself", it's because it is an entirely different question. It's also an entirely different question to ask "Can you trust what man understands of God".

To ask "Can I trust myself" or "Can I trust what others understand of God" is not answering whether or not you can place your life in the hands of a being that you claim to give everything of yourself to.

Thanks for clarifying, Alethea. I misunderstood the real question you were asking and I'm not sure I have an answer for the real question. I'll have to think about it. Thank you.

JamesSand wrote:

Anyway, too many bad things have happened to me in my life that I have trouble trusting that God is looking out for me.

Hubris beyond contemplation to imagine that God is looking out for you

And twice that to imagine that you can comprehend what is best for you in the way that the infinite and almighty does.

God is many things (including but not limited to all things)

however, despite the infinite and all things that God is, God is NOT a giant hand that will descend from the skies to stop a car crash, or pull smoke from your lungs, or rearrange your genes to make you taller, smarter, or less prone to this, that or the other woe.

God's not looking out for us? He is omnipresent and omnipotent, so why not?

But I get your point. He lets bad things happen. It isn't his fault. We screwed up the world, not Him.

Aharon wrote: God's not looking out for us? He is omnipresent and omnipotent, so why not?

But I get your point. He lets bad things happen. It isn't his fault. We screwed up the world, not Him.

And of course we have the power to screw up his plan and he is powerless to fix it, because that omnipotence thing you mentioned as recently as the previous line is all but forgotten now. Or, alterntively, what ever we call "screwed up" was his plan all along and... well, do I even need to add on to that any more?

There is a reason the problem of evil (or suffering, to keep it a tad more modern) is still being brought up, millennia after Epicurus. Whether we accept it or not, if we have a set of premises that are contrary, their conjunction is false, no matter how many more assumptions we try and add to the mix.