Non-locality

nebulaJP · #1 2nd June 2012, 09:42 AM

If God wants to reveal himself to humanity through overt miracles why only in one place and one "time" (the span from Adam to 70AD)? Why not all places and all times with his message constantly updated by new generations of prophets who perform overt miracles to prove they have God's message?

That way everyone would know it's really God communicating to us and it would be a matter of rejecting God or not. As it is the issue is whether or not you accept the Bible is historically accurate.

Thanks in advance.

talitha · #2 3rd June 2012, 04:38 PM

Without a sense of place the work is often reduced to a cry of voices in empty rooms, a literature of the self, at its best poetic music; at its worst a thin gruel of the ego.
William Kennedy

ViaCrucis · #3 3rd June 2012, 04:59 PM

Originally Posted by nebulaJP

If God wants to reveal himself to humanity through overt miracles why only in one place and one "time" (the span from Adam to 70AD)? Why not all places and all times with his message constantly updated by new generations of prophets who perform overt miracles to prove they have God's message?

That way everyone would know it's really God communicating to us and it would be a matter of rejecting God or not. As it is the issue is whether or not you accept the Bible is historically accurate.

Thanks in advance.

I don't know why you chose 70 CE as your arbitrary end-point.

But to address your question generally, I don't believe God's revelation has really been about miracles or things of that nature. From a Christian vantage point the Revelation of God is Jesus Christ Himself. God's condescension into our humanity and His active and living participation in and with us in our humanity. Everything else is, in a word, commentary.

-CryptoLutheran

golgotha61 · #4 3rd June 2012, 05:38 PM

If God wants to reveal himself to humanity through overt miracles why only in one place and one "time" (the span from Adam to 70AD)?

Like Crucis, I find it interesting you end the "revelation" at 70 AD. God's first irruption into humanity was through the covenant, then Christ is the final revelation. His word serves as the recording of His revelation done in a progressive fashion.

Why not all places and all times with his message constantly updated by new generations of prophets who perform overt miracles to prove they have God's message?

To update connotes the need to improve the program. God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow, He never changes and never needs updated. We are the ones who need reprogrammed, so to speak.

The purpose of the "Great Commission" and mission is to take His Word, which is the record of His revelation, to every nation and people. God's message was proven by the resurrection of His Son from the dead.

That way everyone would know it's really God communicating to us and it would be a matter of rejecting God or not. As it is the issue is whether or not you accept the Bible is historically accurate.

How much time do you put into Bible study? What resources do you use to extract the meanings of the Scriptures? How familiar are you with bibliology?

nebulaJP · #5 3rd June 2012, 11:32 PM

Originally Posted by ViaCrucis

But to address your question generally, I don't believe God's revelation has really been about miracles or things of that nature. From a Christian vantage point the Revelation of God is Jesus Christ Himself. God's condescension into our humanity and His active and living participation in and with us in our humanity. Everything else is, in a word, commentary.

-CryptoLutheran

What I don't understand is, if God wants us to know about Jesus why did he give us the message in a way that leaves room for doubt? Why would he not want the world to know for sure that the Bible is his word and that he sent his son to the planet? Most of the world sees the Bible as a collection of mythologies and religious writings but not as true history or God's word.

For example, one way he could have made it indisputable would be if there were always some Christians able to perform overt miracles.

Faulty · #6 4th June 2012, 01:46 AM

Originally Posted by nebulaJP

What I don't understand is, if God wants us to know about Jesus why did he give us the message in a way that leaves room for doubt? Why would he not want the world to know for sure that the Bible is his word and that he sent his son to the planet? Most of the world sees the Bible as a collection of mythologies and religious writings but not as true history or God's word.

For example, one way he could have made it indisputable would be if there were always some Christians able to perform overt miracles.

Exactly what would you consider as a message to all humanity that would leave no room for doubt? Do you have an example of this?

nebulaJP · #7 4th June 2012, 02:18 AM

Originally Posted by Faulty

Exactly what would you consider as a message to all humanity that would leave no room for doubt? Do you have an example of this?

I didn't say he gave us A message THAT leaves room for doubt. I said he gave us THE message, about Jesus, in A WAY that leaves room for doubt, as evidenced by the fact that the Bible isn't universally believed.

nebulaJP · #8 4th June 2012, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by golgotha61

The purpose of the "Great Commission" and mission is to take His Word, which is the record of His revelation, to every nation and people. God's message was proven by the resurrection of His Son from the dead.

At this point in history every nation and people (save perhaps a few remote tribes) has heard the Gospel yet only about 32% of the world's population believes it. Why wouldn't God want everyone to know the gospel is true? If we knew this then everyone would be able to make a decision about whether to accept Christ as savior or not. With the way it is currently though, before anyone can make a decision about whether to accept Christ, they first have to make a decision about whether or not they believe the Gospel is true.

I believe that if God wanted to communicate with humans he would make sure we knew the message was coming from him. Why would he communicate with us in such a way that his word would be mistaken for just another holy book by a majority of the world's population? What would be the benefit of this?

bling · #9 4th June 2012, 12:31 PM

Originally Posted by nebulaJP

If God wants to reveal himself to humanity through overt miracles why only in one place and one "time" (the span from Adam to 70AD)? Why not all places and all times with his message constantly updated by new generations of prophets who perform overt miracles to prove they have God's message?

That way everyone would know it's really God communicating to us and it would be a matter of rejecting God or not. As it is the issue is whether or not you accept the Bible is historically accurate.

Thanks in advance.

First off: Your object while here on earth is not know that the Christian God does or does not exist.

Secondly: Accepting the Bible is not your objective.

What do you need to best fulfill your earthly objective?

Why would God want to “reveal himself to humanity through overt miracles” if that does not help humans?

talitha · #10 4th June 2012, 01:17 PM

from Matthew 12:

Then some of the Pharisees and teachers of the law said to (Jesus), “Teacher, we want to see a sign from you.” He answered, “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.