How To Find The Truth About God?

[Freodin]

God shows Himself to be real and we can only know that which God reveals to us about Himself.

So, you need God's help to understand God, but God doesn't help you.

Yep, seems fair.

 

[GospelS]

So, you need God's help to understand God, but God doesn't help you.

Yep, seems fair.

God helps to discern the truth about Him that He is real and gives us the understanding that which is needed and that which a human brain can receive.

 

[Freodin]

God helps to discern the truth about Him that He is real and gives us the understanding that which is needed and that which a human brain can receive.

How would you know that?

You cannot, by your own admission, "discern" this. You are depending on the "understanding" that God alledgedly gives you.

But in the same way, you are still lacking the capability to discern whether this "understanding" that you now claim to have is correct or not.

It's a logical dilemma which you cannot solve. It is a logical dilemma which should make you reconsider your claims of "wisdom" and "understanding".
The very fact that you cannot see this dilemma is evidence that you are sorely lacking in wisdom and understanding.

 

[GospelS]

How would you know that?

I know that because God gave me this understanding.

But in the same way, you are still lacking the capability to discern whether this "understanding" that you now claim to have is correct or not.

Who said that. This understanding is from God and it is correct. And I'm not lacking capability to discern that this understanding is from God and it is correct because the capability to discern this is also from God.

It's a logical dilemma which you cannot solve. It is a logical dilemma which should make you reconsider your claims of "wisdom" and "understanding". The very fact that you cannot see this dilemma is evidence that you are sorely lacking in wisdom and understanding.

What i say will seem for you that I'm in the logical dilemma but its rather the opposite because your wisdom cannot understand what i have said.

 

[Freodin]

I know that because God gave me this understanding.

That remains to be seen.

Who said that. This understanding is from God and it is correct. And I'm not lacking capability to discern that this understanding is from God and it is correct because the capability to discern this is also from God.

So, you know because you know. Basically you claim that your own fallibility has been replaced by God's infallibility, and so you simply can no longer be wrong in this regard, because your ability to discern is directly from God.

But now consider this. Assume that you were wrong. I am not saying you are. Just assume it, for the sake of the argument.

How would you know? You are claiming that you cannot be wrong, so you cannot even acknowledge that you could be wrong. So if you were wrong, you would have no way to discern it.

And that, basically, is the problem. If you have no way of discerning if you are wrong... you also have no way of discerning if you are right... and so your whole claims falls apart.

What i say will seem for you that I'm in the logical dilemma but its rather the opposite because you have no wisdom to understand what i have said.

I find it amazing that you folks are so quick to claim that God granted you the wisdom to understand him... but he constantly fails to grant you folks the wisdom of understanding how to talk to other humans.

 

[GospelS]

But now consider this. Assume that you were wrong. I am not saying you are. Just assume it, for the sake of the argument.

How would you know? You are claiming that you cannot be wrong, so you cannot even acknowledge that you could be wrong. So if you were wrong, you would have no way to discern it.

I'm sorry. I tried. But its not possible to assume that I'm wrong even for the sake of the argument. If i do not know something i will acknowledge that i do not know or i will use the words like "i think" or "my opinion". If I'm unsure, then i will even say that i could be wrong. But that's not the case with the questions you have asked of me. I already have the understanding to discern right from wrong.

I find it amazing that you folks are so quick to claim that God granted you the wisdom to understand him... but he constantly fails to grant you folks the wisdom of understanding how to talk to other humans.

I'm sorry. May be my word formation was not appropriate causing this misunderstanding and what i meant to say and how you perceived it. I have edited my comment. I do not mean to say that you have no wisdom. I meant to say that you do not have the wisdom of God with you since you are an atheist. So please forgive me for that.

 

[Freodin]

I'm sorry. I tried. But its not possible to assume that I'm wrong even for the sake of the argument. If i do not know something i will acknowledge that i do not know or i will use the words like "i think" or "my opinion". If I'm unsure, then i will even say that i could be wrong. But that's not the case with the questions you have asked of me. I already have the understanding to discern right from wrong.

Just consider this. This has nothing to do with uncertainty, or lack of knowledge, or opinion.
It is just an assumption. A "what if".

And you cannot even do that.

That was exactly my point. You cannot even imagine being wrong. That makes it impossible for you to know if you are right.

I'm sorry. May be my word formation was not appropriate causing this misunderstanding and what i meant to say and how you perceived it. I have edited my comment. I do not mean to say that you have no wisdom. I meant to say that you do not have the wisdom of God with you since you are an atheist. So please forgive me for that.

You misunderstood me here. I am not offended, so there is no need to apologize.

What I tried to say: you claim to have the "wisdom of God". One would think that this "wisdom of God", comming from God, being meant to understand God, would give you the ability to explain this... but this certain wisdom is something that God always forgets to confer to his believers.
For a God who allegedly told his followers to "go and make disciples of all the world", this is quite an oversight.

 

[GospelS]

Just consider this. This has nothing to do with uncertainty, or lack of knowledge, or opinion.
It is just an assumption. A "what if".

And you cannot even do that.

That was exactly my point. You cannot even imagine being wrong. That makes it impossible for you to know if you are right.

Of course, no one can see something in real and then imagine that what they are seeing is not seeing or "what if" they are not seeing it. When someone sees something then they are seeing it. What imagination has to do with it. That would be mad. When you see your hand then you see it and it is really your hand and you know it, there is no point in imagining your hand is not yours and it is not there and "what ifs" do not apply or make any sense nor you can assume its not your hand and there's no hand.

You misunderstood me here. I am not offended, so there is no need to apologize.

What I tried to say: you claim to have the "wisdom of God". One would think that this "wisdom of God", comming from God, being meant to understand God, would give you the ability to explain this... but this certain wisdom is something that God always forgets to confer to his believers.
For a God who allegedly told his followers to "go and make disciples of all the world", this is quite an oversight.

If you are talking about other folks/believers who did not have the wisdom on how to talk to other humans, then i do not know them to comment on that. May be those believers are not following God the way they ought to. Because that's when a believer would not have the wisdom of understanding how to talk to other humans. On behalf of them, i ask your forgiveness. Please do not ignore the love of God for you just because you find some believers without wisdom of such understanding. It is not God who has forgotten to give such wisdom but it was those folks who are not following God properly.

 

[Freodin]

Of course, no one can see something in real and then imagine that what they are seeing is not seeing or "what if" they are not seeing it. When someone sees something then they are seeing it. What imagination has to do with it. That would be mad. When you see your hand then you see it and it is really your hand and you know it, there is no point in imagining your hand is not yours and it is not there and "what ifs" do not apply or make any sense or you cannot assume its not your hand.

Again, you are just proving my point.

Of course you can ask "what if" in each and every situation. And then you try to make reasonable arguments about the truth or falsehood of this assumtion.
Reasonable arguments. That's the point. You have none. You cannot have any, as long as you don't start with the realization that you might be wrong.

It is very well possible that, after this process, you find that your "what if" is incorrect... must be incorrect... and your initial position is the correct one.
This is a well-established method in logic, or in mathematics, called "reductio ad absurdum".
In its most perfect form, it starts with an assumption... then followes the logical path... and finally shows that our initial assumption would need to be false.
I can show you an example of this, if you are interested.

But in this case, in your case, you are not able to do that. You are not willing to do that. You have no means to test your assumption - positive or negative. All you have is your conviction.

Which is fine. But it gets into trouble when you are faced with a contradicting conviction.

If you are talking about other folks/believers who did not have the wisdom on how to talk to other humans, then i do not know them to comment on that. May be those believers are not following God the way they ought to. Because that's when a believer would not have the wisdom of understanding how to talk to other humans. On behalf of them, i ask your forgiveness. Please do not ignore the love of God for you just because you find some believers without wisdom of such understanding. It is not God who has forgotten to give such wisdom but it was those folks who are not following God properly.

I am talking to you. And it is obvious, painfully obvious, that you have no idea to talk to someone who does not believe in your worldview.
And neither has any "believer" I have ever met, in my not-that-short life on this planet. No priest, no preacher, no layperson believer. They all have absolutely no idea of how to present their ideas to me. Because, like you, they simply cannot understand that they might be wrong.

A poor testemony for a wisdom providing deity.

 

[GospelS]

Again, you are just proving my point.

Of course you can ask "what if" in each and every situation. And then you try to make reasonable arguments about the truth or falsehood of this assumtion.
Reasonable arguments. That's the point. You have none. You cannot have any, as long as you don't start with the realization that you might be wrong.

It is very well possible that, after this process, you find that your "what if" is incorrect... must be incorrect... and your initial position is the correct one.
This is a well-established method in logic, or in mathematics, called "reductio ad absurdum".
In its most perfect form, it starts with an assumption... then followes the logical path... and finally shows that our initial assumption would need to be false.
I can show you an example of this, if you are interested.

But in this case, in your case, you are not able to do that. You are not willing to do that. You have no means to test your assumption - positive or negative. All you have is your conviction.

Which is fine. But it gets into trouble when you are faced with a contradicting conviction.

So what would be the meaning of doing this when the reality does not change. What will be achieved of it. When i see my hand and then say what if I'm wrong and I do not have my hand. Why should we do like this when the final conclusion and the reality remains the same and my hand is present just like it is before.

I am talking to you. And it is obvious, painfully obvious, that you have no idea to talk to someone who does not believe in your worldview.
And neither has any "believer" I have ever met, in my not-that-short life on this planet. No priest, no preacher, no layperson believer. They all have absolutely no idea of how to present their ideas to me. Because, like you, they simply cannot understand that they might be wrong.

A poor testemony for a wisdom providing deity.

Truth cannot be played around with it. We do not have wrongs or assumptions to present. What you want might be possible when we have no evidence or assurance of our God. We have evidence and assurance that we are even willing to be killed and persecuted for the sake of our faith if need be.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

What you said is that i'm derailing the point from biblical law and biblical punishment. So i came back to that point and explained how the law is not separated from the punishment.

Contradiction. You still believe that homosexuality is against your religious law, but you no longer believe in the penalty that was orginally attached to it. You've told me that homosexuality is immoral, but that homosexuals should not be put to death. You've separated the law from the punishment.

Old Testament law never allowed a homosexual to let someone else die in his place, nor did it call for him to go to hell forever. It called for the community to pick up rocks and throw them at him until he's dead. You've separated that punishment. But you're saying you're not separating the law from the punishment. This does not appear to be wisdom to me.

Ceremonial laws make a distinction between what is clean and unclean outside and that which we put inside our body. You know homosexuality is immoral because it comes from within a human body/mind/soul.

That's silly. The desire for shellfish comes from the body/mind/soul, but you're not unclean until you put the shellfish into your body. Similarly, homosexuals were not unclean until they put things in their body.

Jesus never commented on homosexuality, but if he did, he might've said that they are guilty merely for lusting after other men in their hearts. But they would not be unclean in the ritualistic sense if they never put something in their bodies a homosexual context.

The matter is that they are living in the God's camp. Doing unclean things inside the camp makes the camp unclean. Like a drop of dirt inside your water would pollute and make all water unclean. So, all people shall maintain ritual cleanliness and purify themselves to live inside the God's camp keeping it clean for rituals to be performed.

Eating a shrimp makes the whole camp unclean. As ridiculous as this is, you have not even been able to be consistent in defending the position. I'm sorry but I have not found the wisdom here that was advertised. Have you been praying correctly, asking for wisdom?

 

[Freodin]

So what would be the meaning of doing this when the reality does not change. What will be achieved of it. When i see my hand and then say what if I'm wrong and I do not have my hand. Why should we do like this when the final conclusion and the reality remains the same and my hand is present just like it is before.

Truth cannot be played around with it. We do not have wrongs or assumptions to present. What you want might be possible when we have no evidence or assurance of our God. We have evidence and assurance that we are even willing to be killed and persecuted for the sake of our faith if need be.

Well, it seems there is no way that you can even slightly attempt to see my point. Which again speaks for my point that believers like you simply do not know how to converse with unbelievers.

But then... I can see your point. I can make it my own.

I know that there is no God. This is the truth, this is reality. No God, no gods, no deities. I have evidence and assurance. I know that this is true, because it is knowledge, and my atheistic wisdom tells me that I am right.

Now, shall we meet for a duel in order to find out who of us is more willing to be persecuted for the sake of our faith... which seems to be the only way for you to establish truth?

 

[Tinker Grey]

Well, it seems there is no way that you can even slightly attempt to see my point. Which again speaks for my point that believers like you simply do not know how to converse with unbelievers.

But then... I can see your point. I can make it my own.

I know that there is no God. This is the truth, this is reality. No God, no gods, no deities. I have evidence and assurance. I know that this is true, because it is knowledge, and my atheistic wisdom tells me that I am right.

Now, shall we meet for a duel in order to find out who of us is more willing to be persecuted for the sake of our faith... which seems to be the only way for you to establish truth?

I'm tempted to start a thread for these implicit presuppositionalists asking about some fine point of theology. Let's see how many disparate views we can't get from those that can't be wrong 'cause "God told me."

 

[GospelS]

Contradiction. You still believe that homosexuality is against your religious law, but you no longer believe in the penalty that was orginally attached to it. You've told me that homosexuality is immoral, but that homosexuals should not be put to death. You've separated the law from the punishment.

Old Testament law never allowed a homosexual to let someone else die in his place, nor did it call for him to go to hell forever. It called for the community to pick up rocks and throw them at him until he's dead. You've separated that punishment. But you're saying you're not separating the law from the punishment. This does not appear to be wisdom to me.

Redemption is one aspect of the nature and purpose of the law for its fulfillment.

That's silly. The desire for shellfish comes from the body/mind/soul, but you're not unclean until you put the shellfish into your body. Similarly, homosexuals were not unclean until they put things in their body.

Jesus never commented on homosexuality, but if he did, he might've said that they are guilty merely for lusting after other men in their hearts. But they would not be unclean in the ritualistic sense if they never put something in their bodies a homosexual context.

Eating shellfish results in bodily/physical uncleanliness while homosexuality defiles body, mind, and soul.

Eating a shrimp makes the whole camp unclean. As ridiculous as this is, you have not even been able to be consistent in defending the position. I'm sorry but I have not found the wisdom here that was advertised. Have you been praying correctly, asking for wisdom?

To receive understanding you need to acknowledge God and fear God. Then you will receive wisdom that gives you understanding about these things. This is what i have advertised in my OP.

 

[GospelS]

Well, it seems there is no way that you can even slightly attempt to see my point. Which again speaks for my point that believers like you simply do not know how to converse with unbelievers.

But then... I can see your point. I can make it my own.

I know that there is no God. This is the truth, this is reality. No God, no gods, no deities. I have evidence and assurance. I know that this is true, because it is knowledge, and my atheistic wisdom tells me that I am right.

Now, shall we meet for a duel in order to find out who of us is more willing to be persecuted for the sake of our faith... which seems to be the only way for you to establish truth?

I see your point. But what you say cannot be applied to a spiritual context.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I know that there is no God. This is the truth, this is reality. No God, no gods, no deities. I have evidence and assurance. I know that this is true, because it is knowledge, and my atheistic wisdom tells me that I am right.

Since you don't apparently want to know the truth, and apparently are not seeking the truth, why are you reading posts that tell the truth, and that lead to the truth, on a Christian forum,

in the section set up on purpose to answer such unbelief with the reason(s) for the truth ?

 

[cvanwey]

I have already answered that: Humans are accountable because they neither have capacity nor they humbled themselves and willing to accept what God told them. If only you have have the humility to accept God, He Himself will take care of leading you to truth.

In case you were not already aware... I was a devout believer/follower for decades. It is only when I decided to instead read the Bible for myself, verses awaiting my weekly (sermon / book report) in church, and also in Bible study, is when I started to actually question.

I did so in earnest for a couple of years. And since then, I have found many passages which appear in conflict with human discovery. It would appear God was not guiding me accordingly, when I started to question.

Thus, your assertion that God 'leads in truth' is not applicable in my case.

Hence, no wonder I'm now a skeptic to such asserted claims...

Since humans minds are flawed, you put God's word to be true and let Him lead you to an assessment. That is how you come to a correct assessment and not be mistaken. You will know that assessment is correct because then your eyes and ears will be opened.

You have not answered my question...

If humans are flawed, how do you know you have even chosen the correct claimed God to follow? You are aware there exists many differing god(s), right? I would imagine you have not explored them ALL And even if you have, if you are flawed, how were you 'effectively' able to rule out all others?

This for given for church on how it should function. Not for the world outside church. It still is normative for a church leadership structure. Church is God's organization and He decides how it should function. Any man or woman should not have a problem with it and all are under God's authority within His church. This is not about inequality but about proper functioning of the church. Anyone who walks in the truth will know and understand how necessary and awesome it is to practice this within a church. Do you see how you misunderstood God's word without His leading?

You have basically stated that this is how God want's it, in church. And that's it! (i.e.) 'He decides how it should function'. You do not provide any reason(s).

You also state 'It still is normative for a church leadership structure.' Which further reinforces my prior posted observation that: 'it seems more likely whomever wrote such a passage was simply reinforcing the normative thoughts and behaviors of the era; without any true just cause to assert as such.'

So no, I certainly would not see how I misunderstood God's Word. But more importantly, you furnished no explanation as to how I might have actually misunderstood.

You can 'spin' the cited text however you like, hence 'Christian apologetics'

Yeah, it hardly sounds like an ultimate sacrifice for you because you are a mere human and away from God's path. You have no understanding of God's wisdom and neither you care to accept His wisdom. Also, no understanding of perfect LOVE and how that it works yet no regard to receive it as it is presented to you.

Again, if humans are flawed, how do YOU know you have chosen the correct claimed /asserted God to attempt following?

It is not "if you do not believe" then you will fry.

"18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son."

The above is an example of coercion or an ultimatum. God is stating humans are 'broken', and the only way to fix what is 'broken', is to believe an anecdotal story line. Well, I don't. So if what God states is true, God's "wisdom' is to tell me to believe in it anyways, or I will fry.

People are not seeing their utter ruin in which they are already living. We ourselves have already fallen into the hell fire overtaken by our sins and looking for God to rescue us.

Again, since you are a flawed human, you may be following the script of a false claimed god. How would you know, since you are flawed?

You see, I know how (I) evaluate such claims. I compare such claims with peer reviewed reality. And when such claims don't appear to align, I then doubt such claims. What is (your) method for discerning truth?

If humans have no capacity and cannot control what they believe, then this is what they must do all their life, humble themselves and keep saying "God, i have no capacity to discern nor control over what i believe. If you are real, then would you please have mercy on me and lead me to yourself so that i may know you, understand all this and believe". If you genuinely do this, then it is upon God and He is faithful and wont hold you accountable since you already kept asking God for His help all your life.

I prayed for contact/guidance/communication for decades. No luck. Lying to myself would not fool such a claimed God, or would it?

 

[Nihilist Virus]

Redemption is one aspect of the nature and purpose of the law for its fulfillment.

We're talking about punishment. Again you dodge and derail! This is wisdom?

Eating shellfish results in bodily/physical uncleanliness while homosexuality defiles body, mind, and soul.

I'm asking why it is true, and you're answering by asserting it is true. I see no wisdom in that response. A fool could do the same thing!

To receive understanding you need to acknowledge God and fear God. Then you will receive wisdom that gives you understanding about these things. This is what i have advertised in my OP.

I was a Christian for over a decade.

 

[GospelS]

We're talking about punishment. Again you dodge and derail! This is wisdom?

Redemption is to exchange my wrong and my punishment and rescue me. This nature and purpose of the law has been fulfilled by Messiah taking my wrong and my punishment upon Himself for this was the purpose of the law.

I'm asking why it is true, and you're answering by asserting it is true. I see no wisdom in that response. A fool could do the same thing!

Jesus said:

“Don’t you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? But the things that come out of a person’s mouth come from the heart, and these defile them. For out of the heart come evil thoughts—murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. These are what defile a person”

I was a Christian for over a decade.

I wish you stood the test of faith so God would grant you the wisdom and understanding of the spiritual matters.

 

[Freodin]

Since you don't apparently want to know the truth, and apparently are not seeking the truth, why are you reading posts that tell the truth, and that lead to the truth, on a Christian forum,

in the section set up on purpose to answer such unbelief with the reason(s) for the truth ?

Reasons? I am all for reasons!
But didn't you read the thread? There are no reasons! She got the "wisdom"... I didn't. Case closed.

No reasons. Just claims. And my claims are as good as hers, or yours, or anyone elses.

Consider, just for a moment, if you are capable of considering alternative ideas:
If I were to open a thread here, and it wouldn't be instantly shut down for 'promoting atheism'. A thread where I just stated: "There is no God. This is the truth, I know that this is the truth. Accept it."
Would you even consider it? Would you ask how I know? Would you ask for reasons? Explanations? Arguments?
Would you simply accept that I am telling the truth... even if it contradicted everything you believed? Would you just deny it?

gospels' position in this thread is nothing but "I am right, you are wrong. Because I say so."
Now I know that the reasonable response to that would by "KTHXBYE Felicia."... but I am one of those unredeamable optimists who think that all humans are capable of rational thought and have the ability to communicate their ideas with each other. So I try. And for all the counter-examples I get... I am still an optimist.

...and apparently are not seeking the truth...

How would you know? Did you read my posts?
I didn't spell it out, or phrase it this way, but the gist of my posts is: "What you propose it a very bad way to find truth. Do you have a better way to offer?" And the response was a staunch denial to even acknowledge the existence of a different way.

Well... if you are of the same opinion: I told you the truth. I know that you cannot see it, because you are lacking the atheistic wisdom.