Your evidence for God, in another theist's hands...

Rachel20

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2020
1,954
1,443
STX
✟58,109.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Okay. Sounds like you just came on to a forum that asks you to present evidence for your beliefs being true and conceded that you don't have any.

I didn't see any request for evidence in your OP so it came off as a poll for believers, which I answered. I've conceded nothing, but I understand if you have a need to assume that. If you wanted my evidence, would my personal experiences with Christ, the truth of scripture, and answered prayers suffice? Would the fine-tuned universe and miracle of this life suffice? Which is easier to believe - that you never existed before but then suddenly existed, or that you exist now and will continue to do so? These are my reasons and evidences. They're sufficient for me, and you would understand why if you could answer the question "why faith?". Why would God choose faith?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2PhiloVoid
Upvote 0

Paul4JC

the Sun of Righteousness will rise with healing
Apr 5, 2020
1,626
1,370
California
✟163,707.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
That is a great story, one that I've often enjoyed reading. I think it's a great idea. So please arrange a properly-witnessed, verified and recorded prayer meeting to make a pile of wood explode into flames upon the completion of a prayer so that I can convert to the worship of the Christian God forthwith.
You really want me to ask God to answer you by fire? :grinning:

I don't know which god some Christians worship, so I wouldn't go there either.

That was indeed some explosion, but many people still worship Baal today, though none will openly say so, (and he goes by other names) and some do so without even knowing it.
 
Upvote 0

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Site Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
If God actually existed, we should expect most people to believe in Him. But they don't. Most people believe in Him, Him, Him, Him, Him
You keep circling back to this plurality argument. People are different so come to difficult conclusions about God. It is not their conclusions that is the remarkable thing it is the universal need for God among humans. I dare say you have have even sincerely approached the subject at some time in your life. Pluarity doesn't negate God it shows a demand for God. You are attacking the symptom of the need for God which is misguided and pety. The fact that people have silly ideas doesn't contribute anything to this conversation or negate anything.
 
Upvote 0
Aug 4, 2006
3,868
1,065
.
✟95,047.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
You keep circling back to this plurality argument. People are different so come to difficult conclusions about God. It is not their conclusions that is the remarkable thing it is the universal need for God among humans. I dare say you have have even sincerely approached the subject at some time in your life. Pluarity doesn't negate God it shows a demand for God. You are attacking the symptom of the need for God which is misguided and pety. The fact that people have silly ideas doesn't contribute anything to this conversation or negate anything.
Misguided and petty? Please don't be insulting. There's no need to get personal.
Now think about this. Yes, of course, everyone has different points of view. But not that different. If President Biden, for example, said on TV that he liked hamburgers, I can imagine people might have a number of different reactions, including, but not limited to:
- President Biden likes hamburgers.
- President Biden says he likes hamburgers, but how can we know if he is telling the truth?
- President Biden is not a vegetarian.

However, I do not expect people to be saying:
- President Biden does not exist.
- President Biden said he likes chocolate.
- President Biden says he hates hamburgers.

Do you see what I mean? If God actually did exist, people might well have a great range of reactions to Him and opinions about Him. But not to the extent of believing that He did not exist, or existed in many different, completely contradictory forms. And yet that is exactly what we do have. Some people think the Christian God exists. Some people think another god exists. Some people think many gods exist. A few people think no gods exist.

If God does actually exist, this state of affairs is inexplicable.
If God does not actually exist, but people have a need for a God to exist, then what we would expect to see is exactly what we do see.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Larniavc
Upvote 0
Aug 4, 2006
3,868
1,065
.
✟95,047.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
You really want me to ask God to answer you by fire? :grinning:

I don't know which god some Christians worship, so I wouldn't go there either.

That was indeed some explosion, but many people still worship Baal today, though none will openly say so, (and he goes by other names) and some do so without even knowing it.
You said that God could prove His power. I was hoping you'd be able to show it.
I can tell you, if I saw an actual, verifiable miracle, I would become a Christian.
But I never have, and I never expect to.
 
Upvote 0
Aug 4, 2006
3,868
1,065
.
✟95,047.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I didn't see any request for evidence in your OP so it came off as a poll for believers, which I answered. I've conceded nothing, but I understand if you have a need to assume that.
You said that you would be able to prove that your religion was right in the next life. that sounds like you've conceded that you cannot do it in this life. If you think you can do it in this life, that was not the impression you gave.

If you wanted my evidence, would my personal experiences with Christ, the truth of scripture, and answered prayers suffice?
No, no and yes. Of course, the answered prayers would have to be verified.

Would the fine-tuned universe and miracle of this life suffice?
They would not.

Which is easier to believe - that you never existed before but then suddenly existed, or that you exist now and will continue to do so? These are my reasons and evidences. They're sufficient for me, and you would understand why if you could answer the question "why faith?". Why would God choose faith?
I don't understand you. I never existed? That doesn't make sense. I have a very good idea of how I came to exist.
 
Upvote 0
Aug 4, 2006
3,868
1,065
.
✟95,047.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Which is my point entirely. You make these out as questions that Christians can't answer, when you really mean that SOME Christians can't answer in way that satisfies YOU. The fact that the answers are available for Christians and that they are either satisfied by them or at least accepting of them as a possibility means that your set of questions is meaningless.

You not liking an answer does not make it untrue or invalid, it is just a personal opinion... unless you are willing to have the courage of your convictions and take up the burden of proof that you want to throw on others.
Don't like the answer? What makes you think I like or dislike the answers you give? All I'm doing is pointing out the logical fallacies in the answers you give.
And if you give an answer to a question that is logically flawed, you cannot say that you have answered the question.
 
Upvote 0
Aug 4, 2006
3,868
1,065
.
✟95,047.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
The question about Santa might be to show why burden of proof makes no sense, but it is NOT a question that Christians cannot answer. Next!
Is it not? I'm afraid you yourself are about to try and fail, a little later down.

PS - the burden of proof is a red herring! Something is true if it can be proven and untrue if it can be disproven, but if it cannot be either proven or disproven then that doesn't mean by definition that it is true or untrue. It just means that it cannot be proven or disproven. So lack of proof really means nothing.
But if someone makes a claim about something and is not able to prove that they are right, can you say that you believe them?
Let's take magical creatures like fairies, for example. Has anyone proven that they exist? No. Can you or I prove that they do not exist? No. Might they exist? Yes.
Do you believe in them?
No.
Is your lack of belief in fairies - your "a-fairyism" a rational belief? It is.
See? Burden of proof, a useful concept.

PPS. Scientific 'proof' is not the same as absolute proof (like in mathematics). Falsification and modelling do not have certainty but are based on evidence or dismissed by lack of evidence.
Sure. And "proof" can be used in everyday language to mean "good reason for believing in something."
You want proof? Check the dictionary:
Definition of proof | Dictionary.com
noun
evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, or to produce belief in its truth.
anything serving as such evidence:What proof do you have?

PPPS. Which is why Santa is a bit of a silly argument, since the evidence is overwhelmingly against his existence as anything other than a figment of imagination very loosely based on a real person in history. This is not proof, but it is is a good reason to not accept claims about the reality of Santa. If you only disbelieve things are true when given proof, you of course still believe in Santa and God also... which means you are not an atheist.
The evidence overwhelmingly against his existence? What are you talking about? He has literally millions of believers. There are sightings all over the world. He has inspired songs, stories, movies, TV shows. There is evidence of his existence every Christmas in millions of vanishing mince pies and appearing presents. This is a good deal more than God's followers can boast of!

It is not difficult to find both simple and complex refutations of the concept of slavery among Christians. Try Paul Copan's Is God a Moral Monster? where he devotes 3 chapters to the subject.
I'm afraid I'm not going to buy a book just for the sake of debating you. If Copan has made such an argument, feel free to summarise or quote it.

I understand why you raise the issue, but slavery in the Bible is not the same as Slavery in any other culture that I am aware of. The fact that people could choose to become slaves for a time (up to seven years) is a good indication that it is not the same as what we usually term 'slave' (and in the Greek it can mean servant. with only the context indicating something forced.
No slavery in any one culture is the same as slavery in any other culture, but the similarities are certainly broad enough to justify the name. While there was a form of indentured servitude in the Bible, there was also plenty of forced slavery, slavery of captives in war, including women and children, and slavery by birth.

What is more, even before Jesus the Jews frowned on taking foreign slaves (that's part of history), the early Christians accepted it, but greatly discouraged it (e.g. Philemon) and the Patriarchs made it clear that it was unacceptable... which probably helped in the downfall of Rome. It was Christians who opposed the African slave trade in Europe and spent years and a lot of money to first close it down and then free slaves.
The Jews were quite happy to take foreign slaves, and did so frequently. Philemon was asked by Paul to free Onesimus as a personal favour, not because there was a belief that holding slaves was a bad thing to do. On the contrary, the various authors of the Bible, whenever they expressed an opinion on slavery as an institution, showed that they were in favour of it - as long as it didn't apply to them or to people they liked.

So your original question was answered - clearly Christians can and do answer it, whether you like it or not. Next!
I'm sorry, you still haven't answered the questions.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Aug 4, 2006
3,868
1,065
.
✟95,047.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
At least your are being honest, that nothing would convince you.
When did I say that? In point of fact, atheism is extremely vulnerable to disproof. There are literally millions of things that could disprove atheism.
The problem is, those things are dependent on God actually existing.
 
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,170
25,219
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,726,704.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
I'm afraid that's not what this forum says. It says you do have to provide evidence. And quoting the Bible to say that you're right isn't good enough.
Still not addressing my arguments? Okay. That’s one way to do it.
 
Upvote 0

Norbert L

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Mar 1, 2009
2,856
1,064
✟560,360.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
What if a believer in a different God told you they had the same reasons for believing in their God as you do for believing in yours? Would you then believe in their God?

And if a third party asked you which of the two of you were correct, would you be able to show them that you were?
The first two questions are text book Islamic Dilemma material Christians use in public to point out that even the Islamic Quran only reveals that Muhammad is the most obvious false prophet in history.


As to the 3rd question, see above.
 
Upvote 0

Silly Uncle Wayne

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,332
598
57
Dublin
✟102,646.00
Country
Ireland
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
Don't like the answer? What makes you think I like or dislike the answers you give? All I'm doing is pointing out the logical fallacies in the answers you give.
And if you give an answer to a question that is logically flawed, you cannot say that you have answered the question.
Have you pointed out the logical fallacies? What is the logical fallacy in not being able to prove the existence of Santa. Is there a logical fallacy in answering yes and no to the the question of whether the Bible endorses Slavery? I don't see a logical fallacy in a third answer to Euthypro. And as for prayer having no effect, the logical fallacy is that there is an assumption that it has no effect.

It is not true that "if you give an answer to a question that is logically flawed, you cannot say that you have answered the question." You can say that you have answered the question, but clearly the answer is going to be at least as logically flawed as the question. It makes me wonder why you ask logically flawed questions?
 
Upvote 0

Silly Uncle Wayne

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,332
598
57
Dublin
✟102,646.00
Country
Ireland
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
But if someone makes a claim about something and is not able to prove that they are right, can you say that you believe them?
Let's take magical creatures like fairies, for example. Has anyone proven that they exist? No. Can you or I prove that they do not exist? No. Might they exist? Yes.
Do you believe in them?
No.
Is your lack of belief in fairies - your "a-fairyism" a rational belief? It is.
See? Burden of proof, a useful concept.

Firstly whether I believe somebody or not is entirely dependent on their trustworthyness.

If a random stranger tells me something and is unable to prove it, then I am quite at liberty to ignore them.

If someone I know tells me something and is unable to prove it, I am still at liberty to ignore them, but if they have proven themselves trustworthy in the past then I certainly works in their favour and I would be ignorant to completely ignore them.

If someone I don't know tells me something and is unable to prove it, but I have observed the same thing then it would be actually stupid not to believe them though I am free to ignore their version if I choose (this goes back to the OP).

There are other things to consider. Most of what we know of science we know because someone has told us that is true. Unless we have studied the aspect of science for ourselves then we take on faith that they are correct. Most people accept that E=MC^2 and if someone tried to prove it to them, they would probably lose the thread pretty quickly. I learned the proof of it over 30 years ago, so I am happy it is correct, but I couldn't repeat that proof without going back through my lecture notes from that time. Only mathematics (and its subsidiaries) have 'proof' in the sense you seem to mean. Everything else presents evidence for and and against and the examination of that evidence provides a basis for making a rational decision.

You switched to fairies, perhaps because the case against Santa is a little bit overwhelming. But the case against fairies is also fairly high. I've not seen convincing proof of fairies and I don't know anyone who has. Afairyism is therefore quite rational.

But as soon as you switch to God (theism), there is a huge difference in evidence and therefore the rationality for the existence of God and while that does not guarantee its truth it does bear consideration. A rational response to the evidence is either theism or agnosticism. Atheism implies some kind of knowledge of truth in the same way as theism and therefore requires a lot of explaining of the various arguments and evidences, including the sheer amount of them.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Site Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Misguided and petty? Please don't be insulting.

not personal, attacking the minutia is counterproductive and can suggest being agenda-driven. You seem quite fond of this argument and I'm saying it's not productive.

There's no need to get personal.
Now think about this. Yes, of course, everyone has different points of view. But not that different. If President Biden, for example, said on TV that he liked hamburgers, I can imagine people might have a

Biden and his hamburger are physical things that are described within the jurisdiction of science and the observable. God is not these things. The concept of God preexists our space-time continuum that science operates in so science has no ability to see God which also means God cannot be proven or disproven within science. Innately God is not of this world, he caused it, and anthropomorphic descriptions will always be limited or miss the mark. However, humans are of this world and will try and express our inner desires through the physical.

This can look like an old man, an elephant or monkey, bright light or disembodied voice but these are not God and at best they may be manifestations of God and at worst misguided attempts at capturing the uncapturable or seeing the unseeable.

The moment we declare God is something observable like a flying spaghetti monster we reduce God to a myth because although I have never seen an FSM it's possible to prove/disprove it because the FSM is based in this world and thus can be proven/disproven by science. God however cannot be observed by science and cannot be proven or disproven by science. We can only prove within science what science can see.

So the expressions are expected and are expected to be diverse but they can never grasp God, it is the root of the expression that is more interesting to talk about.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Paul4JC

the Sun of Righteousness will rise with healing
Apr 5, 2020
1,626
1,370
California
✟163,707.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You said that God could prove His power. I was hoping you'd be able to show it.
I can tell you, if I saw an actual, verifiable miracle, I would become a Christian.
But I never have, and I never expect to.

Don't become a Christian. Just believe in Christ.

I don't recommend seeking signs and miracles.

[Luk 11:29 NIV] 29 As the crowds increased, Jesus said, "This is a wicked generation. It asks for a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah.

[Luk 23:8 NIV] 8 When Herod saw Jesus, he was greatly pleased, because for a long time he had been wanting to see him. From what he had heard about him, he hoped to see him perform a sign of some sort.

[Jhn 2:18 NIV] 18 The Jews then responded to him, "What sign can you show us to prove your authority to do all this?"
 
Upvote 0

Silly Uncle Wayne

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,332
598
57
Dublin
✟102,646.00
Country
Ireland
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
The Jews were quite happy to take foreign slaves, and did so frequently. Philemon was asked by Paul to free Onesimus as a personal favour, not because there was a belief that holding slaves was a bad thing to do. On the contrary, the various authors of the Bible, whenever they expressed an opinion on slavery as an institution, showed that they were in favour of it - as long as it didn't apply to them or to people they liked.
You'd have to show where the New Testament writers show they are in favour of it, because I don't recall seeing that anywhere.
 
Upvote 0

Silly Uncle Wayne

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,332
598
57
Dublin
✟102,646.00
Country
Ireland
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
I'm afraid I'm not going to buy a book just for the sake of debating you. If Copan has made such an argument, feel free to summarise or quote it.
I have already and you should be able to find copious amounts of You Tube refutations of the arguments - often only a few minutes long. Clearly short answers aren't enough, so a long answer would have to be gleaned from a book.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Silly Uncle Wayne

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,332
598
57
Dublin
✟102,646.00
Country
Ireland
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
Sure. And "proof" can be used in everyday language to mean "good reason for believing in something."
You want proof? Check the dictionary:
Definition of proof | Dictionary.com
noun
evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, or to produce belief in its truth.
anything serving as such evidence:What proof do you have?

Then there is no issue, pretty much every Christian I know has evidence sufficient to establish the truth of the existence of God or perhaps more accurately produce belief in its truth.
 
Upvote 0

rockytopva

Love to pray! :)
Site Supporter
Mar 6, 2011
20,046
7,673
.
Visit site
✟1,063,017.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Single
It is important, for the sake of spirituality, that we divide the man into three parts… Physical, Spiritual, and Intellectual. If E = mc2 then we can divide and conclude that...

Mass (m) = Energy (E/c2) And there are three varieties...

Natural E/c2 - All mass is basically cooled plasma, the sun is the visible form of E/c2
Mental E/c2 - Our thinking can produce creativeness, light, and good things
Spiritual E/c2 - E (motivation, warmth, love) / c2 (faith, hope, charity, joy)

The Natural E/c2 in the form of mass produces a gravity that attracts other objects
The Intellectual E/c2 produces a gravity that draws us to study
The Spiritual E/c2 also has a gravity that draws and makes religion attractive

Here is a story about a man who never sensed the presence of Christ. When he came to faith the lights came on and it flooded his soul with divine light and energy. This is my testimony also, the difference being....

I started out Baptist, GC Rankin Presbyterian
I would work the hay field, GC Rankin the cottonfield
I would receive this in a Pentecostal Holiness church, GC Rankin Methodist
I came down with cigarettes, GC Rankin with a pistol of large make!
All in exact methods of GC Rankin 100 years before me!

I was also agnostic and it took a spiritual power to convert me from unbelief to faith...

"Grandfather was kind to me and considerate of me, yet he was strict with me. I worked along with him in the field when the weather was agreeable and when it was inclement I helped him in his hatter's shop, for the Civil War was in progress and he had returned at odd times to hatmaking. It was my business in the shop to stretch foxskins and coonskins across a wood-horse and with a knife, made for that purpose, pluck the hair from the fur. I despise the odor of foxskins and coonskins to this good day. He had me to walk two miles every Sunday to Dandridge to Church service and Sunday-school, rain or shine, wet or dry, cold or hot; yet he had fat horses standing in his stable. But he was such a blue-stocking Presbyterian that he never allowed a bridle to go on a horse's head on Sunday. The beasts had to have a day of rest. Old Doctor Minnis was the pastor, and he was the dryest and most interminable preacher I ever heard in my life. He would stand motionless and read his sermons from manuscript for one hour and a half at a time and sometimes longer. Grandfather would sit and never take his eyes off of him, except to glance at me to keep me quiet. It was torture to me." - George Clark Rankin

George Clark Rankin and myself also moved to kind hearted kinsmen where the religion came into the heart, reporting to the mind what had taken place....

rankin78.jpg

In the course of an hour I was at my uncle's. He was surprised to see me, but gave me a cordial welcome. The first thing he did was to disarm me, and that ended my pistol-toting. I have never had one about my person or home to this good day. And I never will understand just why I had that one. A good dinner refreshed me and I soon unfolded my plans and they were satisfactory to my kind-hearted kinsman. He was in the midst of cotton-picking and that afternoon I went to the field and, with a long sack about my waist, had my first experience in the cottonfield. We then would get ready for the revival occurring that night…

After the team had been fed and we had been to supper we put the mules to the wagon, filled it with chairs and we were off to the meeting. When we reached the locality it was about dark and the people were assembling. Their horses and wagons filled up the cleared spaces and the singing was already in progress. My uncle and his family went well up toward the front, but I dropped into a seat well to the rear. It was an old-fashioned Church, ancient in appearance, oblong in shape and unpretentious. It was situated in a grove about one hundred yards from the road. It was lighted with old tallow-dip candles furnished by the neighbors. It was not a prepossessing-looking place, but it was soon crowded and evidently there was a great deal of interest. A cadaverous-looking man stood up in front with a tuning fork and raised and led the songs. There were a few prayers and the minister came in with his saddlebags and entered the pulpit. He was the Rev. W. H. Heath, the circuit rider. His prayer impressed me with his earnestness and there were many amens to it in the audience. I do not remember his text, but it was a typical revival sermon, full of unction and power.

At its close he invited penitents to the altar and a great many young people flocked to it and bowed for prayer. Many of them became very much affected and they cried out distressingly for mercy. It had a strange effect on me. It made me nervous and I wanted to retire. Directly my uncle came back to me, put his arm around my shoulder and asked me if I did not want to be religious. I told him that I had always had that desire, that mother had brought me up that way, and really I did not know anything else. Then he wanted to know if I had ever professed religion. I hardly understood what he meant and did not answer him. He changed his question and asked me if I had ever been to the altar for prayer, and I answered him in the negative. Then he earnestly besought me to let him take me up to the altar and join the others in being prayed for. It really embarrassed me and I hardly knew what to say to him. He spoke to me of my mother and said that when she was a little girl she went to the altar and that Christ accepted her and she had been a good Christian all these years. That touched me in a tender spot, for mother always did do what was right; and then I was far away from her and wanted to see her. Oh, if she were there to tell me what to do!

By and by I yielded to his entreaty and he led forward to the altar. The minister took me by the hand and spoke tenderly to me as I knelt at the altar. I had gone more out of sympathy than conviction, and I did not know what to do after I bowed there. The others were praying aloud and now and then one would rise shoutingly happy and make the old building ring with his glad praise. It was a novel experience to me. I did not know what to pray for, neither did I know what to expect if I did pray. I spent the most of the hour wondering why I was there and what it all meant. No one explained anything to me. Once in awhile some good old brother or sister would pass my way, strike me on the back and tell me to look up and believe and the blessing would come. But that was not encouraging to me. In fact, it sounded like nonsense and the noise was distracting me. Even in my crude way of thinking I had an idea that religion was a sensible thing and that people ought to become religious intelligently and without all that hurrah. I presume that my ideas were the result of the Presbyterian training given to me by old grandfather. By and by my knees grew tired and the skin was nearly rubbed off my elbows. I thought the service never would close, and when it did conclude with the benediction I heaved a sigh of relief. That was my first experience at the mourner's bench.

As we drove home I did not have much to say, but I listened attentively to the conversation between my uncle and his wife. They were greatly impressed with the meeting, and they spoke first of this one and that one who had "come through" and what a change it would make in the community, as many of them were bad boys. As we were putting up the team my uncle spoke very encouragingly to me; he was delighted with the step I had taken and he pleaded with me not to turn back, but to press on until I found the pearl of great price. He knew my mother would be very happy over the start I had made. Before going to sleep I fell into a train of thought, though I was tired and exhausted. I wondered why I had gone to that altar and what I had gained by it. I felt no special conviction and had received no special impression, but then if my mother had started that way there must be something in it, for she always did what was right. I silently lifted my heart to God in prayer for conviction and guidance. I knew how to pray, for I had come up through prayer, but not the mourner's bench sort. So I determined to continue to attend the meeting and keep on going to the altar until I got religion.

Early the next morning I was up and in a serious frame of mind. I went with the other hands to the cottonfield and at noon I slipped off in the barn and prayed. But the more I thought of the way those young people were moved in the meeting and with what glad hearts they had shouted their praises to God the more it puzzled and confused me. I could not feel the conviction that they had and my heart did not feel melted and tender. I was callous and unmoved in feeling and my distress on account of sin was nothing like theirs. I did not understand my own state of mind and heart. It troubled me, for by this time I really wanted to have an experience like theirs.

When evening came I was ready for Church service and was glad to go. It required no urging. Another large crowd was present and the preacher was as earnest as ever. I did not give much heed to the sermon. In fact, I do not recall a word of it. I was anxious for him to conclude and give me a chance to go to the altar. I had gotten it into my head that there was some real virtue in the mourner's bench; and when the time came I was one of the first to prostrate myself before the altar in prayer. Many others did likewise. Two or three good people at intervals knelt by me and spoke encouragingly to me, but they did not help me. Their talks were mere exhortations to earnestness and faith, but there was no explanation of faith, neither was there any light thrown upon my mind and heart. I wrought myself up into tears and cries for help, but the whole situation was dark and I hardly knew why I cried, or what was the trouble with me. Now and then others would arise from the altar in an ecstasy of joy, but there was no joy for me. When the service closed I was discouraged and felt that maybe I was too hardhearted and the good Spirit could do nothing for me.

After we went home I tossed on the bed before going to sleep and wondered why God did not do for me what he had done for mother and what he was doing in that meeting for those young people at the altar. I could not understand it. But I resolved to keep on trying, and so dropped off to sleep. The next day I had about the same experience and at night saw no change in my condition. And so for several nights I repeated the same distressing experience. The meeting took on such interest that a day service was adopted along with the night exercises, and we attended that also. And one morning while I bowed at the altar in a very disturbed state of mind Brother Tyson, a good local preacher and the father of Rev. J. F. Tyson, now of the Central Conference, sat down by me and, putting his hand on my shoulder, said to me: "Now I want you to sit up awhile and let's talk this matter over quietly. I am sure that you are in earnest, for you have been coming to this altar night after night for several days. I want to ask you a few simple questions." And the following questions were asked and answered:

"My son, do you not love God?"

"I cannot remember when I did not love him."

"Do you believe on his Son, Jesus Christ?"

"I have always believed on Christ. My mother taught me that from my earliest recollection."

"Do you accept him as your Savior?"

"I certainly do, and have always done so."

"Can you think of any sin that is between you and the Savior?"

"No, sir; for I have never committed any bad sins."

"Do you love everybody?"

"Well, I love nearly everybody, but I have no ill-will toward any one. An old man did me a wrong not long ago and I acted ugly toward him, but I do not care to injure him."

"Can you forgive him?"

"Yes, if he wanted me to."

"But, down in your heart, can you wish him well?"

"Yes, sir; I can do that."

"Well, now let me say to you that if you love God, if you accept Jesus Christ as your Savior from sin and if you love your fellowmen and intend by God's help to lead a religious life, that's all there is to religion. In fact, that is all I know about it."

Then he repeated several passages of Scriptures to me proving his assertions. I thought a moment and said to him: "But I do not feel like these young people who have been getting religion night after night. I cannot get happy like them. I do not feel like shouting."

The good man looked at me and smiled and said: "Ah, that's your trouble. You have been trying to feel like them. Now you are not them; you are yourself. You have your own quiet disposition and you are not turned like them. They are excitable and blustery like they are. They give way to their feelings. That's all right, but feeling is not religion. Religion is faith and life. If you have violent feeling with it, all good and well, but if you have faith and not much feeling, why the feeling will take care of itself. To love God and accept Jesus Christ as your Savior, turning away from all sin, and living a godly life, is the substance of true religion."

That was new to me, yet it had been my state of mind from childhood. For I remembered that away back in my early life, when the old preacher held services in my grandmother's house one day and opened the door of the Church, I went forward and gave him my hand. He was to receive me into full membership at the end of six months' probation, but he let it pass out of his mind and failed to attend to it.

As I sat there that morning listening to the earnest exhortation of the good man my tears ceased, my distress left me, light broke in upon my mind, my heart grew joyous, and before I knew just what I was doing I was going all around shaking hands with everybody, and my confusion and darkness disappeared and a great burden rolled off my spirit. I felt exactly like I did when I was a little boy around my mother's knee when she told of Jesus and God and Heaven. It made my heart thrill then, and the same old experience returned to me in that old country Church that beautiful September morning down in old North Georgia.

I at once gave my name to the preacher for membership in the Church, and the following Sunday morning, along with many others, he received me into full membership in the Methodist Episcopal Church, South. It was one of the most delightful days in my recollection. It was the third Sunday in September, 1866, and those Church vows became a living principle in my heart and life. During these forty-five long years, with their alternations of sunshine and shadow, daylight and darkness, success and failure, rejoicing and weeping, fears within and fightings without, I have never ceased to thank God for that autumnal day in the long ago when my name was registered in the Lamb's Book of Life.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0