Ask God for Me

[dlamberth]

Knowledge does not "destroy" faith, since after you extend just a little faith, knowledge can be used to help grow that faith. Knowledge without faith, will quench the desire for faith.

Knowledge can also change the trajectory of one's faith, sometimes in a completely different direction all together.

 

[Ed1wolf]

Is he able to implement it what it takes? If so, why hasn't he.

It's simple:
1) Does your god know what it would take to convince me without violating my will? Is he omniscient?
2) If yes, can he carry it out? Is he omnipotent?
3) If yes, why doesn't he? Is he willing that any should perish? Is he benevolent?

1. Yes
2. Yes.
3. Yes He does it everyday but you refuse to believe.

 

[Ed1wolf]

What do you mean?

Only you know what is sufficient to convince you.

 

[Jok]

I don't need any. I am not claiming God does not exist, I just don't believe He does based on the evidence so far.

Why not be a deist then? I wonder what so many people have against deism.

I’m not being a wise guy. I am just curious why almost every ex-Christian storms out saying “This is ridiculous, I’m now an atheist” instead of storming out saying “This is ridiculous, the Bible doesn’t describe God, God could care less about humanity!”

 

[Nihilist Virus]

... I could be wrong, but it almost seems like you're saying that, if there is a God, and if that God is 'timeless,' He "can't create" anything, since ....... well, do DO SO would imply His somehow pushing through and beyond timelessness, or somehow inverting or making 'implode' a state of timelessness in order to enable the act of creation to transpire (which requires 'time').

That's one way of putting it. Alternatively, you could say that causality requires object A to act on object B, but in the state of reality wherein only God exists, there is no object B for him to act upon. So whatever he did, he was acting on nothing, which is the same as doing nothing.

I don't presume to comprehend the whole of reality, which may or may not include things even beyond the universe. I'm not saying that I can declare with absolute certainty that God couldn't have "caused" the universe to exist. What I am saying is that if God does exist, then whatever he did is certainly not like the causality we currently understand, and that any apologist who argues that God caused the universe to exist in the same way that carpenters cause chairs to exist is simply and irrefutably wrong.

This is too bitter a pill to swallow, though, because the argument for creation is ultimately reduced to a non sequitur:

Given unlimited power, we still could not describe how creatio ex nihilo actually works. The process by which the universe came to exist is fully beyond our understanding. Yet, we are absolutely sure that God was necessary for this to occur.

I'm sure you see the problem.

Or am I incorrect in 'how' I've understood what you've said (and in what I've attempted to understand what you've said by my application of hermeneutics to what you've said)?

You were basically spot on, except that I don't intend to limit the omnipotence of God. Maybe God could somehow "do" things in the absence of time, but we have no way of comprehending this and it is nonsensical in every way we can see. In no way does it serve as a superior explanation to the problem of existence over a simple "I don't know."

... I mean, I'm willing to allow you to push this further through the Hermeneutic Circle so that I might gain a more coherent, and thereby, more substantial understanding of what you're really saying.

I think you've got it down. Is there a flaw?

What if it isn't an an extra dimension in which some form of 'time' still exists in an exterior presence outside of our present universe in which we live?

That doesn't solve anything. It just pushes the problem back a step. Does this extra dimension of time exist eternally apart from God, or did he create it? Back to square one.

What if there is something inherent within the nature of timeless being that can can still rip open the logical barrier between timeless existence and an 'act' of creation?

Sure. What if God can just do whatever he wants, including the creation of square circles and one-ended sticks?

Except... does this actually explain anything?

Maybe another way to think about it is to contemplate, perhaps, what Frank Close states in the last of 10 points in the following, very short video? And I'd ask you, is this something that Lawrence Krauss would agree with? If not, then which of them is the 'more' rational and logical, NV?

I'll watch that if I have time.

 

[Tolworth John]

have read a Case for Christ. It was hardly a complete review of the available evidence

So an investigative journalist talks with experts on the history and accuracy of the Bible, to medical experts, to historians etc etc and the conclusions of these experts is that the NT account is accurate and you say he has not presented enough evidence.

Sorry but you are making excuses not to believe.
If Lee Stones book was inaccurate or insufficient then you need to provide information to show where.

For me I had very little information, I knew that even liberal skeptical Christians, who doubted the biblical accounts of miracles had also shown that the NT was written by eyewitneses.
That archeologists had demonstrated the historical accuracy of the NT.

If someone can be shown to be accurate and reliable then it is reasonable to believe them when they report something one finds unbelievable.

See John Robinson treating the new testament
And
Sir William Michael Ramsay work on digging up the middle East.

 

[MrsFoundit]

Isn't that what Christians want?

In a word, no.

 

[MrsFoundit]

I would know more of what is true. That is a good thing.

Why is it a good thing? Are you sure it is a good thing?

 

[Tinker Grey]

1. Yes
2. Yes.
3. Yes He does it everyday but you refuse to believe.

If I don't believe, your god failed. He's either not omnipotent, not omniscient, not benevolent, or not.

Either one is convinced or one is not. There is no refuse.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Only you know what is sufficient to convince you.

Sort of. I don't know all the evidence that could be out there that I have not seen that might convince me. But in the end I will either be convinced or not.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Why not be a deist then? I wonder what so many people have against deism.

I’m not being a wise guy. I am just curious why almost every ex-Christian storms out saying “This is ridiculous, I’m now an atheist” instead of storming out saying “This is ridiculous, the Bible doesn’t describe God, God could care less about humanity!”

Why would I become a deist when I am not convinced that there is sufficient evidence to believe a God exists?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

So an investigative journalist talks with experts on the history and accuracy of the Bible, to medical experts, to historians etc etc and the conclusions of these experts is that the NT account is accurate and you say he has not presented enough evidence.

Yes. Each person gets to evaluate the evidence and see if they are convinced. You don't get to tell me if I should be convinced or not.

Sorry but you are making excuses not to believe.

Now you are calling me a liar. Again, no one an decide to believe something they are not convinced of by the evidence. You don't get to be so arrogant to "know" my motivations. What if I told you there is sufficient evidence to believe that Alah is the true God and you just don't want to believe it.

If Lee Stones book was inaccurate or insufficient then you need to provide information to show where.

I don't have to, but if you want to discuss that book you can make another thread and I would.

For me I had very little information, I knew that even liberal skeptical Christians, who doubted the biblical accounts of miracles had also shown that the NT was written by eyewitneses.
That archeologists had demonstrated the historical accuracy of the NT.

How is that possible? Where are you getting this information? The fact is the first written account was written decades after the events, we don't have the originals, the earliest manuscript we have is around 130 and the earliest manuscripts we have of all four gospels is around 180. If you are getting your information from only christian sources maybe you should look at information from non believers and see why they do not believe.

If someone can be shown to be accurate and reliable then it is reasonable to believe them when they report something one finds unbelievable.

No, that is bad epistemology. Just becasue a person is accurate with one thing does not mean they are accurate with all things. Also, the more extraordinary the claim the more extraordinary the evidence that is needed to be convinced. If you told me you had a dog named Fred i would believe you without any further evidence, if you claimed that big foot existed I would need more evidence to convince me. Claiming a dog is a mundane claim claiming big foot exists is an extraordinary claim.

See John Robinson treating the new testament
And
Sir William Michael Ramsay work on digging up the middle East.

Maybe I will. I have done a lot of study and research and that is why I became unconvinced.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

In a word, no.

So you want me to go to hell?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Why is it a good thing? Are you sure it is a good thing?

Yes, it is surprising to me that theists here are telling me knowing the truth is a bad thing. Do you want to know what is true over what is false?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Because of your exuberance to deny anything and everything, I don't believe that as well. A searcher your not.

Wow, I don't deny god exists or the supernatural. I am unconvinced of they are real. I have done nothing on this site but to state honestly why I don't believe and few people actually engage in that, a lot more engage in what you have done here. Accusations of dishonesty, why?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Be careful, knowledge of the Christian God's existence, can be truly depressing for some and up setting since they do not like the Christian God, as they read of Him in scripture. If you really believed you were hell bound would that be comforting to you? You might be better off not knowing?

Not knowing will send me to hell if it is real. At least knowing the truth I would have the chance to make that choice.

That is not the way it works. Some will believe you, but others will pick up stones to stone you.

When was the last time a Christian was stoned in the US?

Your "witness" is not: "Everyone look how much God Loves me over the rest of you since he came to me and not you", but your witness has to be "I was this big time sinning atheist and God made a huge change in my life the same kind of change He can make in your life so join me in seeing the change He has made in me." (Like God did with Paul)

So you believe in the change Gospel. Not convincing, Muslims have changed lives as well as secular people.

Knowledge does not "destroy" faith, since after you extend just a little faith, knowledge can be used to help grow that faith. Knowledge without faith, will quench the desire for faith.

Knowledge and faith are incompatible. Faith as defined in the bible is (Heb 11):

1Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. 2 For by it the people of old received their commendation. 3 By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.

Assurance of things hoped for and conviction of tings not seen is believing without evidence. I can believe in anything with faith.

Also, notice all the following stories of great faith as described in the rest of the chapter tell of stories where people believed without evidence ans were commended for it.


4 By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he was commended as righteous, God commending him by accepting his gifts. And through his faith, though he died, he still speaks. 5 By faithEnoch was taken up so that he should not see death, and he was not found, because God had taken him. Now before he was taken he was commended as having pleased God. 6 And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him. 7 By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, in reverent fear constructed an ark for the saving of his household. By this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.

8 By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. 9 By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. 10 For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God. 11 By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised. 12 Therefore from one man, and him as good as dead, were born descendants as many as the stars of heaven and as many as the innumerable grains of sand by the seashore.

13 These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. 14 For people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. 15 If they had been thinking of that land from which they had gone out, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed hto be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city.

17 By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son, 18 of whom it was said, “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” 19 He considered that God was able even to raise him from the dead, from which, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back. 20 By faith Isaac invoked future blessings on Jacob and Esau. 21 By faith Jacob, when dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, bowing in worship over the head of his staff. 22 By faith Joseph, at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his bones.

23 By faith Moses, when he was born, was hidden for three months by his parents, because they saw that the child was beautiful, and they were not afraid of the king's edict. 24 By faith Moses, when he was grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter, 25 choosing rather to be mistreated with the people of God than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin. 26 He considered the reproach of Christ greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt, for he was looking to the reward. 27 By faith he left Egypt, not being afraid of the anger of the king, for he endured as seeing him who is invisible. 28 By faith he kept the Passover and sprinkled the blood, so that the Destroyer of the firstborn might not touch them.

29 By faith the people crossed the Red Sea as on dry land, but the Egyptians, when they attempted to do the same, were drowned. 30 By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they had been encircled for seven days. 31 By faith Rahab the prostitute did not perish with those who were disobedient, because she had given a friendly welcome to the spies.

32 And what more shall I say? For time would fail me to tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets— 33 who through faith conquered kingdoms, enforced justice, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, 34 quenched the power of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, were made strong out of weakness, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight. 35 Women received back their dead by resurrection. Some were tortured, refusing to accept release, so that they might rise again to a better life. 36 Others suffered mocking and flogging, and even chains and imprisonment. 37 They were stoned, they were sawn in two,they were killed with the sword. They went about in skins of sheep and goats, destitute, afflicted, mistreated— 38 of whom the world was not worthy—wandering about in deserts and mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth.

39 And all these, though commended through their faith, did not receive what was promised, 40 since God had provided something better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect.

 

[SPF]

1Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. 2 For by it the people of old received their commendation. 3 By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.

Assurance of things hoped for and conviction of tings not seen is believing without evidence. I can believe in anything with faith.

Also, notice all the following stories of great faith as described in the rest of the chapter tell of stories where people believed without evidence ans were commended for it.

For what it's worth, you're wrong. Our faith isn't a blind faith without evidence. It, as William Lane Craig puts it, is a reasonable faith.

Assurance of things hoped for, and conviction of things not seen... There is assurance, and there is conviction - there is evidence. Can any of us "know" in the technical sense that God is real? No. There is an element of faith to it.

You keep asking for people to convince you, but obviously that can't and won't happen. You claim to have been a Christian for many years - yet if you don't even believe your own experiences, why would you believe any of ours? I provided examples of God providing money miraculously to my family. That's evidence, but you reject it. I provided example of God miraculously healing me. That's evidence, but you reject it. There's honestly nothing anyone can say here to convince you. You don't/won't accept anything anyone says.

I'll pray that someone invents a time machine so you can literally travel back in time and meet Jesus. I suspect that's the only thing you would be willing to accept. But even then, you would test Him and make him perform some miracle. But then I wonder if He even did that if you would somehow try and create some test to prove that it was true and not faked.

There is a lot of evidence for the existence of God, but in the end, it will always be faith. Not a blind faith without evidence, but faith nevertheless.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

For what it's worth, you're wrong. Our faith isn't a blind faith without evidence. It, as William Lane Craig puts it, is a reasonable faith.

I disagree that we should believe in something without sufficient evidence.

Assurance of things hoped for, and conviction of things not seen... There is assurance, and there is conviction - there is evidence. Can any of us "know" in the technical sense that God is real? No. There is an element of faith to it.

It says we have assurance of what we hope for. If hope is the criteria then I can have assurance of anything. I hope that big foot is real, should I believe he is based on hope?

Assurance of things not seen. Again I can believe anything on that criteria. I don't see big foot so I can be assured he exists.

You keep asking for people to convince you, but obviously that can't and won't happen.

No I don't, I ask people for evidence that will convince me.

You claim to have been a Christian for many years - yet if you don't even believe your own experiences, why would you believe any of ours?

I was a christian despite your arrogant claim that you can somehow know I was not. I believe your experiences happened I don't believe your reason for them because you have not provided sufficient evidence for belief.

I provided examples of God providing money miraculously to my family. That's evidence, but you reject it.

You provided no evidence except a story. I believe the story, I don't believe God had anything to do with it becasue you have insufficient evidence to believe that he did.

I provided example of God miraculously healing me. That's evidence, but you reject it.

Again, all you provided was a story of healing which I believe. You provided no evidence that God healed you.

There's honestly nothing anyone can say here to convince you. You don't/won't accept anything anyone says.

That is a lie. You tell me two stories of supernatural events and expect me to believe you and be convinced that god exists. Your standard for belief is ridiculously low.

Why don't you believe Musims when they claim Alah healed them after praying to him?

I'll pray that someone invents a time machine so you can literally travel back in time and meet Jesus. I suspect that's the only thing you would be willing to accept.

Why not instead pray to God to tell you what to say to convince me. Something you are unwilling to do.

But even then, you would test Him and make him perform some miracle. But then I wonder if He even did that if you would somehow try and create some test to prove that it was true and not faked.

Look, does God know what would convince me or not?

There is a lot of evidence for the existence of God, but in the end, it will always be faith. Not a blind faith without evidence, but faith nevertheless.

You are admitting here that the evidence for gods existence (which I agree exists) is insufficient for belief on its own (Which I agree also). You believe God exists without sufficient evidence for belief.

 

[SPF]

I disagree that we should believe in something without sufficient evidence.

Well, actually you believe you don't have a choice in what you believe. I find that interesting as again, there are more educated and intelligent people than you who have looked at the evidence and believe that God exists. So what does that mean? if people are incapable of deciding what they believe but are forced into their beliefs based upon evidence, why do people who see the same evidence walk away with different beliefs?

I was a christian despite your arrogant claim that you can somehow know I was not

I don't recall claiming that you weren't ever a Christian. You'll need to quote me on that. What I do think that actually matters is what you believe yourself, today, about your Christianity. At the moment, you are an atheist. At the moment, you do not believe that God exists. Therefore, if you do not believe that God exists, then you do not believe any experiences you had as a Christian were actually genuine. If you are an atheist, then you cannot believe that God heard or answered your prayers, you cannot believe that you were convicted of sin, and you cannot believe that the Spirit led you in anything you did. That's the reality of today. And that's what matters to me.

You provided no evidence except a story. I believe the story, I don't believe God had anything to do with it becasue you have insufficient evidence to believe that he did.

Well I'm not entirely sure what sort of evidence would satisfy you. My wife and I had 4 to 5 bills that were coming due that totaled $2,037. We didn't tell anyone about this. We prayed about it, and we were looking for ways to come up with the money.

Someone we didn't know well from Church, knocked on our door the day before the first bill was due, and said that they were praying and felt prompted by the Holy Spirit to write us a check for $2,037.

Now sure, it's possible that God doesn't exist, and that He didn't hear our prayer, and that He didn't prompt someone we didn't know that well to give us money. It's possible that the person just liked the number 2,037 and randomly (and wrongly) thought that the Spirit was telling them to give it to us.

Sure, it's possible. But if we're honest here, I think the most rational explanation is that God exists, He saw our need, and He used someone else to help provide for us.

I'm not sure what you need to be convinced that was God, but whatever it is, I'm sure I can't provide it. You would probably need me to find some written list of the bills I had, confirming that they added up to $2,037, then somehow provide recorded evidence from the moment I found out how much we needed until the moment we received it that proves we didn't disclose that amount to anyone. Then you would also need that person to somehow (I don't know how they could) demonstrate to you that the Spirit, during their prayer time laid that idea on their heart.

Sorry, but you either accept it or don't. The evidence, I think though, lends itself towards God.

Again, all you provided was a story of healing which I believe. You provided no evidence that God healed you.

Well, as far as I know, 6 fractured bones in a person's foot don't miraculously heal over night. If you actually believe the story, then what explanation can you provide other than God? I think the more likely reality is that you don't believe the story, because there is no natural explanation. Or at least, there is no likely natural explanation.

Look, does God know what would convince me or not?

Well, He's actually already provided everything you need to believe.

Rom 1:19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.
Rom 1:20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
Rom 1:21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
Rom 1:22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools,

You believe God exists without sufficient evidence for belief.

Well, according to you, I don't have a choice in what I believe, so at least for the moment, the evidence I have IS sufficient for me to believe that God exists. If it wasn't sufficient, then I wouldn't believe.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Well, actually you believe you don't have a choice in what you believe. I find that interesting as again, there are more educated and intelligent people than you who have looked at the evidence and believe that God exists. So what does that mean? if people are incapable of deciding what they believe but are forced into their beliefs based upon evidence, why do people who see the same evidence walk away with different beliefs?

Why do you avoid my questions to you? People are convinced or remain unconvinced by the evidence and their standards of belief which are different for each person.

There are more educated and intelligent people than you have examined the evidence and they remain unconvinced. So what are you missing? That is not a good reason to believe anything just because other people do.

I don't recall claiming that you weren't ever a Christian. You'll need to quote me on that.

Do you believe I was?

What I do think that actually matters is what you believe yourself, today, about your Christianity. At the moment, you are an atheist. At the moment, you do not believe that God exists. Therefore, if you do not believe that God exists, then you do not believe any experiences you had as a Christian were actually genuine. If you are an atheist, then you cannot believe that God heard or answered your prayers, you cannot believe that you were convicted of sin, and you cannot believe that the Spirit led you in anything you did. That's the reality of today. And that's what matters to me.

I agree.

Well I'm not entirely sure what sort of evidence would satisfy you. My wife and I had 4 to 5 bills that were coming due that totaled $2,037. We didn't tell anyone about this. We prayed about it, and we were looking for ways to come up with the money.

Someone we didn't know well from Church, knocked on our door the day before the first bill was due, and said that they were praying and felt prompted by the Holy Spirit to write us a check for $2,037.

Now sure, it's possible that God doesn't exist, and that He didn't hear our prayer, and that He didn't prompt someone we didn't know that well to give us money. It's possible that the person just liked the number 2,037 and randomly (and wrongly) thought that the Spirit was telling them to give it to us.

I believe the story. Now give me evidence that the god of the bible provided that.

Sure, it's possible. But if we're honest here, I think the most rational explanation is that God exists, He saw our need, and He used someone else to help provide for us.

You are making an extraordinary claim and want me to believe on mundane evidence. The honest answer is I don't know until sufficient evidence is found. Why is it more likely that God provided the money over a coincidence or this person could read minds? You think it is more likely because you believe God exists, that is confirmation bias.

I'm not sure what you need to be convinced that was God, but whatever it is, I'm sure I can't provide it. You would probably need me to find some written list of the bills I had, confirming that they added up to $2,037, then somehow provide recorded evidence from the moment I found out how much we needed until the moment we received it that proves we didn't disclose that amount to anyone. Then you would also need that person to somehow (I don't know how they could) demonstrate to you that the Spirit, during their prayer time laid that idea on their heart.

Sorry, but you either accept it or don't. The evidence, I think though, lends itself towards God.

I know you do, my standard of evidence is different.

Well, as far as I know, 6 fractured bones in a person's foot don't miraculously heal over night. If you actually believe the story, then what explanation can you provide other than God? I think the more likely reality is that you don't believe the story, because there is no natural explanation. Or at least, there is no likely natural explanation.

Please stop putting words in my mouth and telling me what I believe. I believe this happened to you. I am unconvinced it was the God of the bible that healed you. Why not another supernatural explanation or a natural explanation that we don't understand yet. The best answer is "I don't know".

Well, He's actually already provided everything you need to believe.

This is demonstrably false. I am unconvinced.

Rom 1:19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.
Rom 1:20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
Rom 1:21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
Rom 1:22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools,

Ok, so what. A book says something, why should I believe this is from God?

Well, according to you, I don't have a choice in what I believe, so at least for the moment, the evidence I have IS sufficient for me to believe that God exists. If it wasn't sufficient, then I wouldn't believe.

I know you believe. Our standards of evidence are different.

Will you answer this question that you avoided?

Why don't you believe Musims when they claim Alah healed them after praying to him?

I think when you honestly contemplate this question you will understand why I am not convinced by your stories of true life events that God exists.