Demonstrable proof

[Non sequitur]

OK.. make that same appeal to God, and see if He doesn't want to be your friends and want you to get to know Him better.. I would start with His love letter to you.

I have already established that I did and have.

No god has showed up at my door. And to infer I haven't been "doing it right" either means:

1) Even though he knows I've tried to the best of my ability, he chooses to not accept my attempts and get back to me.

Kinda seems like he cares more about my kind and type of attempts, than the fact I am making any; rather nick-picking.

2) He isn't really there.

 

[visionary]

I have already established that I did and have.

No god has showed up at my door. And to infer I haven't been "doing it right" either means:

1) Even though he knows I've tried to the best of my ability, he chooses to not accept my attempts and get back to me.

Kinda seems like he cares more about my kind and type of attempts, than the fact I am making any; rather nick-picking.

2) He isn't really there.

Clean your ears out.. He speaks with a still small voice..kinda like your conscience..

 

[Non sequitur]

Clean your ears out.. He speaks with a still small voice..kinda like your conscience..

From what I've read, your god can be both mystical and quiet as well as loud and apparent; it's his call.

So, I'm not sure why I'd specifically looking for only one of those methods.

Also, I don't recall seeing it written any where in your Bible that he only way he will is in still and small voices, so I'm not sure how you arrived at that being the only or optimal way to hear him.


And, again, it has not happened yet. No arrival at my door for a meet-and-greet.

 

[visionary]

From what I've read, your god can be both mystical and quiet as well as loud and apparent; it's his call.

So, I'm not sure why I'd specifically looking for only one of those methods.

Also, I don't recall seeing it written any where in your Bible that he only way he will is in still and small voices, so I'm not sure how you arrived at that being the only or optimal way to hear him.


And, again, it has not happened yet. No arrival at my door for a meet-and-greet.

You haven't prepared yourself to meet the God of the BIBLE.. He is awesome almighty... and more than you could bear at the moment.. that is why I think that the still small voice of conscience is a good place for you to start listening to.,, Pray and ask God to lift the words off the Bible that are His to speak directly to your heart's questions.

 

[Non sequitur]

You haven't prepared yourself to meet the God of the BIBLE.. He is awesome almighty... and more than you could bear at the moment.. that is why I think that the still small voice of conscience is a good place for you to start listening to.,, Pray and ask God to lift the words off the Bible that are His to speak directly to your heart's questions.

If you keep moving the goal posts, I'm going to find this conversation pointless.

 

[visionary]

If you keep moving the goal posts, I'm going to find this conversation pointless.

Is it not your goal to meet God? To get real with Him as you expect Him to get real with you? THen we have the same goal.

 

[Ishraqiyun]

1) Even though he knows I've tried to the best of my ability, he chooses to not accept my attempts and get back to me.

Maybe he likes exasperating you like that? Or at least that is the manner of this stage of your learning process? He likes to play and Hide Seek for some reason. He can seem a rather cruel lover at times.

 

[Non sequitur]

Is it not your goal to meet God? To get real with Him as you expect Him to get real with you? THen we have the same goal.

If I were looking for facts to support my conclusion, then I might not even be able to see the truth.

If I were looking for conclusions to support my facts, then I can only arrive at the truth.

So saying that my goal is to meet God, would be drawing a conclusion before the facts.

Which is not the way one finds the truth.


I can't very well give something characteristics and define it, prior to my knowledge of it.

 

[visionary]

If I were looking for facts to support my conclusion, then I might not even be able to see the truth.

If I were looking for conclusions to support my facts, then I can only arrive at the truth.

So saying that my goal is to meet God, would be drawing a conclusion before the facts.

Which is not the way one finds the truth.


I can't very well give something characteristics and define it, prior to my knowledge of it.

OK.. let's establish your goals first... Do you want to meet God, who is the fact?

 

[Non sequitur]

Maybe he likes exasperating you like that? Or at least that is the manner of this stage of your learning process? He likes to play and Hide Seek for some reason. He can seem a rather cruel lover at times.

Ha, ha, ha.

That was funny and about the most refreshing comment I have read to-date

 

[razeontherock]

So we have an unknown cause... except this time, it can't be tested to show it does exist. And we're gonna go ahead and say we know what it is.

No we don't. When a God fearing person talks about "God," we recognize we don't really know what "it" is. Is your difficulty in this thread really resolved by something this simple?

 

[razeontherock]

So you wish to prove a metaphysical idea by scientific methods?

And then wants to brag about a victory?

 

[razeontherock]

Only until I showed up at your door in person, could you say that you truly know I exist.

And this is the demonstrable proof you ask about. You say you have sought this, and you have gotten nothing. I have no reason to doubt that. It is simply not my experience, so I look to see what the differences are.

Much of my time on CF has been probing atheists, to see if I can find any common ground. And I do. Your stated issue is one common element: seeking G-d and Him "not showing up." So what did you do to seek Him? Please be as specific as you feel comfortable divulging.

The other common ground I see is many say it was reading the Bible that turned them away. And in those individuals I always find some strikingly wrong ideas on the subject of it's meaning. And this problem is a growing trend; more and more people are going down this route. I'm not sure yet if these 2 issues are connected or related ...

 

[razeontherock]

Kinda seems like he cares more about my kind and type of attempts, than the fact I am making any; rather nick-picking.

Please compare your statement here to the story of Cain and Abel

 

[elopez]

I'm going to try my hardest to not address everything you said, not because I can't, but there are many things I view as incorrect and it will derail original topics.

Let's do one at a time.

Hmm, if you say many things will derail the original topic, then why did you even bring them up in the first place as I was responding to what you said? What things are you referring to? You really have to put effort forth to not reply to something you brought up? Honestly, this doesn't sound like it's a matter of irrelevancy, but okay then.

"We do not know it will rise because of the laws of nature are operating presently, that does not mean they will be operating tomorrow. I am not questioning anything but simply the fact that we do not know with absolute certainty that the sun will rise tomorrow just as you do not know you will live to see tomorrow."

The appearance of the sun rising is simply because the earth, spinning on its axis, orbits the sun.

Laws have not and don't just stop working. They don't only work in a specific linear time line; "tomorrow" won't do anything to it.

Now, if some giant mass hits the sun or the earth, then yes it might not rise tomorrow.

The point is those laws could stop working, and neither you or I know when that is going to be. For all we know it could be tomorrow. And some giant mass hitting the earth or sun is not the only way the sun could cease to rise.

But now we are talking about probability of an event occurring within the laws of nature, and honestly that's not the gist of what you are talking about.

Your point was, I believe, there are things which we don't know. Which I agree with... and kind of doesn't prove any point, now.

So, this argument is rather moot since the appearance of the sun rising may or may not happen, but gravity will affect it either way.

It actually does prove a point. I'll restate it for clarification. Being that we cannot prove that the sun will rise or much less that we will be alive tomorrow, we still act and believe as if it will. So we believe in something though we cannot prove it. My point is that not everything can be proven, and those things that cannot be proven doesn't necessarily mean we cannot believe in them.

Now, if you want everything to come with a caveat of "**** happens", fine.

You might grow a third arm and I might start flying, by only using my mind. Are these the kind of things you want to now accept in the realm of reality?

Because I'm not aware of any law that supports those possibilities.

None of this is clear to me. There actually is no possibility that you will start flying or that I will magically grow a third arm, and that is incomparable to sun not rising as that actually is a possibility.

 

[Non sequitur]

No we don't. When a God fearing person talks about "God," we recognize we don't really know what "it" is. Is your difficulty in this thread really resolved by something this simple?

Yes. You fear something and you don't know what it is.

If you don't know what it is, how do you know it is telling you the truth?

 

[razeontherock]

G-d is not fully known by any of us. That does not mean none of us have any legitimate revelation. This would appear to be an important distinction you are willing to overlook.

 

[Non sequitur]

G-d is not fully known by any of us. That does not mean none of us have any legitimate revelation. This would appear to be an important distinction you are willing to overlook.

If it is legitimate revelation, what do you use to put that in context for you?

 

[razeontherock]

An interesting question! I would say I put the idea into context, and until it can be verified it's not accepted as revelation.

If you go back to my post #96, the little blue arrow will take you to your original post for the context of my question there. I think this is important to address ...

 

[Non sequitur]

An interesting question! I would say I put the idea into context, and until it can be verified it's not accepted as revelation.

If you go back to my post #96, the little blue arrow will take you to your original post for the context of my question there. I think this is important to address ...

So, you had never heard of the Bible, prior to that date, and had no knowledge of Christianity?