How can an atheist have a relationship with God?

Deadworm said:

2. JESUS: CONNECTIONS WITH EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY AND EXTRABIBLICAL SOURCES:

This post is intended to address the philosophical distinction between necessary and sufficient conditions for credibility. I don't claim that these connections "prove" Jesus' claims, resurrection, and miracles. But these eyewitness connections do satisfy necessary conditions for credibility and thus should give pause to skeptical assumptions about Jesus.

(1) In 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 Paul lists the sequence of resurrection appearances that he "in turn had received." Received from whom? Well, the answer can be found in Galatians 1:11-17 and 2:1-10. There Paul makes it clear that he made 2 trips to Jerusalem to consult first with Peter and Jesus' brother James, and then with Peter, James, and John, to validate His Jesus' story with eyewitness testimony. Paul notes that they made no corrections in his version of the Gospel. We can safely assume that the series of Easter appearances that Paul reports found confirmation in their testimony. More importantly, Paul is the last witness of the Risen Jesus and his resurrection appearance transforms him from a guilt-free hitman for the Pharisees into the greatest and most effective apostle. 3 times Paul celebrates his life-changing resurrection appearance, thus giving support to his travel companion, Dr. Luke's accounts in the Book of Acts.

(2a) Papias (60-120 AD) writes: "And [John] the Elder said this. Mark having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered. It was not, however, in exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied Him. But afterwards, as I said, he accompanied Peter, who accommodated his instructions to the necessities [of his hearers], but with no intention of giving a regular narrative of the Lord's sayings. Wherefore Mark made no mistake in thus writing some things as he remembered them. For of one thing he took special care, not to omit anything he had heard, and not to put anything fictitious into the statements."

Papias says he prefers "a living voice" to written documents. By this, he means that he prefers information that living disciples of Jesus (John the Elder and Aristion) and direct disciples of Jesus' disciples conveyed to him orally to written sources. Papias's learns from the eyewitness John that Mark was Peter's interpreter, a claim that finds independent support form 1 Peter 5:13). John's claim, mediated by Papias, that Mark wrote the Gospel that bears his name derives independent support from the Latinisms in Mark and from Justin Martyr of Rome who refers to Mark as "Peter's memoirs" (Dialogue with Trypho 106:3). Justin grew up in Samaria in the early 2nd century. Peter was martyred in Rome around 64 AD.

Interestingly, some eyewitnesses and those close to them complain that Mark mixes up the sequence of events in Jesus' life. But Peter never wrote an sequentially correct biography of Jesus. As John tells Papias, Mark knows not the sequence of events, but the actual incidents and miracles of Jesus' ministry, which he gleaned from Peter's teaching sessions for edifying purposes. Thus, this controversy indirectly attests an eyewitness connection with Jesus.

(2b) Papias writes: "Matthew put together the SAYINGS [Greek "logia"of the Lord] in the Hebrew language, and each one interpreted them as best he could."
The Gospel of Matthew is originally composed in Greek, not Hebrew or Aramaic. For this reason, some scholars claim that Papias's source is mistaken. But Papias never says that Matthew wrote the Gospel; rather, he says that Matthew wrote a "sayings" collection, and Christians "interpreted them (the sayings) as best they could." This sounds like the modern sayings source Q that the scholarly consensus identifies as a sayings source used by Matthew and Luke, but not by Mark and John. Q is from the German "quelle" (= source). It represents the major sayings collection that was circulated east of the Jordan River. The Coptic Gospel of Thomas consists of 114 sayings of Jesus and represents the sayings collection that circulated east of the Jordan, and eventually found its way to Egypt. Q, then, is a translation from the original Aramaic. When Greek authors mention "Hebrew," they include "Aramaic," which is, after all, a Hebrew dialect. Apparently, an unknown editor combined Matthew's Q with Mark to produce the Gospel of Matthew and Matthew's name was extended from the Q source to the entire Gospel by association. In any case, Papias is a legitimate witness to a large sayings source traceable to Matthew, an eyewitness of Jesus. Even apart from this, if Mark is essentially giving us Peter's teaching notes, why wouldn't the apostle Matthew use Mark as one of his sources?

(3) The historical credibility of Mark's preservation of Peter's memoirs can be supported by striking details that are embarrassing and unlikely to be fabricated. Here are just 3 examples: (a) The Gospel concedes that Jesus' family considers him mad and actually tries to physically restrain Him (3:19-21). This rejection prompts Jesus to complain that no prophet is "honored among his own kin and in his own house (6:4)." Even John 7:5 sadly concedes, "His own brothers did not believe in Him." (b) Hostility at Nazareth creates an atmosphere in which Jesus "is unable" to perform miracles there. In other words, He apparently tries and fails! (The "except" clause in Mark 6:6 is recognized by scholars as a later gloss.). (c) Jesus does not succeed in curing the blind man at Bethsaida on His first attempt. A 2nd effort is needed to complete the healing (8:22-26). These embarrassing details are surely historical reminiscences and, as such, lend added credibility to Mark's most awesome miracle stories.

(4) Acts 16 begins the famous "we" passages in which Luke was an eyewitness to events recorded. Luke is present with Paul when Paul's companions meet with Jesus' brother James and the Jerusalem "elders," including the surviving eyewitnesses (see Acts 21). It is during these encounters that Luke evidently gains eyewitness sources for his own Gospel. Luke discusses his access to eyewitness testimony in the prologue to his Gospel (Luke 1:1-4). It is likely during this trip to Jerusalem that Luke gains access to Mark's Gospel, Q, and unique materials originally in Aramaic (called L by scholars).
Most intriguing is Luke's reference to "several" earlier Gospels. We can only be sure that uses Mark and Q. He apparently does not use Matthew or John. His allusion suggests the existence of other Gospels from eyewitnesses that got lost and might yet be discovered by archaeologists. This prospect is in my view the most exciting possibility for modern archaeological digs and searches.

Click to expand...

singpraise said:

I believe you can have personal interaction with God. Give Him a chance. Talk to Him as though you believe He's a Person and you may be in for the surprise of your life.

To answer your question, yes, I personally did receive tangible evidence, had a paradigm shift and felt, on a physical level, the Holy Spirit enter me. But, I realize that doesn't really matter in the whole scheme of things, because obviously not everyone will have that type of experience. You don't have to have that type of experience; my experience was unique to me and you will have your own individual experience. I feel that when I finally addressed God with the proper humility and respect and gave myself over, consciously and with my entire free will, to His Son, and accepted the sacrifice of His Son, He blessed me with an unmistakable (to me) sign.

However, I'm hardly the paragon of virtuous Christianity by any stretch, I'm a completely fallible person. In fact, I joke with my husband that "the Christians" (in the traditional sense) would probably disown me because I can't do the "man-made doctrine, rules & regulations" thing required by so many churches. I'm far from "religious." But I am a firm believer in the One Who created us. You and me, and everything else. And the message of the Bible speaks the truth to me in a way no other text I've ever studied, including other religious texts, ever has.

Believing is a paradox. It's impossible. It takes a crazy faith. Which is scriptural, by the way. And God honors that kind of faith, blind faith. I know it's true because He saved my life. From where I was to where I am now is light years different - better, hard to explain - how turned around my life became. And this has held true for 20 years.

Hebrews 11:1

1Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Click to expand...

Aryeh Jay said:

That sounds like pretty good evidence for God to me.

Click to expand...

singpraise said:

I was thinking the same thing. Like, isn't that perfect evidence?

I guess it's all in the way you look at life. To me it seems sad to have the blessing of the beauty of nature in your life, but have no gratitude towards the creator of nature. Atheists miss out on so much joy and comfort. And peace. And certainty.

Click to expand...

singpraise said:

Believers who struggle with poverty, war, illness, addiction, etc., have the comfort and strength of knowing God is with them in their struggles. EVERY life has struggles. Nobody escapes hardship. I personally have been through hellish struggles I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy. The strength of God helped me through it. I've suffered a lot, but I've never suffered alone, because of Him.

Click to expand...