How can I be reasonably sure God still exists?

[Receiver]

Receiver, I am glad it worked out for you.

I (eventually) did it the Jesus way, you can be glad that it will work out for you when you do it this way, as thousands of people Worldwide that I am with will testify.

Just some comments from my side:
I don't think we are masters of our own destiny. Randomness, happenstance and the free will of others hugely affect our attempts to control our own destiny.

Indeed we are not, but I like millions of others was acting as if the meaning of life is to control it as best I can. In reality we cannot see around the next corner and none of us knows if we will wake up tomorrow.

The only "sure bet" is what I got, anything else is Russian Roullette.

The people you have met and now it seems you too have experienced something personally to convince them and now you that God is still here. Here in possibly lies the alternative to "studying the Bible", that I am looking for.

Well, remember what Jesus said to people that studied the bible intently:

"Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life." (John 5:39-40)

Jesus didn't come to bring "bible study" or religion, he came to bring relationship, something we don't have until we receive what we were not born with, His Life. I spent 18 months reading theology, all I ended up with was opinions! Receiving His Spirit is allowing Him to reveal himself!
Once you have received Him in that way teh bible really comes alive because you have what it is talking about.
I would focus on the bit of the bible that is about unsaved people finding salvation - the book of Acts. In fact because there is one way in for all you only need to read Acts 2 - that was enough to convince 3,000 people on day 1. It would help if you vuisit a meeting where people all have the same, and where the gifts of the Spirit are operated iin an orderly way (as detailed in 1 Corinthians 14). Most people have never been to such a church! I'm with these.

The typical issue here is that the instructions on how to travel this path tend to be very vague. How do you go about receiving a spirit or what caused you to whole heartedly want.

I came to a point of wanting nothing more, I didn't believe in any other way, I saw from the people I had met that this worked. I felt there was a party going on and I was missing out.

Then there is the other nagging concern. Just because someone feels content and fulfilled by coming to some sort of realisation or belief does not necessarily mean that the belief is true. Nor does it mean that someone else will also be able to experience the same result.

Yes you will meet Hare Krishnas, atheists, and others who are "very happy with my church", but I was looking for God and they had nothing to offer me that satisfied. When I followed the gospel directives given by Jesus and his disciples to repent (admit I am not right), be baptised (immersed as a believer) and call on God to receive His Spirit, I (at the 3rd attempt) spoke in tongues and found I had God's nature, not just a content feeling that changing circumstances could easily remove.

I remember reading "except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 5:20), and I knew what it meant - there is a goodness that man cannot attain to no matter how hard he tries, it is given when you call on God to do as he says!

 

[Viren]

If we look back on our life what's the most important thing? For me it has to be love. Can love be explained? Not really, yet it's really important and powerful. Knowing God exists is more discerned with the heart than the head imo.

 

[golgotha61]

Is that the only way to find proof of God's existence - to study the ancient texts?

The only way to know anything about the God of the Bible is through the Bible. If it is as important to you as you portray, then you must work at it. You must work, not because the proof of God's existence is so hard to acknowledge, you must work because your doubt is so great and your resistance is so strong.

With respect, I beg to differ. Over time cultures change, which means language nuances change. Some we are aware of some probably not. Some texts may be translated accurately and can be verified, others may have been lost or purposely destroyed over the years. These missing documents may change things significantly. I also find it hard to believe that agendizing then was any less common then it is today.

I said that time in and of itself has no effect on truth. Culture changes do not change truth. Your posit that documents could have been lost is not in dispute. What is in dispute is whether the remaining documents/narratives are adequate for knowing God. They are adequate and I know this because men and women for centuries have been able to know God through these texts of antiquity.

If you truly seek an understanding of the transmission of Biblical texts, then read The Journey From Texts to Translations by Paul D. Wegner. In this book you find answers to your questions on the accuracy of the recovered Biblical texts. On the New Testament textual criticisms, Sir Fredric Kenyon says "t is reassuring to the end to find that the general result of all these discoveries and all this study is to strengthen the proof of the authenticity of the Scriptures, and our conviction that we have in our hands, in substantial integrity, the veritable Word of God" (234).

I may of course be wrong and am extremely unqualified to argue this in any detail. The point is that at first glance, there is reasonable doubt about these ancient texts. We are not talking about a historical record of who built a monument or building. We are discussing someone who claims that failing to follow him will results in eternity in a burning hell. This is serious stuff. There must be a hundred better ways to make us realise that we should take this seriously, rather than ancient texts written in a language and style many of us today struggle to understand.

I thought that your inquiry was simply to know if God still exists. It seems that you are expanding the discussion. More to the point of this new line of questioning, separation from God for eternity is the result of separating one's self from God in this temporal life. There are questions among scholars as to whether the "burning" language is metaphorical that simply represents the pain that is involved in God's complete absence from one's habitation. You can choose to believe what you like but separation from God is the worst choice one can make.

As I said before, time has no bearing on truth. Truth is transcendent and does not change over time.

1. Makes sense to me.
2. Ditto.
3. Seems to rely heavily on ancient texts again. Which is my current problem and where it all falls down for me.

The proof of Gods current existence always seems to require the ancient texts or Bible. This is probably why so many discussions seem to revolve around the validity and accuracy of the bible. I was really hoping there was something else.

It's too bad that you simply reject this formulation out of hand. I would have expected a more thoughtful perspective from someone who claims to be serious about finding God. However, if you are too intellectually restricted to continue, I understand.

I will leave you with this, if one is convinced that God existed at a point in time in the past, and you have already agreed with that fact, then one must accept God's characteristics. God's characteristics define Him as eternal and never changing, therefore God still exists. Matthew 7:7-8 (NIV)
7 "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.
8 For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened.

Post script:
What you have engaged in is the “if I were God I would do it differently” presumptuous argument. God did what He did, and we cannot second guess Him. Job believed that the retribution principle (the righteous prosper and the wicked suffer) was how the world worked but when he was confronted with his own suffering, he was without an explanation.



When God finally confronted Job, He didn’t give an explanation for Job’s suffering. God made the point that we must trust His wisdom rather than demand explanations for what He has or has not done.


May God bless you and may He reveal Himself to you.

 

[Lukaris]

I didn't quite follow or understand your argument clearly, so forgive me if I've missed the point(s).

I'm not sure how you're getting from the fact that you have a moral conscience to the result that God exists now.

I believe that our minds & the conscience that guides them are from God. They were meant to be good but human, ancestral sin conflicted them. Human notions that there is something gone wrong & a need for purification in a peaceful manner are good. Nonetheless, there is confusion & much misery in between realization & resolution.

As a flawed & sinful individual, I can only offer a limited, but hopefully credible, apology for the existence of God in that the explanation is trustworthy & necessary. God always exists, we have not but will from our conception in life onward.

Only the divinity of the Son of God born as Jesus Christ fully God & man in His birth, life, baptism, Gospel preaching, crucifixion on the cross, death, resurrection, & ascension heal the sinful confusion in our spiritual & psychological state of mind. It is possible for a virtuous individual (who may not have ever heard or truly understood the Gospel a it was presented to them etc.)l to live as God intended us (see the Beatitudes in Matthew 5:1-12) but this is tenuous.

We need the assurance of our savior:

John 3:16-21New King James Version (NKJV)

16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. 21 But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.”

 

[Gumph]

If Scripture is true ...

This is the crux of my problem and was the danger of me going off topic. The arguments become complex and rely heavily on scripture. I'm just not well enough read up on the topic to do your replies any justice. Sorry, but thanks for your effort.

1.) Thematic unity.
2.) Fulfilled prophecy.
3.) Historical/archaeological accuracy.
4.) Impact upon individuals and culture.
5.) Survivability.
6.) Personal experience of its truth.
7.) Correspondence to reality.
8.) Explanatory power.

Thanks for this. I suppose its points 6 and 7 that I'm starting with and having the greatest difficulty with.

 

[Gumph]

Yes you will meet Hare Krishnas, atheists, and others who are "very happy with my church", but I was looking for God and they had nothing to offer me that satisfied. When I followed the gospel directives given by Jesus and his disciples to repent (admit I am not right), be baptised (immersed as a believer) and call on God to receive His Spirit, I (at the 3rd attempt) spoke in tongues and found I had God's nature, not just a content feeling that changing circumstances could easily remove.

Receiver I am glad it has worked out for you. I'm not going to call you lucky because you seem to have worked hard to reach your fulfilment.

It does seem to have been a personal set of circumstances that made your journey work out. There does not seem to be anything concrete that I can relate to yet.

I wonder however why this is not the norm and seems to rather be the exception?

Also, would it have been possible for you to achieve the same success or an even greater one, if you had worked just as hard on another path, such as another religion or life philosophy?

 

[Gumph]

If we look back on our life what's the most important thing? For me it has to be love. Can love be explained? Not really, yet it's really important and powerful. Knowing God exists is more discerned with the heart than the head imo.

Yeah, I'm getting that impression too. That makes it really difficult for me though as I don't do well with emotions and feelings. Give me maths and logic any day

To get to know something "in my heart" is quite simply not something I know how to start doing.

 

[yesyoushould]

Lol. I meant in this thread. I don't mind asking about the Bible in other threads of this forum. I'm worried that it may side track the main question in this thread only

Lol. Can't ever go wrong with the Word.

 

[Gumph]

The only way to know anything about the God of the Bible is through the Bible.

That seems to be the general consensus I'm getting from this thread. I'm a little disappointed to be honest as I had expectations of more or something else I'd been missing.

If it is as important to you as you portray, then you must work at it. You must work, not because the proof of God's existence is so hard to acknowledge, you must work because your doubt is so great and your resistance is so strong.

Not too sure how strong I've been portraying it . I have hit a stage in my life where I am simply questioning many things. Currently the only reason I can think of why I would work hard on Christian religious discovery, is because I grew up in a Christian environment. That's it. Not a single other reason. Its not very compelling.

I've tried to take a step back, away from any childhood preconceptions and have a look at all these life philosophies and religions that I have heard of on an even basis. I can't possibly study them all in enough detail to do them justice. So which one do I choose to focus on?

What is in dispute is whether the remaining documents/narratives are adequate for knowing God. They are adequate and I know this because men and women for centuries have been able to know God through these texts of antiquity.

If I were to grant you that the current translations are essentially exact representations of the originals. Don't we still run into the problem that the originals are still nothing more than humans recounting what they or someone else said they saw a few decades earlier. At best they are eye witness accounts. Would that be fair?

If you truly seek an understanding of the transmission of Biblical texts, then read ....

Perhaps I will, thanks for the lead. But first I need my reason before choosing that path. The search continues.

I thought that your inquiry was simply to know if God still exists. It seems that you are expanding the discussion.

It was, well is. I do get side tracked although I'm trying to avoid doing so. I think that the consensus seems to be that the only way to do so is by using the bible. If that is the result of the discussion, then I will have other questions to expand my knowledge. Probably best done in a separate thread.

It's too bad that you simply reject this formulation out of hand.

Well, its a reasoning coming out of a text I hardly understand and haven't been able to easily verify its authenticity. I can't really use this as a source of evidence yet. Put to the side for now, as opposed to rejected out right.

I would have expected a more thoughtful perspective from someone who claims to be serious about finding God.

Whoa. Haven't got there yet. I'm trying to find the motivation and reasons for starting the journey of finding God. As of now I don't know which God I should be trying to find or even if it is a God I should be trying to find or even if I should be trying to find anything.

However, if you are too intellectually restricted to continue, I understand.

I am admittedly no great intellect, but (and this is a big concern I have with the only way of knowing God being the study of a complicated text) if I am restricted from continuing, what about all those others of lower intellect, education or means? How can they possibly hope to find God?

I will leave you with this, if one is convinced that God existed at a point in time in the past, and you have already agreed with that fact, then one must accept God's characteristics. God's characteristics define Him as eternal and never changing, therefore God still exists.

I did? I hope not. If so perhaps I should clarify. I can imagine that everything we experience was created by some sort of superior being, race or entity. That is not based on any evidence, but purely because I haven't heard of an alternative option.

So the characteristics could be anything, and I see no reason why they have to be eternal or unchanging. That's the very reason why I would like to confirm right now if this superior being is still here and watching us.

What you have engaged in is the “if I were God I would do it differently” presumptuous argument. God did what He did, and we cannot second guess Him.

Indeed I have. I see no alternative. I have to second guess because I have not been given any reason why it was done the way it was. I cannot just accept that "He has his reasons" and not have any idea what they may be.

May God bless you and may He reveal Himself to you.

I thank you for your contribution. I sense you are becoming frustrated with me and I understand that. Unfortunately the light bulb moment has not yet arrived for me.

 

[Gumph]

I believe that our minds & the conscience that guides them are from God. They were meant to be good but human, ancestral sin conflicted them. Human notions that there is something gone wrong & a need for purification in a peaceful manner are good. Nonetheless, there is confusion & much misery in between realization & resolution.

Thanks Lukaris. You seem to have come to your solution. I have a long way to go to find mine. Above you provide your end result. I first need to know which end result to aim for, and why.

 

[Receiver]

Receiver I am glad it has worked out for you. I'm not going to call you lucky because you seem to have worked hard to reach your fulfilment.

It does seem to have been a personal set of circumstances that made your journey work out. There does not seem to be anything concrete that I can relate to yet.

I wonder however why this is not the norm and seems to rather be the exception?

Also, would it have been possible for you to achieve the same success or an even greater one, if you had worked just as hard on another path, such as another religion or life philosophy?

I wouldn't say I worked hard, the message is believe and receive!
When I did that it worked!
It was made a little harder by not hearing that in "churches" I went to, and when I did hear it I tried to ignore it for a while.

Gumph, it is the norm, indeed the rule, the promise, guaranteed for people who believe the original message as given in Acts 2 (repeated to the gentiles in Acts 10:44-48). I'm with thousands of people from all different backgrounds who have all received the same ... the reason it doesn't happen that way in the groups you have met is that they believe a different message ... "pray the sinners prayer", accept a "confession" or creed.
A lady came to us who had been with a "charismatic" group for two years, she prayed once with them to receive the Spirit speaking in to9ngues, it didn't happen and they told her she has a blockage. We said God doesn't do blockages, God has no favourites, what he has done for one he will do for another, she received that day.

The apostles went into the world, people of different background but were able to relate the gospel to them ... I'm sure if you get to one of our meetings you will find at least one person of similar age / background to you, if that's what you think you need.

I looked at philosophy, politics none of these things made people happy, philosophy made people vague and a bit boring as they try to fit everything into their mental construct, politics used to make people angry.
Other works of worship didn't seem to make much difference on Monday morning, and the people kind of admitted it, the religious line was "I must not judge", what I have now is a daily two-way relationship with God, fulfilling and with answers that work, that I give to people such as yourself so they can receive the same.

 

[Gumph]

Perhaps its time for another summary and some clarification. An analogy if I may:

I find myself as a Freshman at the College of Life. I need to choose which subjects to major in. There are a huge number of these subjects: Christianity; Islam; Hinduism; Buddhism, Astrology, Science, Atheism, Sport, Materialism, Satanism, Engineering, are just some of the main, better known faculties. There are dozens of smaller ones too.

Then each will require me to choose from a wide variety of courses within each subject. (Methodists, Catholics, Anglicans, etc in the Christian faculty and Astronomy, Evolution, Quantum Mechanics, etc in the Science faculty for example purposes). There is the opportunity to take the odd course in another faculty, but not to major level. Just a way of expanding general knowledge really. Almost all the subjects have the goal of providing me with some sort of fulfilment in life. Each has a different way of doing so.

Orientation week has started, so I'm chatting with peers and doing some superficial research to decide which courses to take and which subject to major in. Each faculty holds talks and puts on displays to entice the students to take their courses.

So far I have attended several functions:

1) The Science guys were friendly and showed me a whole lot of interesting things they had made. They had interactive displays where I could experience some of their projects. They were a bit elitist though, and have fairly stringent entrance requirements. A high end analytical brain seems to be pretty important here. Social life seems a bit dull.

2) The Atheist guys were a bit hard to find. They didn't have much to offer and seemed to not care less who joined their faculty and who didn't. There were one or two exceptions. In fact they didn't even seem to have a faculty building. Occasionally they hold raids on the neighbouring faculty buildings and egg them for fun.

3) The Christians are friendly and helpful, and will accept almost anyone who is willing to study hard. They were effusive in their promises of a wonderful graduation and a life long, rewarding career. They didn't have anything in their displays that allowed me to experience or get a sense of what the end result would be. Instead they showed me their text books and promised that on graduation, the result would become clear and would be amazing. They seemed like nice guys, but it would have been nice to see what they could actually do.

Tomorrow I'm off to see what the rest of the faculties have to offer and I will make a decision by the end of orientation week.


A lot of this is tongue in cheek and a poor attempt at some humour. Its not intended to trivialise the matter so please no one get offended.

Does this help explain where I am now though? I am busy trying to choose my career path. All the faculties offer promises of final fulfilment. Christianity cannot yet offer me an enticing sample of what to expect. Instead I am shown excerpts from their text books which are not always easy to understand, and I have no way of testing these excerpts to get a better grasp of what the subject is all about.

I am told that I must first study and understand the book and then it will all become clear. I have nothing more than a promise to go on

 

[High Fidelity]

No matter how legitimate things may seem, it's ultimately a matter of faith.

I think you yourself just need to read the bible, do topical studies and just build your understanding of the bible. I think that's when most people find they have enough of a basis to take that leap of faith.

 

[dcalling]

Perhaps its time for another summary and some clarification. An analogy if I may:

I find myself as a Freshman at the College of Life. I need to choose which subjects to major in. There are a huge number of these subjects: Christianity; Islam; Hinduism; Buddhism, Astrology, Science, Atheism, Sport, Materialism, Satanism, Engineering, are just some of the main, better known faculties. There are dozens of smaller ones too.

There can be a million other man made things, but Christianity is simple and clear, you don't need to take all that course, as long as you know that God said all you goal is to Love God and Love others as yourself. (Luke 10:27 or Mathew 22:36-40), and that we can't do this (everyone will fall short of this), so we have to repent to God and no one can go to heaven except through the grace of God.

I did a lot of research of Islam, and it seems initially it is the same as Christianity, but later it changed, from simple message of Love to rules of war and all others.

And if you check out revolution, it can't even proof the second stage of complex chemicals to RNA (the best humans can do is construct an RNA that can replicate half of itself, which is a complete failure in real world).

Now the most interesting part about Quantum physics is, down to the root of it, the pairing action is best described as "spooky action" .... No one knows why, but they know through mathematics it must happen, you just have to have faith in it Sounds familar?

 

[aiki]

The thing is, Gumph, the Christian life is at its heart, not just a body of knowledge that will aid you in leading a fulfilling life, but a Person: Jesus Christ. Christianity is, at bottom, about knowing, and loving, and following him. And in every instance of such a relationship, both sides must take initiative in creating the relationship. In the relationship a believer has with God, however, most of the relational initiative at first is on God's side. He draws those who are seeking the truth about life, who have responded to the God-shaped vacuum within their heart by searching for truth, into an experience of Himself through faith in Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord. You can't enter into this personal experience of God by yourself. He must move to meet you in your search for truth. Have you asked Him to do so? Have you invited Him to make Himself real to you? Are you willing to take the lower place before God as all who wish to know Him must do?

Selah.

 

[golgotha61]

I find myself as a Freshman at the College of Life. I need to choose which subjects to major in. There are a huge number of these subjects: Christianity; Islam; Hinduism; Buddhism, Astrology, Science, Atheism, Sport, Materialism, Satanism, Engineering, are just some of the main, better known faculties. There are dozens of smaller ones too.


I am told that I must first study and understand the book and then it will all become clear. I have nothing more than a promise to go on

Experiential consistency
The Biblical narratives in the New Testament reveal why Jesus was who He claimed to be and is followed by millions. A comparison of Jesus, Mohammad, Krishna (no evidence for a true existence), Buddha, and Mahavira show the extreme differences in their claims and demonstrations. Only one, Christ, ever claimed to be divine. For the follower of Christ the fact that the universe is not self-existent, plus the obvious intelligence embedded in the universe, and the experiential verification of what Jesus taught and did, make belief in Him a very rational and existentially fulfilling reality.

Concerning the authenticity of the Biblical claims concerning Christ, I don’t see any reason to doubt the historical event of His death and resurrection. It is without doubt that a man called Jesus who was thought to be the Christ/messiah existed. The only verification that is needed is whether or not this man rose from the dead. If He did rise from the dead as the accounts in Scripture narrate, then He must be God. Only a god could rise from the dead. But since the OT prophecies point to this event and in fact build up to it, this is not just a god but He is God/Yahweh.


If the resurrection of Christ is false, then Christianity is a lie and we Christians believe in vain (1 Cor. 15:14). If on the other hand He did rise from the dead then the purpose of all that ancient text that you challenge, is accomplished. God’s intent for the Biblical narratives is to draw the lost to Himself and to redeem them so that they may spend eternity with Him in His garden.
So, there are two groups who would have loved to prove the resurrection a lie. One group is the ancient Jews that had Jesus crucified and the simplest way to disprove His resurrection would be to produce a body. But that never happened. There is no evidence that there was even an attempt to find the body of Christ. There is no evidence of a search for His body in the Bible and there is no evidence of a search for His body in any other secular or Jewish writings.


Biblically, the thought of a stolen body was prepared for by securing the tomb where Jesus’ body lay and this was done by Roman guards who were not slouches in this area of securing a tomb. There is no evidence that the Roman guards were attacked and since the penalty for failing at the job of securing the tomb was severe, there is no chance that the Roman guards were in league with the Apostles. In fact, the only attempt to discredit the authority of the Apostles as they went into the known world to proclaim Christ, was to accuse them of heresy and other crimes against the Jewish faith. It would have been much more effective to produce the body of Christ and be done with it. But it never happened and the reason it never happened was because Christ did rise from the dead, there is no other explanation.



The other group was the Roman government. Now, Christ was not as much a threat to them as He was to the Jews. Christians were more of an annoyance to the Romans and were objects of torture under the rule of Nero and other Romans. But again, if the Romans wanted to quell the obnoxious Christian movement, all they needed to do was produce the body of Christ. But again, no attempt is recorded of being done.


The reasoning above supports the experiential consistency that makes the other religions nothing more than falsities. If the resurrection is true, and there is no evidence to disprove it, then the ancient Scripture is true and one needs to put faith in Christ, which is the only reasonable action available.

 

[yesyoushould]

Denying we exist is foolish.

 

[Gumph]

... as long as you know that God said all you goal is to Love God and Love others as yourself...

This is something you may "know", but for me and any other beginner, how would we "know"? It also seems that there is much more to Christianity than just this.

... Now the most interesting part about Quantum physics is, down to the root of it, the pairing action is best described as "spooky action" .... No one knows why, but they know through mathematics it must happen, you just have to have faith in it Sounds familar?

Lol. Absolutely it sounds familiar. The big difference is that I can ignore it and choose another interest in life and there will be no consequence. Christianity and I assume some of the other religions, claim that failing to make sense of it can result if a very miserable eternity. That's a serious and significant claim.

 

[Gumph]

Have you asked Him to do so? Have you invited Him to make Himself real to you?

Am I not doing just that in this forum? I'm asking, in writing, show yourself, please.

 

[Gumph]

@ Golgotha61

You put forward an apparently convincing argument is a field which you seem to have done much more research than me. I can't attempt to fault you because doing so would require me to become familiar with the records and customs of the times. I am sure that countless scholars have argued both sides over the years and continue to do so. Perhaps one day I will start that herculean journey.

In the mean time I present an unsubstantiated possibility on why the body was never shown: At the time he was one of many annoyances (to the authorities of the day)claiming to be the messiah. The body was lost or stolen or disposed of and at the time they felt no need to cater to the whims of a small body of followers. They probably regretted that decision in the years that followed.

Now I'm pretty sure you have a reason why you find that scenario implausible. Then I could probably come up with a couple more "maybe" scenarios. But it all becomes an exercise in futility because a decent discussion requires you and I to be experts in the civilisation of the time.

That remains my main issue: In order to know God exists now, I need to believe in the words written in the Bible. In order to believe the words of the Bible I have to trust testimony from men in a foreign culture who were largely uneducated and lived a very long time ago.

It just seems so horribly illogical. Something that appears so incredibly crucial to us here and now, is presented to us in a format that no layperson in off the street, in 2015 can be expected to verify with reasonable ease.

We have to trust the words of others, and yet human lying and false rumour is common place - even if unintentional. Why can't this doubt be removed?