If God manifested himself, how would you know that it was God?

[TillICollapse]

I disagree! If God knows all things; he will know what it will take to convince an atheist, a skeptic, or any doubter of who he is. If he is unable to do that; why call him God???

K

I'm picking this post of yours out of context because I have a question regarding it ... I am not responding to it in the context of the circular logic discussion you were involved in with other posters at that time

Having said that, I am curious what your expectations of a "god" would be ? Based on this post of yours, it would seem you would expect a "god" to be all knowing. Is that a correct assumption of your post ? If so ... my question to you, as an atheist (I'm assuming, based on your icon thing), is why ?

 

[Jeremy E Walker]

You're not getting it. Hypothetically speaking; suppose the Bible and the religion of the bible is a fraud, and the real God is a God that you are not familiar with; a God that you have been ignoring all this time because you were too busy focusing on the wrong God? What would it take for you to recognize you were in error all this time?

Ken

Ask yourself the same question and you may just have your answer.

 

[Ken-1122]

My claims are in fact substantiated.

1) For His invisible attributes, that is, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen since the creation of the world, being understood through what He has made. As a result, people are without excuse. (Romans 1:20)

2) You will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. (Jeremiah 29:13)

3) The LORD is good to those who wait for Him, to the soul that seeks Him. (Lamentations 3:25)

4) No foreigner who has joined himself to the LORD should say," The LORD will exclude me from His people"; and the eunuch should not say," Look, I am a dried-up tree." For the LORD says this:
“For the eunuchs who keep My Sabbaths,
and choose what pleases Me,
and hold firmly to My covenant,
I will give them, in My house and within My walls,
a memorial and a name
better than sons and daughters.
I will give each of them an everlasting name
that will never be cut off.
And the foreigners who join themselves to the LORD
minister to Him, love the name of Yahweh
and become His servants,
all who keep the Sabbath without desecrating it
and who hold firmly to My covenant —
I will bring them to My holy mountaing
and let them rejoice in My house of prayer.
Their burnt offerings and sacrifices
will be acceptable on My altar,
for My house will be called a house of prayer
for all nations.” (Isaiah 56:3-7)

Edit: Let me therefore add that God has never hidden Himself from men. Those who are diligent and sincere in trying to know who He is will not be rejected. It has been God's stance since OT even to non-Israelites, it remains so that God rewards those who seek Him with all their hearts.

You can't use the bible to substantiate the bible; that's called circular reasoning. You must use an outside source.

K

 

[Ken-1122]

I think that it's ultimately impossible to convince anyone of anything because there's always an alternate explanation, so no matter how much evidence is given it just wouldn't matter. People could claim that it was an alien with super-advanced technology that we just couldn't understand or something like that and no-one would be able to refute it.

So you can't be convinced by something through the five senses. The convincing has to come from the inside.

It all depends upon the person. Many people can be convinced through their five sences.

Ken

 

[Ken-1122]

You are not arguing on the issue of the OP.

That particular argument was directed to a particular person's claim; not the OP

Ken

 

[Ken-1122]

I'm picking this post of yours out of context because I have a question regarding it ... I am not responding to it in the context of the circular logic discussion you were involved in with other posters at that time

Having said that, I am curious what your expectations of a "god" would be ? Based on this post of yours, it would seem you would expect a "god" to be all knowing. Is that a correct assumption of your post ? If so ... my question to you, as an atheist (I'm assuming, based on your icon thing), is why ?

Because the society of which I live defines God that way.

Ken

 

[Ken-1122]

Ask yourself the same question and you may just have your answer.

I already know the answer as applied to myself; but not as applied to you!

Ken

 

[Jeremy E Walker]

I disagree! If God knows all things; he will know what it will take to convince an atheist, a skeptic, or any doubter of who he is. If he is unable to do that; why call him God???

K

There are two ways in which it can be said that someone believes in God.

1. In the sense that one assents to the proposition: God exists. This is called the assent of the intellect. It is akin to saying, I believe in the theory of evolution by natural selection etc.

2. In the sense that one trusts in, relies upon, depends upon, places their hope in, has confidence in etc. etc.

God can and has done 1. Romans 1 testifies of this. Even the demons believe and tremble. Everyone knows God exists but some choose to suppress this truth in unrighteousness.

And I think God could so order providence as to make even the most evil man melt with sorrow and seek repentance after having been brought to see his helpless state.

The real issue is: would God be obligated to so order providence as to bring every man who was intent on abiding in unbelief, to a place of repentance and belief?

I do not think so. I do not think God could be charged with wrongdoing if He left a man to himself who was determined to not have anything to do with God.

As C.S. Lewis wrote in The Great Divorce:

“There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, in the end, "Thy will be done." All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell. No soul that seriously and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek find. Those who knock it is opened.”

 

[TillICollapse]

Because the society of which I live defines God that way.

Ken

Well, not all of us would. Which bring me to my point:

If for example, I'm not one who would define "god" that way ... then it confuses me somewhat why an atheist would still. You can say, "Because others do," but you are now one of those others, from the perspective of myself and others who may think similarly. I'm asking somewhat because of a conversation I had with another person ... why do you think that you specifically would define "god" that way ? Keep in mind it can be shown that not all society can be generalized as defining "god" that way, as all it takes is a few examples to show that (myself included). So why would you specifically side with societies definition ? Why the preference ? And would you call that having a bias ?

 

[RDKirk]

There are two ways in which it can be said that someone believes in God.

1. In the sense that one assents to the proposition: God exists. This is called the assent of the intellect. It is akin to saying, I believe in the theory of evolution by natural selection etc.

2. In the sense that one trusts in, relies upon, depends upon, places their hope in, has confidence in etc. etc.

God can and has done 1. Romans 1 testifies of this. Even the demons believe and tremble. Everyone knows God exists but some choose to suppress this truth in unrighteousness.

And I think God could so order providence as to make even the most evil man melt with sorrow and seek repentance after having been brought to see his helpless state.

The real issue is: would God be obligated to so order providence as to bring every man who was intent on abiding in unbelief, to a place of repentance and belief?

I do not think so. I do not think God could be charged with wrongdoing if He left a man to himself who was determined to not have anything to do with God.

As C.S. Lewis wrote in The Great Divorce:

“There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, in the end, "Thy will be done." All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell. No soul that seriously and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek find. Those who knock it is opened.”

I pretty much have to agree with this. Romans 1 goes farther to assent that God gives men what they want.

Ahab expressly did not want to hear the true word of the Lord, so God sent to him a lying spirit. God gives over to a great delusion those men who supress the knowledge of Him expressed by creation, and thus they become "fools."

 

[Paradoxum]

I would certainly agree that externally it's quite possible that there would be no way to tell.

An alien race with incredibly advanced technology could come across as all of those things. Actually, it's quite possible to interpret the Bible as mankind's encounter with extra-terrestrials (I don't do this, obviously).

I agree.

I guess that depends on your point of view.

 

[WoundedDeep]

You can't use the bible to substantiate the bible; that's called circular reasoning. You must use an outside source.

K

It is not circular reasoning anymore when your own experiences prove what is said in the Bible (I'm talking about hardcore reality no one can deny). Remember that I said I myself was an atheist too born in a wholly atheist family, my experiences testify to what I read later on in the Bible, which I now quoted to you.

To make it an undeniable reality to anyone, they need a personal encounter with God, just like I or other atheist-turned-Christian did.

Edit: Let me also add on that God does not reveal Himself to people who clearly don't want to know Him. Sadly the state of the vast majority today is that they want nothing to do with the true living God since they are happy being their own gods. God will in no way force anyone to know Him.

 

[Ken-1122]

There are two ways in which it can be said that someone believes in God.

1. In the sense that one assents to the proposition: God exists. This is called the assent of the intellect. It is akin to saying, I believe in the theory of evolution by natural selection etc.

There is proof that evolution happens.

2. In the sense that one trusts in, relies upon, depends upon, places their hope in, has confidence in etc. etc.

AKA Faith

God can and has done 1.

That is untrue. There is no proof that God exists. If you disagree I challenge you to provide such proof.
Even though there is no proof of God’s existence, if God were everything people claim he is; he could provide such proof in a way that even a skeptic like me could believe.


Ken

 

[Ken-1122]

Well, not all of us would. Which bring me to my point:

If for example, I'm not one who would define "god" that way ... then it confuses me somewhat why an atheist would still.

Why are you confused? Are you surprised that not everybody thinks the same as you do?

You can say, "Because others do," but you are now one of those others, from the perspective of myself and others who may think similarly.

Yes! Now why is this confusing?

I'm asking somewhat because of a conversation I had with another person ... why do you think that you specifically would define "god" that way ? Keep in mind it can be shown that not all society can be generalized as defining "god" that way, as all it takes is a few examples to show that (myself included).

I said the society I grew up in; not what ever society YOU or someone else grew up in! Now in the society I grew up in, God was defined that way. If you wish to prove me wrong; you can try, but you gonna be swimming upstream if you gonna try to refute me on this on.

So why would you specifically side with societies definition ? Why the preference ?

Because the people who actually believe in God are the ones who get to define what it is they believe in.

And would you call that having a bias ?

No; just common sense.

Ken

 

[Ken-1122]

It is not circular reasoning anymore when your own experiences prove what is said in the Bible (I'm talking about hardcore reality no one can deny). Remember that I said I myself was an atheist too born in a wholly atheist family, my experiences testify to what I read later on in the Bible, which I now quoted to you.

Your own personal experiences does not substantiate the bible, all it does is convince YOU.

Ken

 

[WoundedDeep]

Your own personal experiences does not substantiate the bible, all it does is convince YOU.

Ken

I am not the only one convinced, if not there will only be a single Christian in this world. Personal experiences, though not sufficient to convince everyone, are what everyone needs to decide for themselves what is true or false. Every author in the Bible, from Moses to David to Peter and John, though living in different generations with no communication among them, had a personal testimony of God by their own experiences, and its not mere coincidence they all have the exact same testimony. We wouldn't have any Bibles in the first place if these people did not share their personal experiences with God.

 

[Ken-1122]

I am not the only one convinced, if not there will only be a single Christian in this world. Personal experiences, though not sufficient to convince everyone, are what everyone needs to decide for themselves what is true or false. Every author in the Bible, from Moses to David to Peter and John, though living in different generations with no communication among them, had a personal testimony of God by their own experiences, and its not mere coincidence they all have the exact same testimony. We wouldn't have any Bibles in the first place if these people did not share their personal experiences with God.

I understand all that, and the same can be said for all religions. My point is, personal experiences do not substantiate it; for that you have to use an outside source.

Ken

 

[2PhiloVoid]

So here's a question for all to ponder: Suppose that God manifests himself in some sort of physical or spiritual revelation, to you personally, you and a group of people, or to the entire planet. How would you know that this was God? How would you know, for instance, that it wasn't some sort of alien with super-advanced technology pretending to be God?

A follow-up question for antitheists: If a personal manifestation/appearance of God wouldn't prove to you that God exists (since there could always be another explanation - aliens or whatever), then what sort of proof would you accept that God exists?

...you wouldn't "need" proof; God's presence would be known through the experience of the numinous, as Rudolf Otto would have said it. In fact, this is the kind of phenomenon we see in Scripture when a person encounters the Divine (or one of His agents).

 

[WoundedDeep]

I understand all that, and the same can be said for all religions. My point is, personal experiences do not substantiate it; for that you have to use an outside source.

Ken

Will it be more convincing for me to show you some form of substantiation, or for you to seek and test the things stated in the Bible by yourself? Don't you find it odd that people are willing to go to great lengths to humble themselves to learn and master a human knowledge, but when it comes to learning the knowledge of God, they shy away and reject it with stubbornness, claiming that it is a foolish pursuit? I would rather someone who had true curiosity and keenness to learn to seek and test the truth on their own, so that they don't need someone else to convince them. I say this for your benefit and for the benefit of those humble enough to discard human wisdom and to learn as innocent and receptive children, because true godly knowledge should be attained by seeking it from God Himself with the attitude of a humble child. Jesus Himself said those who are like children will enter God's Kingdom.

 

[TillICollapse]

Why are you confused? Are you surprised that not everybody thinks the same as you do?

Confused is perhaps the wrong word ... perplexed maybe ? At first glance it seems counterintuitive for an atheist to be defining a god they claim doesn't exist. It would be like someone who doesn't believe in Bigfoot saying, "I don't believe Bigfoot exists. But Bigfoot likes bananas, otherwise he's not Bigfoot." How would you know ? " If your answer is more or less, "Well that's what others told me," then I'm still somewhat perplexed why you would claim such a thing about Bigfoot while simultaneously claiming there is no Bigfoot.

Yes! Now why is this confusing?

See above. Wrong choice of words. I'd still like an answer to my question, if you'll provide it, of what your expectations of a "god" would be ? What is your own personal, independent definition IOW ? Again, based on your previous post, I'm assuming one such attribute would be "all knowing", yes ? What other attributes ?

I said the society I grew up in; not what ever society YOU or someone else grew up in! Now in the society I grew up in, God was defined that way. If you wish to prove me wrong; you can try, but you gonna be swimming upstream if you gonna try to refute me on this on.

You never said the society in which you grew up in, you said the society in which you live. What is the society in which you live ? And how could I possibly prove that every member of the society in which you live, or grew up in, defines god precisely the way you would claim they do ? To prove such a thing would be difficult, as I'd have to poll each and every individual you would consider part of your "society". I'm not even sure why you would think I would want to prove you wrong, however you are the one who made the claim about your "society", so actually the burden of proof is on you to prove that your society is defining god a specific way.

Personally, I would include the people you interact with daily on the internet as part of your society in some form or fashion. So if you want to continue the "society" route, you should probably define what you mean by "society", since we are no longer humans living in isolated pockets.

Because the people who actually believe in God are the ones who get to define what it is they believe in.

No; just common sense.

Ken

But you seem to be defining it as well. Esp from my perspective, since your own definition involves something which mine doesn't, which even you refer to as "common sense". By the rationale you just proposed, does that mean you believe in God since you define "God" ?