'Knowledge' of Existence

[Chriliman]

dp

 

[cvanwey]

I see. When I say study, I'm not referring to anything along those lines. Theism is a 2500 year old tradition in the West--you can find tons of resources if you know where to look. (Catholicism in particular is very good for this.) If you want to remain Christian, what you need to do is break through the fundamentalist indoctrination that you seem to have been subjected to and find your own path instead.

Though that is, of course, more easily said than done. I think you do need to also look into biblical scholarship, though I'm not sure which scholars are the best bet to challenge what you've been taught without smashing what's left of your faith entirely. You might want to ask around in the subforum for Liberal Christianity--they may be able to point you in the right direction.

I appreciate the information and suggestions. But I feel it is not actually addressing my main objective in this thread

I could study more, think more, rationalize more, 'philosophize' more, remove my preconceptions more, etc... But I do not really need to do any of that when 'knowing' something exists.

Regardless of my education, presuppositions, bias, etc., I 'KNOW' many things exist, whether I 'like' it or not....

 

[bling]

I would then not severely question if such a being actually existed. Which in turn, leading me to the severe doubt that anyone, other than human beings wrote the Bible, passing such script off as 'God-breathed.'

Thank you, for responding so quickly.

Are you really “unhappy” because you doubt?

Let's just say someone handed you a book, which had claimed tenets within it. It stated that if you do not believe in something specific, you will be denied or declined of it's stated rewards. But you were never given any evidence or proof of such a being. Wouldn't you demand evidence for such a claim? And honestly, I'm not sure what, if anything, I would 'currently' change about my current 'moral' actions? However, I would then start to strike up a relationship with this now 'known' being, to see if it jived with my own 'moral' sensibilities, or other.... I would like to be given the opportunity to make a sound choice, based upon actual reality, and not 'pretending' to 'know'.

Are you saying you do not know if Christian morals “…jived with my own 'moral' sensibilities”?

I do hear from most atheist and agnostics: “I'm not sure what, if anything, I would 'currently' change about my current 'moral' actions”. Which is understandable, but change is what needed and if you are not willing/wanting to make a huge change in your life, knowledge of the Christian God will give you nightmares.

I want to be given my actual options.... As it stands, I searched for evidence for years. For me, the truth is always 'better' than imagination or fantasy, because it is 'real'.



All I'm asking for is evidence of existence, so I may then assess my future path accordingly. If God does not care to reveal His presence to me, then what should I do? 'Imagine' it's true?



Yes. But to be 'loved', the individual must be 'known' to first, at least, exist. Otherwise, you are asking to 'love' an imaginary agent



What does 'humility' have to do with asking for proof, while not receiving my necessary proof for existence? I either 'know' something exists, or not.



I could ask you the very same question, about the 'knowledge' of Brahma.

My point is, without the knowledge of existence, I really cannot honestly answer YET.

God does not need you to acknowledge His existence and it would be even worse for Him and you, if you did know He exists and ignored Him (which the Jews sometimes did in the past).

You have been told “God wants to have a relationship with you”, but God cannot change from having unconditional Love, so you have to willingly and want to come to Him wanting that Love from Him and for yourself to be with Him. A relationship with God is not based on acknowledging His existence, you know lots of people exist, but you’re not looking to have a relationship with lots of them. You first determine what type of person you want to have a relationship with and pursue those individuals.

The “god” you might want to have a relationship with at this point in your life, does not exist, so why do you need to know about the God who you would not like to have a relationship with who does exist?

To “know” God as God truly is, does not come from some sensory experience but it is to know Godly type Love, since “God is Love”.

Godly type Love is pure sacrificial charity and most people will do almost anything to avoid having to humble themselves to the point of accepting pure charity.

 

[Sanoy]

Salvation isn't through formal belief in God or Jesus. All that is required is a true heart response to His nature, the identity behind the name, from which Christs blood is applied. It's not belief in His existence that saves, even the demons believe, it is ones heart response to his Nature. So there are sheep within and sheep without. We will be in heaven with professed Hindus and Muslims whose hearts responded to Gods general revelation, described in Romans 1:20, and submitted their heart to Gods nature which they called upon through the wrong name. One is not saved by their religious title. They are saved because their hearts responded to the Revelation each has received, either by God's explicit revelation in Jesus, or by God's general revelation, His invisible attributes, which some have put their trust in, knowing no other name to call Him by, Romans 2:14-16.

Each mans eternal fate is dependent on their hearts response to the revelation they did receive. Everyone's heart will either accuse or excuse them on that day when God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. Do not worry about whether your revelation is sufficient for formal belief, worry about your hearts response to what you have received first. Even as a long believing Christian, my chief concern each day is my hearts response to Christ. Christ could live in my house, and I could experience Him everyday, but only my heart can grasp at Grace. And if in greater revelation, my heart recoils at His presence? Greater then is my condemnation (Matthew 10:15)

edit. Adding this in from my next post for clarity over the soteriology I just mentioned.

"As far as the theology I mentioned, it's not in conflict, it's just hard to put into words without getting dense. It's like this. If I give you coke in a sprite can and sprite in a coke can and you tell me you love coke which do you actually love? You actually love Sprite. The label on the outside doesn't matter, it's what you love on the inside. God has revealed himself to all, but not to all by name. Islam doesn't save, it's God's general revelation and a persons heart response to it, that allows for Christs grace to all on the planet."

 

[cvanwey]

Thank you, for responding so quickly.

Are you really “unhappy” because you doubt?

My emotional conclusion, based upon my current assessment, has absolutely no baring upon reality. Many things to me, appear true, which do not make me 'happy', and vise versa. Doesn't mean I do not accept their apparent revealed 'truth.' That would then instead be denial

Are you saying you do not know if Christian morals “…jived with my own 'moral' sensibilities”?

No. I'm saying, that without knowing if the book was the guiding hand of a perfect divine being, I would not even know whether or not to assess if I'm going to follow this specific set of instructions, and instead continue to use my own 'moral compass'.

I do hear from most atheist and agnostics: “I'm not sure what, if anything, I would 'currently' change about my current 'moral' actions”. Which is understandable, but change is what needed and if you are not willing/wanting to make a huge change in your life, knowledge of the Christian God will give you nightmares.

I think this missed the point... Atheists and agnostics basically 'reject', or lack belief in the existence of a God/gods, for one reason or another. Hence, in such a case, the Bible becomes no different than any other book, written by humans, which instruct 'absolute' dictates. My point is, until the 'knowledge of existence' is 'revealed' to such 'atheists/agnostics', the non-believers will not even give the book a second look, in regards to specific and stated 'absolute moral dictates'.

God does not need you to acknowledge His existence and it would be even worse for Him and you, if you did know He exists and ignored Him (which the Jews sometimes did in the past).

No, it's even worse for the millions and billions, whom do not think He exists, and are then sent to hell, for not worshiping the correct entity, or no entity. At least if the one true creator is 'revealed' to all, in a way which is satisfactory to the current non-believer, the person whom now realizes it IS true, would then be given a fare shake to follow, deny, reject, rebel, obey, love, develop a relationship, etc....

Remember, Sal of Damascus was a non-believer, until God revealed And he arguably 'started' Christianity

You have been told “God wants to have a relationship with you”, but God cannot change from having unconditional Love, so you have to willingly and want to come to Him wanting that Love from Him and for yourself to be with Him. A relationship with God is not based on acknowledging His existence, you know lots of people exist, but you’re not looking to have a relationship with lots of them. You first determine what type of person you want to have a relationship with and pursue those individuals.

Do you love any humans, which you think never existed? Do you carry on relationships with any humans, in which do not correspond back, or that you do not think even exists?

If you do not think such a person exists, the discussion/topic of a relationship is over

The “god” you might want to have a relationship with at this point in your life, does not exist, so why do you need to know about the God who you would not like to have a relationship with who does exist?

My point is that I find is quite perplexing, and quite odd, that I prayed for proof 30+ years, and received nothing forthcoming. I have doubt such an entity exists. If prayer is based upon faith, which I wholeheartedly possessed for decades, why would an omnibenevolent God choose not to fulfill not even one of my requests for 'knowledge of existence'. Furthermore, according to prayer verses, and from relevant scriptures, God will now no longer reveal to me. Why? Because without faith, the prayer is void. And now that my faith is severely shaken with doubt, God will certainly not reveal existence to me.

So I ask you... Why did God not choose to reveal Himself to me, but does for many others? Makes no sense, if God wants a personal relationship.

To “know” God as God truly is, does not come from some sensory experience but it is to know Godly type Love, since “God is Love”.

I'm sorry, but this response does not make sense to me.

 

[cvanwey]

Salvation isn't through formal belief in God or Jesus. All that is required is a true heart response to His nature, the identity behind the name, from which Christs blood is applied. It's not belief in His existence that saves, even the demons believe, it is ones heart response to his Nature. So there are sheep within and sheep without. We will be in heaven with professed Hindus and Muslims whose hearts responded to Gods general revelation, described in Romans 1:20, and submitted their heart to Gods nature which they called upon through the wrong name. One is not saved by their religious title. They are saved because their hearts responded to the Revelation each has received, either by God's explicit revelation in Jesus, or by God's general revelation, His invisible attributes, which some have put their trust in, knowing no other name to call Him by, Romans 2:14-16.

Though I do appreciate the response, as it seems sincere, it really does not address the OP (knowledge of existence). I have no knowledge of His existence, anymore than I have knowledge of any other man made mythical characters. :/

Say we were work buddies, and I was always pulling practical jokes with you. Say I placed fake spiders on you from time to time when you weren't looking, because I knew you 'hated' them. Now lets say, this time, I walk by and said..."watch out, there's a black widow on your neck!' You DON'T believe me. But then it bites you. You see, it does not matter if you believed or not, your necessary 'knowledge of existence' would then be revealed.

My entire point of this OP, is to demonstrate that there should exist no presupposition, specific mindset, or amount of preparation to at least have 'knowledge of existence.'

My other point is that many many many would then view the Bible in a different light.

I honestly see why many rationalize many parts of the Bible in which I currently do not agree with... Why, because they may genuinely have received their necessary needed 'knowledge of existence'.

In MY case, I'm saying I need 'knowledge of existence'. Otherwise, I'm observing from a far, due to indoctrination, continued professed 'truths' from many of my peers, from TV, and many other avenues.

Knowledge of existence seems as mundane as knowledge of the countless other items on this planet humans take for granite

Off topic, I do want to present a simple response, demonstrated by one of the most famous Biblical verses ever:

John 3:16-21 New International Version (NIV)

16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

Regardless, I do not wish to hash over conflicting Biblical verses (Your chosen ones verses my chosen ones). We can leave that for another topic.

Each mans eternal fate is dependent on their hearts response to the revelation they did receive. Everyone's heart will either accuse or excuse them on that day when God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. Do not worry about whether your revelation is sufficient for formal belief, worry about your hearts response to what you have received first. Even as a long believing Christian, my chief concern each day is my hearts response to Christ. Christ could live in my house, and I could experience Him everyday, but only my heart can grasp at Grace. And if in greater revelation, my heart recoils at His presence? Greater then is my condemnation (Matthew 10:15)

Many/most genuinely rationalize and justify many of their actions, in which others would disagree. You don't think the 911 hijackers felt morally righteous?

The point is, moral dictates differ from religion to religion. Some are based upon works, others are based upon belief. In the case for Christianity, it appears quite clear, that w/o belief, you are doomed!

 

[Sanoy]

Though I do appreciate the response, as it seems sincere, it really does not address the OP (knowledge of existence). I have no knowledge of His existence, anymore than I have knowledge of any other man made mythical characters. :/

Say we were work buddies, and I was always pulling practical jokes with you. Say I placed fake spiders on you from time to time when you weren't looking, because I knew you 'hated' them. Now lets say, this time, I walk by and said..."watch out, there's a black widow on your neck!' You DON'T believe me. But then it bites you. You see, it does not matter if you believed or not, your necessary 'knowledge of existence' would then be revealed.

My entire point of this OP, is to demonstrate that there should exist no presupposition, specific mindset, or amount of preparation to at least have 'knowledge of existence.'

My other point is that many many many would then view the Bible in a different light.

I honestly see why many rationalize many parts of the Bible in which I currently do not agree with... Why, because they may genuinely have received their necessary needed 'knowledge of existence'.

In MY case, I'm saying I need 'knowledge of existence'. Otherwise, I'm observing from a far, due to indoctrination, continued professed 'truths' from many of my peers, from TV, and many other avenues.

Knowledge of existence seems as mundane as knowledge of the countless other items on this planet humans take for granite

Off topic, I do want to present a simple response, demonstrated by one of the most famous Biblical verses ever:

John 3:16-21 New International Version (NIV)

16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

Regardless, I do not wish to hash over conflicting Biblical verses (Your chosen ones verses my chosen ones). We can leave that for another topic.



Many/most genuinely rationalize and justify many of their actions, in which others would disagree. You don't think the 911 hijackers felt morally righteous?

The point is, moral dictates differ from religion to religion. Some are based upon works, others are based upon belief. In the case for Christianity, it appears quite clear, that w/o belief, you are doomed!

I'm having a hard time understanding. On the analogy, is God the spider and the church the "prankster"? You look but don't ever see it, then you die and get bit by it? Is that what you mean?

You want knowledge, you want to see the spider first. Most of us Christians have not had any sort of open revelation, that is true for most religions. By Open revelation I mean, angels, demons, supernatural events, healings etc. But they believe. We get knowledge, but it's internal and basic. All knowledge is derived through our intuitions, they are the "seeming" of the things we call true. Logic "seems" true, Math "seems" true, morality "seems" true. It is very much like an innate propositional attitude. We are even using an intuition right here that allows us to have an 'image' of each other. We recognize a distant mind through mere words. It is that same intuition in which we experience God. And it works even without scripture. Look at everyone who has ever lived on this planet, minus the last 200 years of demanded doubt. Nearly everyone developed a belief in the supernatural, the afterlife, deities, moral rights and wrongs etc. We have even tested this and discovered we have something called intuitive theism. An inborn tendency to see teleology in the world which even adults have to fight against.

You don't need knowledge as you imagine it, you just need to trust the things within yourself and despise no intuition, because they are all equal and necessary to trust. We cannot disparage any intuition and survive the process. We might distrust a conclusion of an intuition, but that distrust itself will be from an intuition. Even our tests come from blindly accepting an intuition as a first step, like logic. All knowledge is built on the foundation of pure and blind intuition, a "seeming" that can never be tested as there is nothing prior to it. So we should trust our experiences until we have a reason to doubt them, not the other way around.

As far as the theology I mentioned, it's not in conflict, it's just hard to put into words without getting dense. It's like this. If I give you coke in a sprite can and sprite in a coke can and you tell me you love coke which do you actually love? You actually love Sprite. The label on the outside doesn't matter, it's what you love on the inside. God has revealed himself to all, but not to all by name. Islam doesn't save, it's God's general revelation and a persons heart response to it, that allows for Christs grace to all on the Planet.

 

[cvanwey]

I'm having a hard time understanding. On the analogy, is God the spider and the church the "prankster"? You look but don't ever see it, then you die and get bit by it? Is that what you mean?

You are reading my response the wrong way. My point is all should 'know' God exists, just like we 'know' many other things, people, and stuff exists. Not only that, but it 'should' be 'common knowledge' as to which God exists. Furthermore, regardless of one's current faith, intuitions, and premonitions, the 'facts' should all lead everyone to the same general conclusion. Seems like a simple task, for an omniscient and omnibeneolvent God to perform. Many will still rebel, deny, and reject the tenets, which establishes the implied 'judgement' of our 'freewill' or 'free choice'.

You want knowledge, you want to see the spider first. Most of us Christians have not had any sort of open revelation, that is true for most religions. By Open revelation I mean, angels, demons, supernatural events, healings etc. But they believe. We get knowledge, but it's internal and basic. All knowledge is derived through our intuitions, they are the "seeming" of the things we call true. Logic "seems" true, Math "seems" true, morality "seems" true. It is very much like an innate propositional attitude. We are even using an intuition right here that allows us to have an 'image' of each other. We recognize a distant mind through mere words. It is that same intuition in which we experience God.

No. We have 7 billion examples of humans, which exist. Hence, we have 7 billions examples of a single human race. We have countless examples of writings, literature, and print, which have only been produced by humans - even the Bible. Hence, we 'know' humans wrote the Bible. Hence, I have 'knowledge' a human is responding to me, and not some other type of agent. I don't even know your real name, address, age, or anything else. But if you wanted to reveal that to me (figuratively), and I didn't believe (you) existed, you could produce a way to reveal your presence in a way, where I could no longer deny your specific existence - (whether I wanted to or not). I have no 'intuition' that anything other than a human is responding to me. Why? Because I have never experienced such a response from anything other than a human.

Furthermore... Without humans, the concepts of 'logic', 'math', and 'morality' also ceases to 'exist'. Without humans, no one on planet earth is here to conceptualize such topics in the same way. I get what you are saying, but logic, math, and morality are not claimed to be interactive in any way, like Yahweh claims. One does not expect to receive any 'response' or special sign from such human invented concepts. They are simply tools to understand such topics and concepts. It appears a false analogy to compare 'God' to such concepts, as God claims to be 'interactive', or an 'intentional agent'. One cannot carry any dialogue with logic, math, and morality

And it works even without scripture. Look at everyone who has ever lived on this planet, minus the last 200 years of demanded doubt. Nearly everyone developed a belief in the supernatural, the afterlife, deities, moral rights and wrongs etc. We have even tested this and discovered we have something called intuitive theism. An inborn tendency to see teleology in the world which even adults have to fight against.

What else was discovered in the last 200 years???? Continued enlightenment has also demonstrated that 'survival of the fitter' has favored the humans which interject and impose 'intentional agency.' The ones which do not so much so, die off. Hence, it is no wonder the ones whom do so, would be in abundance. Many humans have a natural tendency to want to conclude, or draw 'purpose' or 'meaning' to many things which happen to us humans directly.

Though 'intentional agency' serves as a great survival tool, it also produces MANY false positives. Example... you are in the Savannah, and you hear a rustle in the grass... Is it the wind, or a tiger stalking you? The ones whom elicit 'tiger', as their initial 'intuition', have higher survival rates.

You watch a scary movie, it's dark, and you here a weird noise in your house in the ceiling. Is it the house settling, or someone in your attic? Often times, our natural tendency is to first conclude 'intentional agency', or a 'false positive', verses no intentional agency. It only comes with wisdom, experience, and continued discovery, do we then learn to overcome the propensity to first conclude 'intention', when it no longer seems reasonable to do so.

When humans look at the world and universe, it is then no wonder most humans apply the same intention, or false positives. But it does not mean that such a false positive, is actually 'proven.' We often make connections, where connections do not actually exist. Doesn't make them fact, simply because of our natural 'knee-jerk' reaction of applying 'intentional agency'. It kind of, instead, further proves how selfish we humans are, and self absorbed we humans are

As far as the theology I mentioned, it's not in conflict, it's just hard to put into words without getting dense. It's like this. If I give you coke in a sprite can and sprite in a coke can and you tell me you love coke which do you actually love? You actually love Sprite. The label on the outside doesn't matter, it's what you love on the inside. God has revealed himself to all, but not to all by name. Islam doesn't save, it's God's general revelation and a persons heart response to it, that allows for Christs grace to all on the Planet.

As stated prior, you cannot be a practicing Muslim, and have much of any chance getting into a Christian heaven. Too many verses in scripture would directly contradict such a notion. (My 911 example is just one of many). It just seems odd that 'common knowledge' of a one true God, is not 'known' by all humans. But instead, many will be absent from such a claimed heaven, solely because they worshiped the wrong one, while genuinely still trying to be a 'good person' doing so.

 

[Sanoy]

You are reading my response the wrong way. My point is all should 'know' God exists, just like we 'know' many other things, people, and stuff exists. Not only that, but it 'should' be 'common knowledge' as to which God exists. Furthermore, regardless of one's current faith, intuitions, and premonitions, the 'facts' should all lead everyone to the same general conclusion. Seems like a simple task, for an omniscient and omnibeneolvent God to perform. Many will still rebel, deny, and reject the tenets, which establishes the implied 'judgement' of our 'freewill' or 'free choice'.



No. We have 7 billion examples of humans, which exist. Hence, we have 7 billions examples of a single human race. We have countless examples of writings, literature, and print, which have only been produced by humans - even the Bible. Hence, we 'know' humans wrote the Bible. Hence, I have 'knowledge' a human is responding to me, and not some other type of agent. I don't even know your real name, address, age, or anything else. But if you wanted to reveal that to me (figuratively), and I didn't believe (you) existed, you could produce a way to reveal your presence in a way, where I could no longer deny your specific existence - (whether I wanted to or not). I have no 'intuition' that anything other than a human is responding to me. Why? Because I have never experienced such a response from anything other than a human.

Furthermore... Without humans, the concepts of 'logic', 'math', and 'morality' also ceases to 'exist'. Without humans, no one on planet earth is here to conceptualize such topics in the same way. I get what you are saying, but logic, math, and morality are not claimed to be interactive in any way, like Yahweh claims. One does not expect to receive any 'response' or special sign from such human invented concepts. They are simply tools to understand such topics and concepts. It appears a false analogy to compare 'God' to such concepts, as God claims to be 'interactive', or an 'intentional agent'. One cannot carry any dialogue with logic, math, and morality



What else was discovered in the last 200 years???? Continued enlightenment has also demonstrated that 'survival of the fitter' has favored the humans which interject and impose 'intentional agency.' The ones which do not so much so, die off. Hence, it is no wonder the ones whom do so, would be in abundance. Many humans have a natural tendency to want to conclude, or draw 'purpose' or 'meaning' to many things which happen to us humans directly.

Though 'intentional agency' serves as a great survival tool, it also produces MANY false positives. Example... you are in the Savannah, and you hear a rustle in the grass... Is it the wind, or a tiger stalking you? The ones whom elicit 'tiger', as their initial 'intuition', have higher survival rates.

You watch a scary movie, it's dark, and you here a weird noise in your house in the ceiling. Is it the house settling, or someone in your attic? Often times, our natural tendency is to first conclude 'intentional agency', or a 'false positive', verses no intentional agency. It only comes with wisdom, experience, and continued discovery, do we then learn to overcome the propensity to first conclude 'intention', when it no longer seems reasonable to do so.

When humans look at the world and universe, it is then no wonder most humans apply the same intention, or false positives. But it does not mean that such a false positive, is actually 'proven.' We often make connections, where connections do not actually exist. Doesn't make them fact, simply because of our natural 'knee-jerk' reaction of applying 'intentional agency'. It kind of, instead, further proves how selfish we humans are, and self absorbed we humans are



As stated prior, you cannot be a practicing Muslim, and have much of any chance getting into a Christian heaven. Too many verses in scripture would directly contradict such a notion. (My 911 example is just one of many). It just seems odd that 'common knowledge' of a one true God, is not 'known' by all humans. But instead, many will be absent from such a claimed heaven, solely because they worshiped the wrong one, while genuinely still trying to be a 'good person' doing so.

Rather than go too far off topic, since things are expanding, I will pull back to your initial complaint. I don't think we should have explicit knowledge. Because knowledge doesn't save, it condemns. We all have sufficient knowledge to come to Christ if our heart is ready, and sufficient lack of knowledge to prevent the recoiling of our heart from producing greater condemnation. If you are worried about the unknown consequences of death than have a true heart. I worry about my heart as a Christian. No one is exempt from that. I pray for you often, and I don't pray for greater knowledge because I fear it would serve to condemn you. I instead pray that your heart is softened. Worry over your heart not your head, only one will lead to life.

 

[cvanwey]

Rather than go too far off topic, since things are expanding, I will pull back to your initial complaint. I don't think we should have explicit knowledge. Because knowledge doesn't save, it condemns. We all have sufficient knowledge to come to Christ if our heart is ready, and sufficient lack of knowledge to prevent the recoiling of our heart from producing greater condemnation. If you are worried about the unknown consequences of death than have a true heart. I worry about my heart as a Christian. No one is exempt from that. I pray for you often, and I don't pray for greater knowledge because I fear it would serve to condemn you. I instead pray that your heart is softened. Worry over your heart not your head, only one will lead to life.

I appreciate your response and concern. But here is where I'm at...

I strongly disagree.... Knowledge of existence provides a clear path. You 'know' your parents exist. You then choose whether to listen, obey, deny, etc... But what if someone told you that an invisible agent wants you to do this, that, or the other thing. Before you give such a claim any credence, you would demand proof of existence, prior to assessing the dictates. If you found such a claimed dictator did not actually exist, you would then render such dictates worthless, or inherit no real value, as they are not real; but instead only provided by the person presenting them to you.

Let's just say, as it stands, I acknowledge that Jesus, as a human, existed. However, I sincerely doubt a resurrection, (as this falls within the realm of the supernatural, and I also see a severe lack in evidence for such a claim). Meaning, Jesus is really no different than Muhammad to me, at this point. And do YOU care what Muhammad wants from you? I doubt it. Because to you, Muhammad was a human, whom is simply dead now. Muhammad does not live on, and warrant judgement on your eternal soul, based upon your habits, beliefs, actions, intentions, morals, etc...

Remove the 'fear of hell' part for a minute.... Even though you are pulling back, many of my points interconnect, or directly relate to the OP.

1. Intuition of intentional agency is demonstrated from evolutionary processes (discovered from the last 200 years). We infer false positives all the time. We invoke meaning and connections all the time, which don't really exist. Yes, we are that selfish Yes, we are that self absorbed

2. Seems God would want to make his specific presence known, like he apparently did with 'Doubting Thomas', or 'Sal of Damascus'. Just think how many would change their life dramatically, 'knowing' something was actually real, verses imaginary Yes, some would not, like Satan. But at least everyone is given the same level playing field, as their reference and starting point

3. Furthermore, how is intercessory prayer going to work in any capacity, when you state you are praying for me? Heck, I prayed for myself for 30+ years and it never revealed any type of knowledge for Yahweh's existence. You honestly think prayer will work in your case, on my behalf?

Getting back to my OP, I've given it a lot of thought. And as stated in the OP, the Starting Point, appears to be knowledge of existence. Without it, you would not care to entertain the commanded 'moral tenets' of an imaginary entity.

 

[Sanoy]

I strongly disagree.... Knowledge of existence provides a clear path. You 'know' your parents exist. You then choose whether to listen, obey, deny, etc... But what if someone told you that an invisible agent wants you to do this, that, or the other thing. Before you give such a claim any credence, you would demand proof of existence, prior to assessing the dictates. If you found such a claimed dictator did not actually exist, you would then render such dictates worthless, or inherit no real value, as they are not real; but instead only provided by the person presenting them to you.

This description is exactly why knowledge is not what you need for salvation. You evaluate the command via the threat attached to it. God doesn't want mere obedience, he called the Pharisees lawless, even while they were the epitome of obedience. He calls our righteousness filthy rags because mere obedience in the masters presence is empty. Love, or hatred, for the master is shown while He is away. The person who does what is right because he loves what is right loves God, the person who merely does what is right in His presence despises Him. In this life we are Wheat, or Tares, and our heart determines which, no amount of knowledge can change that.

 

[cvanwey]

This description is exactly why knowledge is not what you need for salvation. You evaluate the command via the threat attached to it. God doesn't want mere obedience, he called the Pharisees lawless, even while they were the epitome of obedience. He calls our righteousness filthy rags because mere obedience in the masters presence is empty. Love, or hatred, for the master is shown while He is away. The person who does what is right because he loves what is right loves God, the person who merely does what is right in His presence despises Him. In this life we are Wheat, or Tares, and our heart determines which, no amount of knowledge can change that.

You answered very little from my prior response

I say the starting point is knowledge, like you have knowledge of your parents. If your parents no longer exist, you can no longer carry on dialogue with them. If your parents no longer exist, you no longer can show gratitute towards them. If your parents no longer exist, you can no longer please or disappoint them. If your parents no longer exist, your parents can no longer judge your actions in any capacity (ever).

In regard to your direct response, this would imply that God is not omnipresent? If God is all powerful, God sees all, whether you like it or not. Doing anything and everything would ALWAYS be in the direct presence of God's observation. So quite frankly, it would not matter if you did a 'good' act, based upon 'blind obedience', or, simply because you wanted to- out of the 'goodness of your own heart'.

Yes, you can still perform acts, based upon how your diseased parents raised you, in their memory. But you are knowingly doing so, in the absence of them watching you. You instead may perform the actions to preserve your own memories, or, even look up to the ways they interacted with society (which you admired and want to imulate). But I will have done so because I knew they once existed.

Let me simplify my position a bit...

Many facets drive my 'moral compass' presumably... Empathy, consequences, a selfish need to co-exist/cooperate with others, etc etc etc... Empathy, specifically, is not learned, but more inherited. From where, is another topic However, my empathy is exposed as real, if I watch a sad movie. I actually know the movie is not real, and yet still apply an empathetic response, based upon the attributes of the movie which 'move' me.

Trust me, I actually get your position.... If one knows an entity is watching, and then performs the 'good' act because the entity is 'watching', that would not be genuine. Hence, the knowledge of existence may not help such an individual in that very specific case.

But with all due respect, I do not perform 'good' acts because I think I will be rewarded. And maybe neither do you.

However, this is where knowledge of the 'correct God' is key. The moral tenets are different for each. A fundamental Islamic extremist may 'approve' of 911, as an 'absolute moral good'. Though such intentions are 'good', such an action would displease such a real God; Yahweh in this instance. Couple that with the fact such a 'genuine' individual thinks they are being as good as they can be, in line with the Quran, which means they will actually go to hell, for worshipping and following the wrong God.

So yes, knowledge of the correct God is paramount.

 

[Sanoy]

You answered very little from my prior response

I say the starting point is knowledge, like you have knowledge of your parents. If your parents no longer exist, you can no longer carry on dialogue with them. If your parents no longer exist, you no longer can show gratitute towards them. If your parents no longer exist, you can no longer please or disappoint them. If your parents no longer exist, your parents can no longer judge your actions in any capacity (ever).

In regard to your direct response, this would imply that God is not omnipresent? If God is all powerful, God sees all, whether you like it or not. Doing anything and everything would ALWAYS be in the direct presence of God's observation. So quite frankly, it would not matter if you did a 'good' act, based upon 'blind obedience', or, simply because you wanted to- out of the 'goodness of your own heart'.

Yes, you can still perform acts, based upon how your diseased parents raised you, in their memory. But you are knowingly doing so, in the absence of them watching you. You instead may perform the actions to preserve your own memories, or, look even up to the ways they interacted with society (which you admired and want to imulate). But I will have done so because I knew they once existed.

Let me simplify my position a bit...

Many facets drive my 'moral compass' presumably... Empathy, consequences, a selfish need to co-exist/cooperate with others, etc etc etc... Empathy, specifically, is not learned, but more inherited. From where, is another topic However, my empathy is exposed as real, if I watch a sad movie. I actually know the movie is not real, and yet still apply an empathetic response, based upon the attributes of the movie which 'move' me.

Trust me, I actually get your position.... If one knows an entity is watching, and then performs the 'good' act because the entity is 'watching', that would not be genuine. Hence, the knowledge of existence may not help such an individual in that very specific case.

But with all due respect, I do not perform 'good' acts because I think I will be rewarded. And maybe neither do you.

However, this is where knowledge of the 'correct God' is key. The moral tenets are different for each. A fundamental Islamic extremist may 'approve' of 911, as an 'absolute moral good'. Though such intentions are 'good', such an action would displease such a real God; Yahweh in this instance. Couple that with the fact such a 'genuine' individual thinks they are being as good as they can be, in line with the Quran, which means they will actually go to hell, for worshipping and following the wrong God.

I'm intentionally trying to stick to the heart of the matter.

The metaphor of the master going away is not to suggest the Master doesn't know what's going on, but to suggest that the servant thinks what he does the Master will not know.

Everyone already has sufficient knowledge for salvation. It is not lacking. It is our hearts, where salvation begins, that are lacking. It's not empathy, it's not doing your parents wishes as a memorial. Is loving what is right, which refers to God's nature. We either love God or the world, that decides our fate, not what is in our head. Pray for the conviction of the Holy Spirit. I pray for it for myself because I have seen my own heart.

 

[cvanwey]

Everyone already has sufficient knowledge for salvation.

Patently false. To subscribe to such a concept precludes or presupposes that all believe in 'sin', as it pertains to a stated 'divine law'. Which I, do not.

it's not doing your parents wishes as a memorial. Is loving what is right, which refers to God's nature.

This response is the epitome of begging the question.... WHICH God?.?.?.?.? Again, knowledge of existence.... Each God has differing moral attributes. I would sure like to know which one actually exists, if any?

We either love God or the world, that decides our fate, not what is in our head.

I know the world exists. I do not know if God/gods exist. At this point, I can only imagine the later. Hence, how might one go about loving a unknown agent sincerely?

Pray for the conviction of the Holy Spirit. I pray for it for myself because I have seen my own heart.

I prayed every which way for 30+ years. Nothing... Now what?

 

[Sanoy]

Patently false. To subscribe to such a concept precludes or presupposes that all believe in 'sin', as it pertains to a stated 'divine law'. Which I, do not.



This response is the epitome of begging the question.... WHICH God?.?.?.?.? Again, knowledge of existence.... Each God has differing moral attributes. I would sure like to know which one actually exists, if any?



I know the world exists. I do not know if God/gods exist. At this point, I can only imagine the later. Hence, how might one go about loving a unknown agent sincerely?



I prayed every which way for 30+ years. Nothing... Now what?

I was trying to be simple, but really it is everyone has or will have sufficient knowledge. No one is with excuse Romans 1:20. Maybe you are the "or will have" but from the outside looking in it seems your heart is not soft enough.

You ask which God, as to imply His name. It's not the name, it is the invisible attributes, His nature, who He is. A man's heart either loves His nature or despises it. Could I love Baal? No, because my heart loves Christs nature, which Baal has not. You can't love what you do not love, you can only lie about what you love in trying. There are Christians whose heart lies against God's name, and there are non Christians whose heart lies for God's name. Your heart will act according to the nature you have grown it to be. If Baal be God then I am doomed, If Christ, whom I love, be God then I am saved, my heart can love no other. Love the one you love, because your heart already does.

I'd like to talk about those things but you will need to open up and let me know what the testimony you would have given me is if I asked you while you were yet a Christian, and why you lost it. But none of that will matter if your heart is hardened, which "skepticism" seems to commonly entail.

I asked you to pray for conviction from the Holy Spirit, and you replied that you prayed for 30 years as if they were the same thing. When one of the Christians here approaches you with Christ you recoil and start tossing whatever you can think of at the confrontation. If you truly want to rest this burden on your heart then this recoiling within your heart is something you will need to contemplate and overcome. If your heart is able, you won't be defensive when He approaches.

 

[cvanwey]

I was trying to be simple, but really it is everyone has or will have sufficient knowledge. No one is with excuse Romans 1:20. Maybe you are the "or will have" but from the outside looking in it seems your heart is not soft enough.

From my earliest memories, to a few years ago, it was plenty 'soft enough.' And if such an event in 'knowing' would have taken place at any point during such time, I would not be a skeptic today, in regards to existence. Sure, I, or many, could still later chose to critique the teachings or assertions moving forward, but doubt would not STEM from lack in 'knowledge of existence'. This is a BIG ONE

You ask which God, as to imply His name. It's not the name, it is the invisible attributes, His nature, who He is. A man's heart either loves His nature or despises it. Could I love Baal? No, because my heart loves Christs nature, which Baal has not. You can't love what you do not love, you can only lie about what you love in trying.

For me, please read above. Hence forth, thus concluding, my rationale or justification stands.

I'd like to talk about those things but you will need to open up and let me know what the testimony you would have given me is if I asked you while you were yet a Christian, and why you lost it. But none of that will matter if your heart is hardened, which "skepticism" seems to commonly entail.

The skepticism entails from the fact I lack 'knowledge of existence'. I have knowledge of air, gravity, space, and time, all things which are also less than perfectly tangible. Without 'knowledge of existence', it really is no different than telling me to open up my heart to Santa Claus. This entire thread topic ceases to remain, if I only had the 'knowledge of existence.' Do I need to unharden my heart to be aware of the many other things I wish didn't exist, or did not prepare my mind 'properly' to 'know' exists?.?.?.?

I asked you to pray for conviction from the Holy Spirit, and you replied that you prayed for 30 years as if they were the same thing. When one of the Christians here approaches you with Christ you recoil and start tossing whatever you can think of at the confrontation. If you truly want to rest this burden on your heart then this recoiling within your heart is something you will need to contemplate and overcome. If your heart is able, you won't be defensive when He approaches.

I honestly don't think you are seeing my perspective? I see yours... You believe because you have 'knowledge of existence". I don't have it. I was earnest and genuine for decades. The 'recoil', you keep referring to, is in the direct result from failure to obtain 'knowledge of existence' for decades. Please read my responses above, for clarification.

 

[cvanwey]

I pose a second response for @Sanoy...

Put it this way... What is the basic definition of 'atheist'? Simply, they lack a 'belief' in the existence of a God/gods.

The entire point to the topic is...

Remove the belief in existence off the table, and give everyone 'free will' to decide what they are going to do with such known information

Think how many 'atheists' would then be genuine Christians? But many such atheists ARE NOT, simply because they do not care to engage in the thought of all said assertions; just like you care not to engage to closely to the many other claimed assertions from the many gods you think do NOT exist.

Alternatively, does my hardened heart detour me from 'knowing' the existence of the many things I wish did not exist, or did not prepare myself to know prior? I either just know it exists, or not, and bias has absolutely no relevancy.

If Jesus ever appeared to me, in a way I could not deny his existence, this topic would never have been started. But I could then still choose to reject or rebel; like Satan apparently.

 

[jacks]

Still enjoying this thread, there has been some great points made, but I think it is clear that nobody is going to come up with something that proves to you (or other skeptics, atheists, or agnostics) that God exists. (Let alone a Christian version of God.) This may sound trite, but really I think you can relax about it. I was raised a staunch atheist, science was the only acceptable explanation in my household, we basically saw all religion as the "opiate of the masses". My father held to this view to the day he passed away. He was the most "Christian man" I have ever known. He was honest to a fault, treated everyone with respect and knew how to love others and the world. People were drawn to him because he exuded a presence of peace. If he had one fault it was he reached a point he stopped questioning his beliefs. Is he dammed and condemned to an eternity of suffering because he never had the "evidence" he needed to believe? Some would say so, but I think there is a place for those who are "Christian" in their heart and actions, but not in their head.

My advice; keep asking questions and keep an open mind. God is perfectly capable of giving you the evidence you seek. Just keep knocking.

 

[cvanwey]

Still enjoying this thread, there has been some great points made, but I think it is clear that nobody is going to come up with something that proves to you (or other skeptics, atheists, or agnostics) that God exists. (Let alone a Christian version of God.) This may sound trite, but really I think you can relax about it. I was raised a staunch atheist, science was the only acceptable explanation in my household, we basically saw all religion as the "opiate of the masses". My father held to this view to the day he passed away. He was the most "Christian man" I have ever known. He was honest to a fault, treated everyone with respect and knew how to love others and the world. People were drawn to him because he exuded a presence of peace. If he had one fault it was he reached a point he stopped questioning his beliefs. Is he dammed and condemned to an eternity of suffering because he never had the "evidence" he needed to believe? Some would say so, but I think there is a place for those who are "Christian" in their heart and actions, but not in their head.

My advice; keep asking questions and keep an open mind. God is perfectly capable of giving you the evidence you seek. Just keep knocking.

I appreciate your response and hear what you are saying.

It seems extremely odd though that God would not answer; in a way suitable to my justifications for decades?

So did he not answer because:

1. I'm in some kind of extreme denial of my own 'known' reality, for only this one topic?
2. God chooses not to answer, even after decades of prayer and worship; opposing scripture?
3. God chooses to reveal to some, and not others, which seems to imply favoritism?
4. God may choose to reveal only after I form doubt, after years of prior earnest inquiry; which again opposes scripture from the Bible?
5. God is not interactive with humans?
6. God is actually imaginary?

As stated prior, God did so for Sal and Thomas.

It's not enough that we have many differing dialects to Christianity - (all which make opposing claims of requirements for salvation), in and of itself. Why ALSO add the wonderment of - 'is it actually real or true?' Let alone there-after reconciling it's known reality - (whether we agree or not)

Seems as though the 'knowledge of existence' would not logically be the hangup for millions. And most likely, is the only hangup for millions.... And yet, this is the reason many do not care or follow; because they simply do not buy into the asserted agent as real. i.e 'Why invest any energy, if the 'law maker' does not exist?' I know the reason I do, however... Indoctrination

 

[Sanoy]

From my earliest memories, to a few years ago, it was plenty 'soft enough.' And if such an event in 'knowing' would have taken place at any point during such time, I would not be a skeptic today, in regards to existence. Sure, I, or many, could still later chose to critique the teachings or assertions moving forward, but doubt would not STEM from lack in 'knowledge of existence'. This is a BIG ONE



For me, please read above. Hence forth, thus concluding, my rationale or justification stands.



The skepticism entails from the fact I lack 'knowledge of existence'. I have knowledge of air, gravity, space, and time, all things which are also less than perfectly tangible. Without 'knowledge of existence', it really is no different than telling me to open up my heart to Santa Claus. This entire thread topic ceases to remain, if I only had the 'knowledge of existence.' Do I need to unharden my heart to be aware of the many other things I wish didn't exist, or did not prepare my mind 'properly' to 'know' exists?.?.?.?



I honestly don't think you are seeing my perspective? I see yours... You believe because you have 'knowledge of existence". I don't have it. I was earnest and genuine for decades. The 'recoil', you keep referring to, is in the direct result from failure to obtain 'knowledge of existence' for decades. Please read my responses above, for clarification.

I don't understand your response. I don't 'recoil' at Santa Clause. I don't have any emotional response at all to Santa Clause because he doesn't exist. If you wanted to argue that he existed I would listen and not become defensive if his existence becomes a real possibility.

What you ask to be done in lifting the veil would condemn many, and I think yourself as well. Paul says that everyone is without excuse on that day of judgement. When you die, and you stand before God, you will have no excuse, not even 'knowledge of existence' because you know right from wrong. That is not to say there will not be fairness, but that no mater what, no one will be without excuse. Why bring condemnation upon the world when knowledge does not save? God could appear before you on the road to McDonalds, but that won't save you, only your heart can do that.

The problem with skepticism is that it is a decision to include and to exclude certain forms of knowledge. God is not a physical being, I have been healed, attacked by demons in the same sense as the movies, I have seen angels, I have seen, ghosts and yet I have never seen God or the supernatural according to your skepticism. Skepticism, in general usage, is a retaining wall one builds to keep things out, it's not a form of epistemology. What you need is healing from the past, but you want the wound to stay open instead.