Let's suppose God did....

[Dave Ellis]

God can do anything logically possible. It is not logically possible for God to force someone to believe, trust, and love Him.

That is the same as saying that God cannot make a round square or a married bachelor. I can think of millions of things God cannot do.

Who said anything about that?

I said it's certainly within his power to make himself known to everyone, while providing proof it's actually him.

There's no logical contradiction there (like your example of a square circle), in fact, I don't imagine it'd be that hard to do.

 

[Dave Ellis]

I don't see a problem with it at all because I do not presume that everything must have a natural explanation. I don't question beg for naturalism.

We don't presume it either, however with a lack of any other reasonable alternatives, it's all we're left with for now.

 

[jayem]

God can do anything logically possible. It is not logically possible for God to force someone to believe, trust, and love Him.

Well, would Saul of Tarsus have become a Christian had he not been struck blind for 3 days after Jesus appeared to him on the Damascus road? I guess strictly speaking, he already believed in God, though not in Jesus. But the principle is that your God does create circumstances which convinces someone to change their beliefs. Maybe you don't consider being blinded for 3 days as "force." But it certainly would direct one's mind.

 

[Freodin]

God can do anything logically possible. It is not logically possible for God to force someone to believe, trust, and love Him.

That is the same as saying that God cannot make a round square or a married bachelor. I can think of millions of things God cannot do.

I would debate that. Round squares or married bachelors are definitional contradictions. There are other examples of logical contradictions.

But you would need to show why forcing (causing would perhaps be a less weighted term) belief and trust are logically impossible. I am willing to concede "love" here, though only because of the definitional problems with this concept.

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

Let's suppose for a moment that God did do what many atheists here have said He has not done, and reveal Himself to mankind in a way that is undeniable.

How would you know it was God revealing Himself and not just some natural event with a natural explanation?

Let's suppose He caused a message to appear in the clouds in the sky over Israel. How would you know it was really God doing it and not just a chance, random arrangement of clouds to look like words?

Or let's suppose God appeared to you, an atheist, personally. How would you know it was really God and that you were not just hallucinating?

Let's suppose He appeared to hundreds of people at one time and did miracles. How would you know that it was not just some magician doing magic tricks with the help of people who were working secretly with the magician?

Let's suppose a booming voice from the sky cried: "I am God and Jesus Christ is my beloved Son, listen to Him!" How would you know it was not just you imagining the voice inside your head?

I keep hearing over and over again: "If God is real, then He can make His presence known." Well heck, I agree!

But if He did, how would you distinguish the supernatural from the natural?

What marks or qualities would such a revelation possess? Would you even be able to recognize it?

Posting blind here,

but if the god of the bible were as powerful as it's adherents claim he is/was, I imagine he would have the ability to reveal himself to humanity in such a way as to remove all doubt, and the entirety of earth's population would have one, exact, specific religion, and not tens of thousands as is now. Further, if this god were benevolent, and most seem to suggest he is, I doubt there would be over half the world's population of children going to bed without food or potable water. I also imagine young children wouldn't get cancer, and I suppose you might see one or two amputees get new limbs every once in a while.

IMO

Namaste

 

[Elioenai26]

Who said anything about that?

I said it's certainly within his power to make himself known to everyone, while providing proof it's actually him.

There's no logical contradiction there (like your example of a square circle), in fact, I don't imagine it'd be that hard to do.

Of course God can make Himself known to everyone while providing proof it is Him.

It is also possible people could reject this proof as not meeting their criteria for proof of God.

 

[Davian]

Of course God can make Himself known to everyone while providing proof it is Him.

It is also possible people could reject this proof as not meeting their criteria for proof of God.

What 'proof' are you referring to?

 

[Elioenai26]

Posting blind here,

but if the god of the bible were as powerful as it's adherents claim he is/was, I imagine he would have the ability to reveal himself to humanity in such a way as to remove all doubt, and the entirety of earth's population would have one, exact, specific religion, and not tens of thousands as is now. Further, if this god were benevolent, and most seem to suggest he is, I doubt there would be over half the world's population of children going to bed without food or potable water. I also imagine young children wouldn't get cancer, and I suppose you might see one or two amputees get new limbs every once in a while.

IMO

Namaste

Your views are based on a misunderstanding of divine omnipotence. There are numerous things God cannot do.

 

[quatona]

Of course God can make Himself known to everyone while providing proof it is Him.

It is also possible people could reject this proof as not meeting their criteria for proof of God.

What are the criteria for "proof" - as used in your statement above? Just so I know what I am to look for.

 

[Paradoxum]

He's been doing it every moment of every day since the beginning of creation when He walked with Adam and Eve in the cool of the garden. Salvation has always been by faith through grace, and this is a gift of God, not of works, so that no one can boast.

He is speaking to you right now my dear.

Jesus says: "Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone (that means you too Paradoxum ) hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to them and eat with them, and they with me."

Listen for His voice my dear, and open your heart to Him, He wants you more than you could ever know.

I don't believe it, and I don't know why to believe it. I used to believe, and it might be nice if it were true. I often get nostalgic for my former faith, God, and worship, but I don't know why to believe in it. The world doesn't look to me like the God I once loved made it.

I don't see God anymore. I see nature and I see feeling creatures.

There ya go, Paradoxum. How can you not be convinced by that? He got Adam, Eve, the garden of Eden, and Jesus all in the same post. I am dissapointed that he did not expend the effort to work in Moses and the Great Flud.

Oh well...

But Jesus was physical and He is God... and there is evidence that He existed and was seen by many multitudes.

What is the evidence? To be honest I still wonder about the apparent case for the resurrection.

Jesus is a theophany (God in the human form) and appearance of God. He states "I AM the father" "I and the father are ONE." "Why do ye ask' show us the father? For when you see me, you see the father." He states "I have all the power on heaven and on earth" Matthew...

I haven't seen Jesus, and would I believe a man claiming to be God?

(1) In Zechariah 12:10, God speaks of the future return of Christ and says, ". . . They shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourne for him, as one mourneth for his only son . . . ." This is spoken again in Revelation 1:7, which is clearly a reference to Christ Himself, but in Zechariah 12:10 GOD said, ". . . They shall look upon me whom they have pierced . . . ." The One that they pierced was Jesus Christ! So, in Zechariah 12:10, God is saying that He is Jesus Christ.

(2) In John 1:1, John 1:14, 1 John 1:1, and in 1 John 5:7, Jesus is called "the Word," and John 1:1 says that "the Word was God."


(3) Thomas referred to Jesus as "My Lord and my God" in John 20:28, and Jesus did not see the need to correct him.

(4) Isaiah 7:14 gives us the prophecy of the Virgin Birth of Christ and states that His name would be "Immanuel." Matthew 1:23 tells us that this word means "God with us."

(5) In Isaiah 9:6, Jesus is called "Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." The Bible certainly would not say this about anyone less than God.


(6) In John 10:30, Jesus says, "I and my Father are one." Jesus is not a lesser god; He is ONE with the Father.


(7) Micah 5:2 tells us that Jesus is "from everlasting."

(8) In John 8:58, Jesus tells the Pharisees, "Before Abraham was, I am." He claimed to be the "I AM" of Exodus 3:14, which is God Almighty.


(9) Jesus allowed others to worship Him (John 9:38; Matt. 14:33; and Luke 24:52), which was forbidden, unless He was God (Rev. 22:9).


(10) Jesus forgave sins (Mark 2:5), which only God can do (Mark 2:7).


(11) The Lord Jesus Christ is omnipresent (Matt. 18:20; 28:20; II Cor. 13:14; I John 5:7). We know He is God because He is capable of being everywhere at once.


(12) Jesus is omniscient (Mark 11:2-6; Matt. 12:40). He is God because He knows all things.


(13) The Lord Jesus is also omnipotent (Rev. 19:6; Matt. 28:18). He has all power.


(14) According to John 1, 1 John 1, Colossians 1, and Hebrews 1, Jesus Christ is the Creator of Genesis 1!


(15) Jesus never sinned! Romans 3:23 says that ALL HAVE SINNED and come short of the glory of God, but Jesus did not sin (2 Cor. 5:21; 1 Peter 3:18). So Jesus had to be God.

Jesus also states "Neither be ye called masters, for ONE is your master, Christ"... Then God is referred to as the one master "You cannot serve two masters, you either love or hate the other... You cannot serve both God and mammon" meaning Jesus IS God, the ONE master (no humans or things).

JESUS IS GOD!


But God showed Himself in Jesus, who was in the flesh. "God is the word and the word became flesh" John.
John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God... 1:14 - And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us,

Isaiah 44:6 - (God is the Redeemer)
2 Peter 1:1 (Jesus is the Redeemer) - “To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ”

Titus 2:13 - looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ

I'm sorry, but I don't believe the Bible to be from God, so I don't accept what it says as necessarily true.

Something to think about: atoms cannot be seen, and centuries ago, their presence was based merely off intuition without any evidence. "Seeing" is not always believing.

Before there was evidence for atoms why should people have believed in them? It would have been more speculation than anything else. It would make more sense to have claimed ignorance than to have made up that atoms existed. If they didn't have that evidence then it doesn't make alot of sense to claim it to be true.

But Jesus cannot be speculated as He actually existed. Even old churches in the medieval age may have had relics from His cross. And JESUS IS GOD. Proof?

"11 Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the works themselves."
Jesus's God's words, John 14:11

I can accept Jesus was real, but I'm not sure why I should accept that Jesus was God just because the Bible says so.

His evidence is in JESUS, God in the human form given as a theophany, an example to follow. As He had appeared to Moses - Moses saw God's back after He saw Him in the bush, and Jacob wrestled with God in the flesh and saw Him "face to face." Adam and Eve saw God when He walked in the Garden.

I haven't seen Jesus though.

But there is evidence of JESUS, who was God in the flesh as a theophany (appearence of God) as seen in the past.

JESUS IS GOD. There is evidence He was there.

You know because all good comes from God, All good comes from Jesus. You know from the catacombs that people saw Him and what He did. Evidence from 30 A.D. on ward to 313 A.D. JESUS IS GOD, GOD'S THEOPHANY to give us a PERFECT, sinless example to follow.

I can accept Jesus was real, but I see no reason to believe he was God.

I was once asked if I would accept the evidence put forwards for Christ if instead it was Muslims putting it forward for their beliefs. The answer is that I probably wouldn't. It's likely I'm just biased towards Christianity (though you might not see it in my replies).

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

Your views are based on a misunderstanding of divine omnipotence. There are numerous things God cannot do.

So, there's a invisible guy in the sky who is able to make something so vast and and unbelievably mind blowing as billions of galaxies, each with trillions of stars, but isn't able to alleviate suffering, then yes, I misunderstand the limits of your god's power.

 

[Elioenai26]

I don't believe it, and I don't know why to believe it. I used to believe, and it might be nice if it were true. I often get nostalgic for my former faith, God, and worship, but I don't know why to believe in it. The world doesn't look to me like the God I once loved made it.

I don't see God anymore. I see nature and I see feeling creatures.

What caused this change?

I can accept Jesus was real, but I see no reason to believe he was God.

Are you familiar with the statement that C.S. Lewis once made which goes something like:

"Jesus Christ was either God, a liar, or a lunatic"?

Do you agree with that statement?

If so, then since you say you have no reason to believe He was God incarnate, then He must either be a liar or a lunatic or both. Why do you think Jesus was a liar and or a lunatic?

 

[Elioenai26]

So, there's a invisible guy in the sky who is able to make something so vast and and unbelievably mind blowing as billions of galaxies, each with trillions of stars, but isn't able to alleviate suffering, then yes, I misunderstand the limits of your god's power.

I would not call God's inability to do the logically impossible a limit to His power. I would call it the inability to do the logically impossible. That is no limit to His power. In fact, it is in keeping with the logic that is part and parcel of His creation. I believe God in His infinite wisdom has sufficient reasons for allowing suffering and evil to exist at the present moment. This is not logically inconsistent with God's omnipotence, omniscience, or omnibenevolence.

There are many times that humans are subjected to suffering by other humans, sometimes immense suffering, so that a greater good may result from said suffering. No one is accused in these circumstances of doing anything wrong.

If you would like to enter into some type of semi-formal dialogue where we can debate this topic: "Does the existence of human suffering prove God does not exist", I would be more than thrilled to.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Of course God can make Himself known to everyone while providing proof it is Him.

It is also possible people could reject this proof as not meeting their criteria for proof of God.

Not if God did it right... He must be aware of exactly what it would take to convince the most staunch unbeliever, and it would easily be within his power to provide sufficient proof

 

[Elioenai26]

Not if God did it right... He must be aware of exactly what it would take to convince the most staunch unbeliever,

I believe He would know what it would take to convince even the most staunch unbeliever, I grant that prima facie that sounds to be more plausibly true than its negation.....go on.....

and it would easily be within his power to provide sufficient proof

Mr. Ellis, I have an argument that has been formulated by a gentleman whose line of reasoning is similar to yours and I would venture to say the majority of atheists here regarding this issue. I will present the argument below and I would like for you to tell me if you think it represents your view.

1. The Christian God strongly desires a loving relationship with almost every human being, and desires it to last for all eternity. [Christian assumption]

2. A loving relationship with God is possible only if one (a) believes that he exists and (b) chooses to be in a loving relationship with God.

3. Therefore, if the Christian God exists, since he wants humanity to have a loving relationship with him, he would make his existence well-known to almost everyone, thereby ensuring condition (a). (from 1, 2)

4. There are multitudes of conflicting religions and religious beliefs (Christianity, Islam, Hindus, Buddhism, secularism, etc), and more people who don't believe that the Christian God exists than those who do. [empirical assumption]

5. Therefore, not almost every human being believes that the Christian God exists. (from 4)

6. Therefore, the Christian God's existence is not well-known to almost everyone. (from 5)

7. Therefore, the Christian God doesn't exist. (from 6, 3)

Does this argument represent your view?

____________________________________________________________________________________

Argument courtesy of a gentleman named -Spencer, who sent this in for Dr. Craig to respond to on his Q&A #77 regarding Middle Knowledge and Christian Particularism
​

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

I would not call God's inability to do the logically impossible a limit to His power. I would call it the inability to do the logically impossible. That is no limit to His power. In fact, it is in keeping with the logic that is part and parcel of His creation. I believe God in His infinite wisdom has sufficient reasons for allowing suffering and evil to exist at the present moment. This is not logically inconsistent with God's omnipotence, omniscience, or omnibenevolence.

There are many times that humans are subjected to suffering by other humans, sometimes immense suffering, so that a greater good may result from said suffering. No one is accused in these circumstances of doing anything wrong.

If you would like to enter into some type of semi-formal dialogue where we can debate this topic: "Does the existence of human suffering prove God does not exist", I would be more than thrilled to.

It's my belief, based on what you have stated, that your god is logically impossible.

 

[Elioenai26]

It's my belief, based on what you have stated, that your god is logically impossible.

His existence, or God as a concept?

Those are two distinct topics. Which one do you believe is logically impossible?

 

[Skavau]

But if one assents to the proposition:

"God exists"...

then this changes everything (or at least should). If God exists, then there is one who will hold us accountable for every act we commit and even every thought we think. If God exists, then He knows that you cheated on your taxes last year, or that you cursed the driver in the car in front of you for driving too slow even if no one could hear you. He knows the lustful thoughts you have towards someone who is not your husband or wife. He knows every pornographic website you visit and how many times a day you touch. He knows the thoughts you have in your head about the co-worker you hate and despise for whatever reason. He knows your prejudices, your judgmental attitudes towards others, your apathy towards those in need. He knows your hypocrisy and dishonesty even when no one else is privy to it.

This sounds like totalitarian nightmare fuel. Absolutely frightening.

Assenting to the proposition: "God exists", also means that you know God is worthy of worship and honor. He is worth everything you could ever give, not excluding your very life.

This knowledge is a very large pill for some to swallow. Instead of swallowing it, they deny it exists. What better way to soothe one's conscience than to eliminate the very cause for any introspection? With God gone, all things are permissible. Men can be free to be gods and live as they please, committing all manner of shameless, reprehensible acts with a clear conscience.

Stop lecturing people on why they think what they think.

You are not me, nor any atheist.

 

[Skavau]

There's literally nothing to see here in this thread. Elioenai asks us to explain specifically what kind of evidence would constitute reason for us to believe in God. Several people answered, or pointed out that God should be capable of making us understand and yet he has scrutinised every answer. He doesn't want an answer.

His goal was to try and get atheists to admit that no evidence could exist that could not be explained away (ironic as it would mean he would have to make the same concession). He was then going to say that this is exactly what is happening now, that there is evidence and that people are just ignoring it for -insert absurd reason- here.

Nothing more than him trying to make a false equivalence between a hypothetical and now.

When that failed he began talking down to, patronising and preaching to everyone on here. So transparent it is comical.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Your post reinforces my point. People would rather believe in space aliens as opposed to God. The explanation for something can be anything as long as its not God.

To be fair, the epistemological hurdle is higher with supernatural beings. This isn't a matter of emotional preferences, as you are painting it.

My point is that there is no proof or evidence that God could offer to anyone that could not be explained away if that person was unwilling to see it.

And I've directly contradicted that point, even giving an example, not supported it.


eudaimonia,

Mark