Why does God choose to remain invisible and undetectable?

[talquin]

Assuming a god exists, it has chosen to remain invisible. Just how does it better serve this god's agenda to have a world in which he doesn't manifest himself in reality? A world in which an existent god which doesn't manifest itself in reality is indistinguishable from a non-existent god?

Maybe our world is not important to it as other worlds?

If a god exists, this is apparently the case.

Maybe we cant see it but it can see us?

If a god exists, this certainly is the case. Why would a god who loves everyone and wants to relationship with everyone not make himself visible?

Kinda like us observing ants or termites from above, they can go about their business completely oblivious to us observing.

Poor analogy. Ants and termites almost certainly don't possess the cognitive capabilities to believe humans exist.

Furthermore, why would a god set up a system in which our salvation is dependent upon believing something to exist on insufficient evidence?

Perhaps it is because the concept of salvation is purely mans idea.

Be careful. You're placing the burden of proof upon yourself when you say that.

 

[talquin]

So simple, yet this seemingly so difficult (for Christians) to understand.

I bet they wouldn't believe an empty carspace is evidence of a monster that eats cars.

Very well said. Perhaps some Christians can explain themselves.

 

[talquin]

If God is tangible and visible, then in this era where almost everyone in advanced countries has a camera and the internet is so widely available, why don't we see a photograph of this tangible, visible God on the internet?


If I look at the sky, I see sky. So you are using the term 'God' to describe the sky. Why call it 'God' when 'sky' is more widely understood and universally accepted?


That's not a good example of something making itself visible.

Since we can't see each others faces during a forum dialog, I am at pains to decide how seriously to take your remarks. Do you honestly not understand my explanations and examples, or do you understand them just fine, and are pulling my leg, or being intentionally obtuse with your tongue in your cheek?

You said one can look at the sky and see God. Am I supposed to take that to mean something other than what you said? Or are you serious when one looks at the sky they see God?

In any event, I have described my very real experience of God to you in the best terms I know how. I will await someone else to give you better examples which may be more in your wheelhouse.

Peace,

Steven

The experiences you cited weren't evidence of a god. It sounds more like rationalizations put together to deal with those who question your belief.

 

[pdudgeon]

So simple, yet this seemingly so difficult (for Christians) to understand.

I bet they wouldn't believe an empty carspace is evidence of a monster that eats cars.

LOL even if the monster itself were invisable, the action of the visable cars disappearing piece by piece (or bite by bite) would be evidence of the existance of such a monster.

 

[pdudgeon]

If God is tangible and visible, then in this era where almost everyone in advanced countries has a camera and the internet is so widely available, why don't we see a photograph of this tangible, visible God on the internet?

the answer is simple. our brains only recognize 4 dimentions. and so does our equipment.

 

[Kylie]

Having not read the thread, I'd say it is for the same reason Thor remains invisible and undetectable. Because he doesn't exist.

 

[Kylie]

the answer is simple. our brains only recognize 4 dimentions. and so does our equipment.

Irrelevant. If you want to claim that God interacts with the universe that we can measure, then that interaction can be measured.

 

[WindStaff]

Having not read the thread, I'd say it is for the same reason Thor remains invisible and undetectable. Because he doesn't exist.

There is plenty of literature one can read to educate oneself better on deducing false gods. A lot of Saint Augustine's writings are all about going right for the throat of Greek and Roman gods, logically proving why they cannot be real.

There's a lot out there one can receive a lot of insight on, but you aren't going to find absolutely anything by your standing because there is nothing to be had- I bet you don't even realize, with all your 'god doesn't exist' pea shots, that physicists indirectly state that it would make more sense if the universe didn't exist.

With that kind of dead end brick wall, how do atheists even begin to try and stand in the way of divine insight or reprove?
Atheists need to just get over perpetual, idol skepticism

 

[Sean Robson]

If a god exists, this is apparently the case.


If a god exists, this certainly is the case. Why would a god who loves everyone and wants to relationship with everyone not make himself visible?


Poor analogy. Ants and termites almost certainly don't possess the cognitive capabilities to believe humans exist.


Be careful. You're placing the burden of proof upon yourself when you say that.

You have quoted what others have said, then pinned my name to the quotes, I presume it's an innocent error.

 

[Kylie]

There is plenty of literature one can read to educate oneself better on deducing false gods. A lot of Saint Augustine's writings are all about going right for the throat of Greek and Roman gods, logically proving why they cannot be real.

Funnily enough, it would seem that this is coming from a person who has a pro-Christianity bias.

Please give me an example of how we can prove that Thor is not real with an argument that is unable to also be applied to the Christian God.

There's a lot out there one can receive a lot of insight on, but you aren't going to find absolutely anything by your standing because there is nothing to be had- I bet you don't even realize, with all your 'god doesn't exist' pea shots, that physicists indirectly state that it would make more sense if the universe didn't exist.

Source please?

With that kind of dead end brick wall, how do atheists even begin to try and stand in the way of divine insight or reprove?

Like I've said before, show me the evidence and I will believe.

But your unsupported claims that I'm blind aren't going to convince me.

Atheists need to just get over perpetual, idol skepticism

It's not perpetual. Give me the evidence and I will no longer be skeptical of it.

 

[Smidlee]

Having not read the thread, I'd say it is for the same reason Thor remains invisible and undetectable. Because he doesn't exist.

Do you know anyone who claimed Thor is the Creator of the universe and that He "spoke" it into existence? The universe was created by that which has no mass but is very real.

In case you didn't know Thor was trashed when they learn about Jesus Christ.

 

[Kylie]

Do you know anyone who claimed Thor is the Creator of the universe and that He "spoke" it into existence? The universe was created by that which has no mass but is very real.

In case you didn't know Thor was trashed when they learn about Jesus Christ.

Oh, so because no one today believes it, it's just mythology and not true? People back then believed very much that it was true. The fact that no one today believes it does not mean that no one ever believed it.

Try again.

 

[Neogaia777]

Do you know anyone who claimed Thor is the Creator of the universe and that He "spoke" it into existence? The universe was created by that which has no mass but is very real.

In case you didn't know Thor was trashed when they learn about Jesus Christ.

Was Zeus or any other God's of pagan religions, thought to be or have the title, the "creator" and that he "spoke" the universe into existence, and was the one and only true God?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

There is plenty of literature one can read to educate oneself better on deducing false gods.

Yes, there is plenty of good atheist literature.

 

[Smidlee]

Oh, so because no one today believes it, it's just mythology and not true? People back then believed very much that it was true. The fact that no one today believes it does not mean that no one ever believed it.

Try again.

And the reason no one believes is due to Christianity. That's a testimony for Christianity and not against it as you are trying to suggest.
It the same the idea of the four elements: earth, wind, fire and water was replaced by chemistry.

Was Zeus or any other God's of pagan religions, thought to be or have the title, the "creator" and that he "spoke" the universe into existence, and was the one and only true God?

Who claimed Zeus was the creator of the universe which is held together by the power of His word? Are you making this claim?

 

[Kylie]

And the reason no one believes is due to Christianity. That's a testimony for Christianity and not against it as you are trying to suggest.

It the same the idea of the four elements: earth, wind, fire and water was replaced by chemistry.

No it isn't. The four elements idea was replaced by chemistry because chemistry produced actual results. It WORKED. The student didn't need to just take the teacher's word for it, they could do the experiment and see for themselves.

I am not aware of any powers that Christianity has to make more accurate predictions than any other religion. Perhaps you'd care to show me some?

Also, if people leave Christianity for atheism, is that to be taken as testimony for atheism being a better explanation than Christianity?

 

[Smidlee]

No it isn't. The four elements idea was replaced by chemistry because chemistry produced actual results. It WORKED. The student didn't need to just take the teacher's word for it, they could do the experiment and see for themselves.

Exactly. Jesus Christ "works".

I am not aware of any powers that Christianity has to make more accurate predictions than any other religion. Perhaps you'd care to show me some?

OK.

Also, if people leave Christianity for atheism, is that to be taken as testimony for atheism being a better explanation than Christianity?

A Thor worshiper turn to Christ is not the same as someone leaving Christianity for atheism. It is illogical for someone claiming they had a personal relationship with God then suddenly converted to claim there is no creator at all. It would make more sense if someone became a deist or another faith.
This is like someone claiming they saw a rainbow then turn around to claim they don't exist. This is why I doubts there is really such a thing as an atheist.

 

[Kylie]

Exactly. Jesus Christ "works".

And can you give me an example of something where the best results are gained by using Jesus? Please be sure to provide support for your claim.

OK.

Oh, I love this. You agree to show me a case of Christianity providing better predictions than any other religion, and then you fail to do so.

A Thor worshiper turn to Christ is not the same as someone leaving Christianity for atheism. It is illogical for someone claiming they had a personal relationship with God then suddenly converted to claim there is no creator at all. It would make more sense if someone became a deist or another faith.

A Christian turn to atheism is not the same as someone leaving the ancient Greek religion for Christianity. It is illogical for someone claiming they had a personal relationship with Thor or Zeus or whatever then suddenly converted to claim there is only one God at all.

It would make more sense if someone became a deist or another faith.

WHy?

This is like someone claiming they saw a rainbow then turn around to claim they don't exist. This is why I doubts there is really such a thing as an atheist.

Oh that's silly. Rainbows can be measured, and there are scientific explanations for them. Even if I turn and can't see the rainbow, I still know that the scientific principles that cause one to appear are in effect.

 

[Smidlee]

Oh that's silly. Rainbows can be measured, and there are scientific explanations for them. Even if I turn and can't see the rainbow, I still know that the scientific principles that cause one to appear are in effect.

You assume because you are not aware of something than everyone else aren't either. You can't prove a rainbow existence to a blind person. Thus if someone claims to have seen a raindow then later deny their existence then the most logical conclusion would be either they are lying or they are blind.

 

[Kylie]

You assume because you are not aware of something than everyone else aren't either. You can't prove a rainbow existence to a blind person. Thus if someone claims to have seen a raindow then later deny their existence then the most logical conclusion would be either they are lying or they are blind.

I can't get him to understand what one looks like, but I can easily explain the mathematical and physical things that are going on so he understand the principles involved just fine.

You want to keep playing silly games?