Why does God leave no tracks?

[AV1611VET]

Having been raised as a Christian, it is hard for me to untangle God from my thoughts.

No kidding?

Let's see ... it's AD 2016, I'll bet you pass several churches out on the road, Bibles are everywhere, bumper stickers, holidays (especially Christmas & Easter), and a plethora of other things you see on a quo tidian basis ...

... and you're saying it is hard for you to untangle God from your thoughts!?

Are you bragging or complaining?

 

[AV1611VET]

We are the tracks.

Yup.

 

[cloudyday2]

We are the tracks.

It makes a good slogan, but I'm trying to dissect what it means.
- Do you mean our (the universe's) existence is the tracks?
- Do you mean the lives changed by Christianity is the tracks?
- Do you mean something else?

 

[cloudyday2]

Until He does then, can you answer your own question now:

I'm not sure. It seems that if God makes any promises for short time intervals, then science can detect His tracks. Even if these promises are not guaranties. IDK

 

[Winken]

It makes a good slogan, but I'm trying to dissect what it means.
- Do you mean our (the universe's) existence is the tracks?
- Do you mean the lives changed by Christianity is the tracks?
- Do you mean something else?

Once you understand that, you'll return to your confession of Jesus, the Christ, as Savior and Lord.

 

[cloudyday2]

Cloudy, are you so naive that you can't see that if God came back here and repeated His first-advent miracles and healed the sick, raised the dead, and walked on water, that He would be crucified by the academic elite (known as the "highminded" in the Bible) all over again?

If you disagree, then maybe you need to stick around here a little more and listen to those who say:

"If God is real, and I meet Him, He's going to have a lot of explaining to do."

When Jesus does come back and rules and reigns on the earth for 1000 years, read what's going to happen when those thousand years are up.

He's going to be attacked by every nation on the face of the earth.

You're either seriously misguided, or you're trying to act like some big shot with that God-can-show-us attitude.

It would be interesting to imagine what might happen if Jesus manifested today instead of 2000 years ago. I suppose there is a book or movie about that.

 

[Blondepudding]

Ever think that everyone who's looking for God is looking from the inside out first?-------------------------------------------------

​

 

[cloudyday2]

No kidding?

Let's see ... it's AD 2016, I'll bet you pass several churches out on the road, Bibles are everywhere, bumper stickers, holidays (especially Christmas & Easter), and a plethora of other things you see on a quo tidian basis ...

... and you're saying it is hard for you to untangle God from your thoughts!?

Are you bragging or complaining?

Complaining I suppose. On the one hand, I never particularly liked Christianity. But on the other hand, I liked God. I liked Jesus too.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

The gospels are the contemporary accounts of the miracles.

Contemporary meaning written during the same time the alleged miracles happened. The gospels are not contemporary.

He had others to do it? Who cares who wrote about him...

So this message was so important that it's not written down until decades later by Greek speaking writers who do not claim to be eye witnesses? Would you agree that if something was confirmed to be written down by him it would give validity to the claims?

How do you know no one else wrote anything down? Do you have any idea how hard it is for a document like that to survive 2000 years?

I don't. How do you know they did? There are surviving Roman records from that time but the most important message just got lost? I don't buy it.

That is speculation. No one knows when they were written.

Biblical scholars may dispute exact dates but the most agreed upon dates are that Mark was likely written around 65-70, Matthew and Luke about 10-15 years after that and John written around the year 90. They know they are not contemporary and that they are written decades later.

 

[cloudyday2]

Ever think that everyone who's looking for God is looking from the inside out first?

Nope LOL I'm not sure what you mean, but I have been wondering about this idea that our ideas are as real as anything else. Maybe God writes the stories in our imaginations to influence our behavior or something. A person I knew who had studied to be a Rabbi, said that Judaism was all about stories.

 

[Blondepudding]

How can you answer , nope, if you're not sure what I mean by my question?

 

[AV1611VET]

It would be interesting to imagine what might happen if Jesus manifested today instead of 2000 years ago.

That wouldn't happen.

God works on a timetable.

Galatians 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
Galatians 4:5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

The "fulness of the time" came 2000 years ago.

 

[AV1611VET]

Complaining I suppose. On the one hand, I never particularly liked Christianity. But on the other hand, I liked God. I liked Jesus too.

You sound like someone I've heard about that was credited with saying:

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians."

 

[Xalith]

You sound like someone I've heard about that was credited with saying:

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians."

That would be Gandhi and sadly it is so true. There are so many hypocrites in Christianity, who profess Christ, but are nothing like He is.

Obviously, no mortal man can be perfect like He is, but yet we should at least try.

@cloudyday2 : You say you like God and Christ, but not Christianity... to that, I ask... what about Christianity don't you like?

Chances are, what you've been taught/what you heard is either false, misrepresented, or otherwise skewed. If you like Christ, then you should want to be one of His, and you should want to follow His ways which is what Christianity is meant to be in the first place.

 

[ewq1938]

Contemporary meaning written during the same time the alleged miracles happened. The gospels are not contemporary.

There is no evidence that they aren't.

There are surviving Roman records from that time but the most important message just got lost? I don't buy it.

Rome didn't care about Jesus.

Biblical scholars may dispute exact dates but the most agreed upon dates are that Mark was likely written around 65-70, Matthew and Luke about 10-15 years after that and John written around the year 90. They know they are not contemporary and that they are written decades later.

Again, no one has any idea when any gospel was written. All datings are guesses.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

There is no evidence that they aren't.

Biblical scholars would disagree with you.

http://www.bc.edu/schools/stm/crossroads/resources/birthofjesus/intro/the_dating_of_thegospels.html

Bart Ehrman-New testament scholar

Rome didn't care about Jesus.

Cared enough to kill him apparently.
There are no independent and contemporary accounts of his life,ministry, death or resurrection though.

Again, no one has any idea when any gospel was written. All datings are guesses.

They aren't contemporary though and scholars agree they were written decades after the alleged events.

 

[Blondepudding]

Interesting that a Biblical scholar identifies as agnostic after having been a fundamentalist. He's very cutting on the faith he was once member of isn't he?

 

[ewq1938]

Cared enough to kill him apparently.

Nope, they didn't care. The Jews were given the decision on Jesus and they said to crucify. Rome didn't care either way.

There are no independent and contemporary accounts of his life,ministry, death or resurrection though.

There is Josephus and I think some others but I don't recall their names.

They aren't contemporary though and scholars agree they were written decades after the alleged events.

That isn't evidence though and scholars differ on what dates they think they were written anyways. Someone could have been writing things down as things happened, or decades later...it's impossible to know.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

Interesting that a Biblical scholar identifies as agnostic after having been a fundamentalist. He's very cutting on the faith he was once member of isn't he?

His focus is textual criticism and historical Jesus. Not everyone agrees with his conclusions but he's a highly respected scholar.

 

[Blondepudding]

OK, thank you.