The Evangelical Universalist Forum

God's existence

Featured Writers Dr Thomas Talbott
#41

Dave, God speaks in many different ways. As I mentioned before, the Bible isn’t the only source of truth. The Golden Rule has been known for ages. People didn’t need to read the Bible to know this. Where did Confucius get all his wise sayings?

Concerning your list:

  1. No one knows what happens after we leave this earth.
  2. People have hearts and minds, a conscience, and the capacity to do good.
  3. Many have suffered for the sake of truth. The story of Harriet Tubman opens our hearts and minds as well.
    4.prophecy fulfilled?
  4. The love of God is revealed in those who love.
#42

I really cannot see what your points have to do with mine. None at all.

#43

Dave , you claim that those who study the Bible know more about God than those who don’t.
I disagree. I think Bob asked a good question here.

And why didn’t the Pharisees and Sadducees recognize Jesus?

#44

Bob can answer that on his own, and I hope he will. It’s not a big secret.

You’ve read the New Testament, so I suspect you already know the answer to that. Right?

#45

Dave, I suggested there was no other way toward truth than the way of wisdom and reasoning that you argued was not to be trusted. So my question was to you as to how you then determine that the Bible or any other item is true. It remains ‘secret’ and unclear to me what your position on that is.

#46

Oh, my bad. I truly thought you were tongue-in-cheek. But you’re serious? I’m not criticizing or anything like that - just, for some reason, surprised. You have your reasons, I’m certain.
Ok.
LLC - I’m sorry, I had totally misread Bob. Do you want me to suggest some reading material, or are you all good with your understanding of things?

#47

I’d like to get back to the topic. There has been a lot of discussion about whether or not we should accept what the scriptures clearly state about the existence of God. Personally, I haven’t found the argument very helpful. Either the biblical claims are correct and worth taking at face value or they are not.

Some confessions of the Christian faith include an assertion that we know God (and, by default, believe He exists) by two means:

First, “by the creation, preservation, and government of the universe, which is before our eyes as a most elegant book, wherein all creatures, great and small, are as so many characters leading us to contemplate the invisible things of God, namely, His eternal power and divinity.”

Secondly, “by His holy and divine Word”, i.e. the Bible.

There appears to be no consensus in this thread that we should accept what scripture tells us about God’s existence or His nature, character, and actions so that leaves us with the first of the two means, i.e. the “book” of nature. To my way of thinking, this book virtually screams its message into our cognition. The more we learn about the complexities of life, the less we can comprehend how life began, let alone how it is maintained. In his visions, Ezekiel saw “wheels within wheels”. Well, our bodies contain a gazillion of components, interdependent cells, etc. each of which is too complex to describe, let alone replicate.

Man has attempted to “create” life in a test tube and failed miserably. I don’t believe he ever will even if God dropped a detailed instruction manual at his feet. For me, the fact that I exist physically is enough absolute proof that God exists. Add in the existence of my brain and my ability to experience emotions such as love and faithfulness and much more.

Quad erat demonstrandum?

1 Like
#48

Well, there is an old joke!

A mathematician and an engineer agree to a psychological experiment.

The mathematician is put in a chair in a large empty room and a beautiful naked woman is placed on a bed at the other end of the room.

The psychologist explains, “You are to remain in your chair. Every five minutes, I will move your chair to a position halfway between its current location and the woman on the bed.” The mathematician looks at the psychologist in disgust. “What? I’m not going to go through this. You know I’ll never reach the bed!” And he gets up and storms out. The psychologist makes a note on his clipboard and ushers the engineer in.

He explains the situation, and the engineer’s eyes light up and he starts drooling. The psychologist is a bit confused. “Don’t you realize that you’ll never reach her?”

The engineer smiles and replied, “Of course! But in less than half an hour, I’ll be close enough for all practical purposes!”

Well, Holy Scripture is close enough - for all practical purposes. The key is what lens, we see it through:

  • AN RYO (i.e. Roll Your Own)

  • An establish Protestant denominational, community church or non-denominational

  • The Roman catholic magisterium

  • The Eastern Orthodox lens of Sacred Tradition

Right or wrong, I go for the last option. And when I finally meet God, face to face. God would say:

You are close enough, for all practical purposes!

#49

Dave, yes, and they were all scholars. The priests of the Roman Catholic Church were scholars as well, and yet they made laws against working on Sunday and eating meat on Friday etc.etc.

Ivernessian, I agree. We are to test all spirits, even the words that are written in the Bible.

#50

We need an image, to help illustrate this idea!

image

#51

HF, That’s hilarious!:rofl: Thanks for the laugh it’s a great way to start the day. Gotta run.