Hi Straggler,
Straggler writes:
It is quite possible to entertain the idea that God exists but to not have a subjective personal relationship with him. Surely this would be the position of anyone who considers themself to be an agnostic?
I thought the agnostic view was that he/she believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
How could someone believe in and trust in something they do not believe it is possible to know if it exists or not.
That is approaching the subject with a closed mind.
To entertain the idea of God is to approach the subject with an open mind.
If you have a file on your computer that is locked, (read only) you can not add any information to that file.
On the other hand if you have an open file you can add information.
The same applies to the mind.
Straggler writes:
Do you think that the empirical evidence available alone is enough to convince an agnostic?
No.
Straggler writes:
Or can only one who first has a subjective relationship with God be convinced that the empirical evidence also points in this same theistic direction?
No relationship is necessary.
An open mind is necessary.
A desire to find the truth is necessary.
We have an example in the Bible of a man who had a desire, no relationship, but was searching for the truth.
Acts Act And Philip ran thither to [him], and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?
8:31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.
If you go back to verse 27 you find this man was from Ethiopia, and had been up to Jerusalem to worship, and was on his way home.
He was reading from Isaiah but did not understand it. When Philip explained it to him he received the word, believed and was saved.
This man had a desire for the truth and when he heard the word of God he accepted it.
I believe that anyone who is searching for the truth about
God can find it. Just as this man was searching and God sent a man to explain to him what he needed to do.
God nor Philip had any control over whether this man would accept the word or reject it. That was entirely up to him.
So it is with anyone. When I heard the word I could have rejected it and went on my merry way. I could have later reconsidered and decided I needed to join the church, be batized, and do a lot of good works for God. But without accepting the Word of God and receiving the full free pardon still been unsaved but called a christian by most people.
I really believe that a person that thought they had a personal relationship with God would not see their need of salvation.
Straggler writes:
We are considering those who do not have a personal relationship with God but who find empirical evidence convincing. Wherever that empirical evidence may lead.
Without a belief in God or a desire to know God there would never be enough empirical evidence to convince anyone.
Salvation is based on the grace of God by faith when we take God at His word.
Straggler writes:
Let's assume that we are talking about those who are uninterested in having a personal relationship with God but who nevertheless are open to the idea of his existence if the objective facts point in this direction.
If a person is truly interested and is open to the idea of the existence of God, I believe God will provide a messenger to them just as He provided one for the Ethiopian eunuch.
Straggler writes:
Do you think that the objective evidence available is sufficient to convince these people that God does indeed exist?
No.
Straggler writes:
Or must the empirical evidence be viewed through the eyes of one who already knows that God exists in order to make sense in this context?
Yes.
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
™ Version 4.2
(1)