Is God determined to allow no proof or evidence of his existence? Part II

No.My point is that, contrary to what you have claimed, the psalm does seem to portray God speaking in a very literal sense throughout various mediums outside the Scriptures.I've also pointed out that Paul seems to be concluding that this speech is so obvious that people who hear it are held accountable to it.In addition to this, I've pointed out that the scope of this speech has gone out to the ends of the earth, is not limited strictly to the Israelites, and has been perceivable since the very beginning.Conversely, I've explained this in meticulous detail so that anyone reading this should be able to understand this. The key passages in Romans 10 are listed step by step -- and other passages are noted for reinforcement. Legend, I've explained this as carefully and concisely as I could (with a little bit of joking as I went). Actually, they fit together very well once you get rid of your assumptive baggage that you carry over from your former denominational faith. Legend, I already know what questions your going to ask when I make a statement. I've just cut to the chase and listed it as I feel you'll ask. Everything's right there in black and white for you to understand.Consequently, if "tidy" means "make it shorter", then don't count on it. These are really serious questions here about maters of faith. If the message I've presented is considered too long by you, then it probably indicates that you're not really desiring to understand my point of view very much -- and you're most certainly not very interested in understanding God (since you've admitted your questions are largely rhetorical and all).This message has been edited by Mr. Ex Nihilo, 10-12-2005 12:57 PM

Uh no...Proof of evidence is already provided -- and is apparently evident throughout many forms of creation. Lack of faith indicates lack of trusting the God who is already revealed on the most basic level through nature, a God who's nature and message is self-evident in the very things he has created.This message has been edited by Mr. Ex Nihilo, 10-12-2005 03:34 PM

Evidence depends on interpretation. The same data can be consistent with multiple theories, multiple perspectives. For God to be "self-evident from the very things he has created", it has to be clear that he, and only he could have created them.Why are there other explanations of the origins of life out there that aren't "self-evidently" false? How can this be resolved with the "self-evident" nature of God that you describe?I care because what you see as self-evident doesn't feel self-evident to me. If it was self-evident, I would be a believer. I grew up trying to believe. I also grew up romping through the woods.Ben

quote:

---

Lack of faith indicates lack of trusting the God who is already revealed on the most basic level through nature, a God who's nature and message is self-evident in the very things he has created.

---

Stick with this thought and don't deviate.I am talking about the Christian God from here on.We are to trust God because of what he has already revealed through nature which he created and what he has created reveals his nature.Please describe the nature of the Christian God and what has the natural world revealed that supports that description?

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

There is nothing literal about the Psalm itself. Can't you read ? It's the *heavens* that declare, the *skies* that proclaim. When was the last time you heard the heavens and the skies literally speaking ?! so Paul quotes Psalm 19:4 which testifies to the fact that the word has gone forth, so Israel must have heard it.Just like I said in my previous post, when I tried to summarize your position. I generally agree here (though you could use 'speech' instead of speech, as it's not the literal meaning of the word), apart from the last bit: what makes you think that this 'speech' is perceived since the very beginning and wasn't heard only once ?Also what is this 'speech' about ? What is it that the Israelites (and everyone else) were supposed to have heard ?

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

Here we go again! You don't even know what my former denominational faith was but you still assume I'm carrying assumptive baggage. Nice way to support your argument! (not) You're not back to your old tactics of mis-representing (i.e. lying about) my position are you ?when did I admit that my questions are largely rhetorical?even if I had how would you conclude from that I'm not very interested in understanding God ?!I said that one question to you was largely rhetorical, the one in Message 62And that was in response to Message 63 where bkelly said: and guess what? he was right - you never answered.So I hope you'll correct this litle 'misinterpretation' of yours in your next message, right ?I'd expect something along the lines of : thank you!!

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

It makes no difference, He revealed himself to Adam yet Adam chose to sin. You will do the same, especially when you are equipped with pride. Perhaps it's more efficient for people in history to actually *believe in* a perceivable but invisible God.Why not *choose* to ask Him this question when you are in Heaven, with your pride and sins removed.BTW, Noah and Moses may have to disagree with you. This message has been edited by Hawkins, 10-13-2005 12:04 AM

You know nothing of life if you think one "chooses" to sin. It doesn't work that way.I have "sinned" many times in my life, and I am haunted with regret, but not one time did I choose my path. It happened. One gets carried away with one's emotions. One acts irresponsibly. One makes the wrong decision. Is that so terrible?

Yep, because you are not Adam. We cant help but sin sometimes, because after Adam, we act that way, hmm...our original sin.Secondly, I think that if everything is made to be transparent, may be we cant help but sometimes *recognising* someone else to be our "God".This message has been edited by Hawkins, 10-13-2005 01:38 AM

Yes and no. It's depends on what subject matter you're discussing.If one is talking about science, then the interpretation of the data should remain as close to the natural process as possible. However, there are limits to what we can concretely determine by the scientific method.In areas where our limits of understanding reach their apogee, the hypothesis can include the supernatural. This doesn't mean the supernatural is necessarilly the correct interpretation. However, it does mean that those who believe should continue to refine their arguments to a level that can be tested appropiately. That's not true.There can be other factors which are obscuring the truth insofar that the evidence essentially blends into the static of the background noise.Carefully separating the background noise so as to render a more perfect perception reveals the truth of the situation. That's a good question. I have my ideas on this.But I'd like to know how do you think this could be done -- or if you even believe its possible? Again, I have my thoughts on the matter. However, before I proceed any further, I'd like to your own thoughts on this. You've never experienced a mystical feeling about the woods you grew up around?

I've already gone through and talked about these things in the previous thread.What do you think nature reveals about the Christian God?Nothing, correct?This message has been edited by Mr. Ex Nihilo, 10-13-2005 02:15 AM

In your opinion, correct? What do the heavens declare and what do the skies proclaim? Nature speaks volumes to those who listen to her message. Not just Israel -- as I've consistently pointed out. No. It seemed as though you were trying to limit the message to only Israel. It seems as though with this message that you've dropped this argument. This... This...

Oh...I see now...now I'm lying eh?See, that's a strange accusation that you've levelled against me there.Lemme explain this to you.1) I have asked you consistently to let me know your former denominational background.2) I've explained why it was important to know this for the sake of this kind of discussion.3) I've also noted that your view of the Scriptures from when you "formerly" believed sounds remarkably similar to Faith's current denominational background.However, you've never really answered my question when I asked for your former denomonational background, have you?In addition to this, you're now accusing me of 'lying'.However, in order to prove to others that I'm lying you now have to tell us what your former denominational back was, don't you?I suspect that you won't reveal it because you're afraid to admit that the reasons why you agree with Faith have more to do with your former affinity in a faith which is very similar to her denominational background than anything you've personally concluded on your own.Prove me wrong. Right here... Now let's back track a bit. This response that you gave was directed to bkelly's comment... Now let's back track to the comment that you spoke which caused bkelly to make this comment... So, if I'm reading this correctly, your rhetorical question was in relation to knowing how you are supposed to know that God is talking to you, correct?If knowing how you are supposed to know that God is talking to you is indeed a rhetorical question, then it seems fair for me to conclude that you're most certainly not very interested in understanding God (since you've admitted your questions are largely rhetorical and all). Sounds that way to me. Um...yeah. If knowing how you are supposed to know that God is talking to you is indeed a rhetorical question, then it seems fair for me to conclude that you're most certainly not very interested in understanding God (since you've admitted your questions are largely rhetorical and all). Do you really want to hear about what God has audibly said to me -- or is this a rhetorical question too? pft -You are joking, correct? No.Thank you.

Hawkins, you are so intellectual at trying to rationalize and understand God! He knew you before you knew yourself> He COULD make a Rock so big that He could not lift it, but only for a moment...that moment in time when He was a man and the Rock was revealed knowledge. He could not lift it for 33 years, but He died and rose again! Now He can lift that Rock!I have an interesting book. Written by Norman Geisler and Ravi Zacharias, the book is entitled Who Made God?Geisler and Zacharias can be better explained here. In fact, THIS entire site is interesting from an academic point of view. If you can't find out what you want to know there, you either need to pray and meditate or go to college! Best choice! PBThis message has been edited by Phat, 10-13-2005 02:09 AM

and this is in response to.........?

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."