This alleged God requires an individual to believe this however the evidence is flimsy, speculative, questionable and even conflicting. Why would this God (who created the material universe) remain so coy, hidden and aloof? If an omnipotent God wanted us to know his existence he could do so without question.
Sure He could. But power doesn't equal goodness. Anyone who has met a bully knows the truth of this.
quote:
Power can do everything but the most important thing: it cannot control love...In a concentration camp, the guards possess almost unlimited power. By applying force, they can make you renounce your God, curse your family, work without pay, eat human excrement, kill and then bury your closest friend or even your mother. All this is within their power. Only one thing is not: they can't force you to love them. This fact may help explain why God sometimes seems shy to use his power. He created us to love him, but his most impressive displays of miracle--the kind we may secretly long for--do nothing to foster that love. As Douglas John Hall has put it, "God's problem is not that God is not able to do certain things. God's problem is that God loves. Love complicates the life of God as it complicates every life." --Philip Yancy, Disappointment with God
Any parent or lover knows this: love is chosen. You cannot, in the end, force anyone to love you.
Which brings us to the challenge that God faces in rescuing a people who have no idea how captive they are.
quote:
Suppose there was a king who loved a humble maiden. This king was like no other king. Every statesman trembled before his power. No one dared breathe a word against him, for he had the strength to crush all opponents. And yet this mighty king was melted for love for a humble maiden. How could he declare his love for her? In an odd sort of way, his kinglyness tied his hands. If he brought her to the palace and crowned her head with jewels and clothed her body in royal robes, she would surely not resist--no one dared resist him. But would she love him?
She would say she loved him, of course, but would she truly? Would she be happy at his side? How could he know? If he rode to her forest cottage in his royal carriage, with an armed escort waving bright banners, that too would overwhelm her. He did not want a cringing subject. He wanted a lover. --Soren Kierkegaard, The King and the Maiden
He wanted a lover. So the great king disguised himself as a beggar and went alone to the maiden's door in the woods to win her heart. And that is a parable of Jesus of Nazareth. God himself, the King of all creation, takes on human flesh and enters our story as one of us. He sets aside his glory, clothes himself with humility, and sneaks into the enemy camp, under cover of night, and tells us, "I have come for you."
On the other hand Kierkegaard's tale doesn't capture the cost the King will have to pay to ransom his beloved. He will have to die to rescue you. Remember, God warned us back in the Garden of Eden that the price of our mistrust and disobedience would be death. Not just physical death, but a spiritual death--to be separated from God and life and all the beauty, intimacy, and adventure forever. The coming of Jesus was far more like the opening scenes of Saving Private Ryan. A dangerous mission, a great invasion, a daring raid into enemy territory, to save the free world, but also to save one person (YOU). Yes, God is offering you a free gift, but that gift was purchased by Jesus in the form of a terrible death on the cross. It isn't like he's up in heaven, yawning, flippantly holding his hand out dangling salvation like a pepperment candy. It cost him a great deal to offer you the gift and he offers it freely.
This alleged God requires an individual to believe this however the evidence is flimsy, speculative, questionable and even conflicting.
The evidence may in debate for you, but I've read and seen enough to draw my own conclusions about the evidence. However this is another thread entirely.
Edited by Tal, : Added a line for the second quote.
We never seem to acknowledge that we have been wrong in the past, and so might be wrong in the future. Instead, each generation writes off earlier errors as the result of bad thinking by less able minds-and then confidently embarks on fresh errors of its own. --Michael Crichton