How to prove God to an atheist (no, really)...

[camanintx]

so in short, do you really want to know if there is a God?

Go to is house
Listen to his prophets ( preachers)

and get saved like everyone else.

or you can sit and wait for that star thing.

Which house? Which prophet? If our eternal soul really hangs on this one decision, why is God being so obtuse? Isn't the fact that you are a Christian simply a consequence of your being born in the west? If you were born in the Middle East, wouldn't you be saying the same about Islam?

 

[s2a]

Hello michel,

You said:

Sorry Cal, I hadn't seen your reply to mine.

That's OK...better (two years) late then never...;-)

This entire argument is not really applicable to me, and that is why I am having trouble answering your questions.

Hmmmm...

My Faith is a personal one which includes my relationship with God. Recently, I changed my "Label" to "Gnostic Christian", because that is the only type of Christian I can be.

I was of the understanding that the Christian perspective highlights the notion of a "personal relationship with God", within each any every Christian. Having a believing faith in an impersonal deity seems like some brand of religion other than Christianity.

I regard the Bible as a vety innacurate history book, written by (maybe well meaning ) "supposedly inspired by God" humans; I, personally define myself as "Gnostic" because my faith is not one based on scripture, but based on my own personal relationship with God.

OK. Then at least concede that your more enlightened perspective/argument has changed dramatically over the last two years, along with your more recent amendment of your faith-based self-identification as a "Gnostic Christian".

Now, you have every right to question my sanity, my gullability in interpreting feelings I have felt, for me, about my God , but that, of course, is entirely up to you.

Thanks, but I'm unqualified in offering any medical assessments regarding your sanity (speaking as but a layperson myself, you do seem sane enough...;-)).
[I spoke beforehand to this aspect (somewhat) here].

As far as my duties and obligations to God are concerned, I believe that I have to live a life as free from sin as I can manage (and, unfortunately, I am a bit of a recalcitrant sinner - whatever my good intentions may be).....I am not here on Earth to convince anyone else that they ough to believe in my God. IF someone asks me about my beliefs, I will tell them what I believe; it is up to them to decide whether I am a misguided lunatic, or whether they believe that they want to achive what I have achieved - in which case, I would most certainly help them as much as possible; but, they have to ask for my help.

I acknowledge (today) that you do not feel as if your God burdens you with testifying/witnessing your faith in order to lead unbelievers (or others that are spiritually "lost") to (your) God's prospective protections/revelations by means of deliverance/salvation/redemption from personal sin. I also accept that you do not rely upon Scripture in defining your faith/belief...but recall that not all of the questions I posed of you were necessarily rooted in Scripture.

To wit (being presented now as before):

- Are all "miracles" intended solely for the benefit of believers (in reinforcing faith)?

- Is faith *lessened* in some way by witnessing a "miracle"?

- Are some "miracles" too much (or too generalized) to ask of God (like, say, "World Peace")?

- Is there a cut-off, or a specified number, of "affected" (or resultant) converts requisite before praying for divine intervention (ie, a "miracle") as "worthy"? Would such a proposed "miracle" be "unworthy" (of God's time, attention, and effort) if only ONE convert was realized?

Does your Gnostic faith encompass the notion of inspired miracles, or divine interventions? Believers of many faiths testify to the existence of exampled divine "miracles", even to this very day.

If you believe these claimed miracles are manifest of God HImself, then what purpose(s) (or whom) do such miracles serve as a visible part of God's Will?

If you do not believe these claimed miracles are brought about by God HImself (or are in fact, not miraculous acts at all), then what do you suppose drives so many people to believe them to be truly from God?

[PS. I confess that I have had no practical interactions with self-avowed "Gnostic Christians". Perhaps you could clarify my confusion regarding something I looked up and found here , which defined/explained:
"Gnostic Christianity is a Way of Life based on the original teachings of Jesus Christ. A gnostic is a person who believes that salvation is gained through the acquisition of divine knowledge or gnosis. Gnostic Christians believe that the knowledge necessary for salvation has been revealed through Jesus Christ."

Is there another source (book, scrolls, tablets, whathaveyou) that more accurately accounts of the "original teachings of Christ" outside of/beyond what is revealed in the New Testament of the Bible (Scripture)? I ask this, because you said; "I, personally define myself as "Gnostic" because my faith is not one based on scripture". OK, then...what?

Is the definition offered by the quote/link I referenced in complete error?

I would submit that all Christians may claim to experience a "personal relationship with God/Christ". Would you agree?

[PPS. I read the embedded reference (Sayings of Jesus) within that same page, and I noted in Chapter 5-4:5...
"4) A rich young leader of the Jews, coming to Jesus at night, asked him, "Good Master, what must I do to be saved?"
5) Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? Only the Gods[?] are good, for they are Light, so if I am good, then I am a God, for I am Light. Search that Light within yourself, for it is your goodness and the power of your salvation, when charged with the free gift of the Son of the Eloheim. When you live according to the commandments of the Law, it is the Light that performs your good deeds."

What are the "commandments of the Law"? Specifically? Are they recorded somewhere that others might today read these "commandments of the Law" for themselves? What is the most compelling extra-biblical definition of "sin"?

[PS. Nice to chat with you within the forum again. ;-)]

 

[s2a]

Hello rocka21,

You chose to cite [w/o direct attribution] from the Book of Luke 16:27-31...

27Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:

28For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
29Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
30And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. 31And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

...then said:

Sorry, God already said how them that believe will believe.

In one sense, yes...but this understanding is rife with contradictions within other parts of Scripture. Jesus continued to perform "miracles" even while acknowledging not everyone would then believe.
Why?
Jesus endowed His disciples with the power of miraculous deeds, even in that same previous understanding that witness of miracles would not always affect conversion. Why?
Many (most) Christians would claim that "God's miracles" persist to this day. Why?
If they "don't work" (as you suggest, in affecting effective repentance towards salvation), then what purpose do miracles serve, and to whom?

You want some stars to move!

Yep. Is that really asking so much? Why?
I do not place limits on your god's powers. Why would you place any upon Him?

LOL! God sent his prophets.

So it's been said.
Last time I looked, only (about) 1/3 of the world's population is "Christian"...and it's accounted number of adherents is in decline. How's that working out for all the Evangelists and "prophets"? Where shall we look to the failure of sharing "God's Message" in an efficacious manner? Within the "message" itself, or perhaps within the "messengers" (prophets) themselves? You tell me.

You continued:

but just incase you missed it.......

31And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

More of Luke 16...Ya know, while we're on the point of the resurrected Jesus as testimonial of God's power, let's recall that the risen Jesus only appeared before His own adherents, or "believers"--not one unbeliever.
So, it would seem, that the "risen" Christ's "miraculous" reappearance was focused upon reinforcing/validating the faith of believers alone (akin to "miraculous" sightings of Mary or Jesus in pancakes or cloud formations). Of course, this instance does little to enhance the claims of the "eyewitnesses" themselves. If you "believe" that you saw the Virgin Mary appear upon a slice of toast or a potato chip, then it must be true...if you believe in the Virgin Mary.

Yet, we may also consider the "resurrection" case of Lazarus (John 11:1-36 [see also John 12]). Jesus brought Lazarus back from the dead at the specific request of Martha, his (Lazarus') sister..in answer in/of/to her faith in God's promise. Whether intended or unintended, Scripture accounts in John 11:45 that--
"Therefore many of the Jews who had come to visit Mary, and had seen what Jesus did [in witnessing Lazarus' resurrection], put their faith in him..."

Sure...the passage continues to account that some of the Jews willingly reported ("witnessed") to the Pharisees, who then conspired to assassinate Jesus. Hearing this news, Jesus bravely chose to go hide instead.

YES! one rose from the dead, just as icing on the cake to let the world know THERE IS A GOD! and guess what? we still don't believe. Just as the scripture says.
how sad...........

Sad that so many people of Christian beliefs think that a one-flavor cake will appeal to all. "You don't like carrot-cake? Too bad! Go to Hell then!"

so in short, do you really want to know if there is a God?

That's not the point. As a Bible-believing Christian, laden with the burden of fulfilling God's "Grand Commission" to the very best of your abilities, and well-shorn grace...do you want ME to know (as surely as you do) if there really is a God? What would you do? What would you pray for to make/help that happen? What would you sacrifice to help save another unbeliever's soul? What price is too high to pay...or what earnestly and humbly prayerful hope is too much to beseech of God; in order to save as many unrepentant souls as possible? Is shuffling the cosmos around for a couple of weeks too much to ask? Is it really?

You offered:

Go to is house
Listen to his prophets ( preachers)
and get saved like everyone else.

Been there, done that...still an unbeliever.
Now what? Are you a quitter, or a warrior for Christ?

[I probably know, understand...and might readily recite (from rote memory) more Biblical Scripture than you could ever possibly forget in a decade.]

Going to church won't make you a believer.
Hearing Scripture preached won't make you a believer.
Enduring endless witnessing/testimonials won't make you a believer.
Reading the Bible won't make you a believer.

Without requisite faith...no one is a "believer"--not in your god, or any others.

Do you really believe that your God can not, or would not "answer" the prayers of His most faithful adherents in manifesting a truly compelling miracle as the one suggested in my OP? Do you believe that your God is "done" in manifesting any further "miracles" (or divine interventions) in our own lifetimes?
If not...then what's wrong with the "miracle" I propose--that adherents might pray to possibly convert millions (if not billions) of unbelievers in one fell swoop. I dare say that today's "prophets" just aren't getting their "commissioned" job done...

or you can sit and wait for that star thing.

And...I will...

...and, what will you do about all of the remaining errant and lost souls in the meantime?

 

[shadow_fire]

I'm on the same ground you are s2a.


Although I think the message shouldn't rotate but be visible depending on who's viewing. For example I would view it in english, a japanese person would view it in japanese etc. This would be simple for a omniscient being.

 

[s2a]

Hello Rolling Stone,

I asked:
So I ask you, what's wrong with that [being the presented premise of the OP]?

You replied:

It's stupid and presumptuous.

Hmmm...

...are you illustrating those particular qualities as a tidbit of wry irony inherent within your own answer?

;-)

 

[michel]

Hello michel,

You said:

That's OK...better (two years) late then never...;-)


Hmmmm...



I was of the understanding that the Christian perspective highlights the notion of a "personal relationship with God", within each any every Christian. Having a believing faith in an impersonal deity seems like some brand of religion other than Christianity.


OK. Then at least concede that your more enlightened perspective/argument has changed dramatically over the last two years, along with your more recent amendment of your faith-based self-identification as a "Gnostic Christian".



Thanks, but I'm unqualified in offering any medical assessments regarding your sanity (speaking as but a layperson myself, you do seem sane enough...;-)).
[I spoke beforehand to this aspect (somewhat) here].



I acknowledge (today) that you do not feel as if your God burdens you with testifying/witnessing your faith in order to lead unbelievers (or others that are spiritually "lost") to (your) God's prospective protections/revelations by means of deliverance/salvation/redemption from personal sin. I also accept that you do not rely upon Scripture in defining your faith/belief...but recall that not all of the questions I posed of you were necessarily rooted in Scripture.

Bloodied, as I am by your skillful swashbuckling, I shall attempt to respond to your questions as best I can.

To wit (being presented now as before):

- Are all "miracles" intended solely for the benefit of believers (in reinforcing faith)?

Perhaps, perhaps not, I honestly will continue to sit on the fence on that one, weary of splinters, but nevertheless weary of your question.

You see, you are using terminology that you have, as yet, not asked me to define - so how can I answer ? There are two words that are essential to the response I need to give you; "God" and "Miracles".

Now, God is a "nasty" one (I mean as in my needing to try and define him/her/it to you )

God is, perhaps, if you will "toy" with the idea awhile, the greatest scientist and mathematician of them all. I (If I am forced to try and "define him", is an all powerful being, force, all rolled into one that has abilities to do things of which we have no conception.)

You try and make (what could well have been) an existing planet suitable for the growth and subsistence of various forms of life, and see how far you get.

You talk of "miracles"; I am in no way reducing the value of them by saying that I believe that Miracles are (basically) a form of science that is understood by God, but not by us.

Oh how proud we are of our knowledge; how vain we are..............

Take a native South American from the Jungle (who has, as yet had no contact with any man from a first or second world environment), take an African native who has never been out of his country, and add to the melting pot -say- Stephen Hawkins.....

You would have three very different reactions from each of them to anything the three observed at the same instant - say a plane fly.......

The native American would most likely say "There goes God again........why does he fly above us but never come to meet us?" . The African (who has been exposed to these things) would most likely say " Ah, him big airplane; I know men make them, but I am damned if I understand the flaming' things"....and Steven Hawkins might say "Wow, what an out of date contraption!"

God, (if he does look), looks upon the air plane as you might do at an ant that is trying to scurry back to his home with a grain of sugar..........

I hope the analogy is not lost on you, and that you can see that I am leading to a point at which I can begin to say to you "What is a Miracle ?"...........sure, to us, they (miracles) are, indeed Miraculous. Try telling a dead man to rise...........I have had sufficient trouble in the past getting my very "alive" sons to get out of their own beds........

So, God knows much more than we do; is that so impossible ?

- Is faith *lessened* in some way by witnessing a "miracle"?

I see what I call miracles everyday; I recognise them as such because, as many times as it happens, I still find something wonderfully un-understandable by the birth of a child, by the blossoming of flowers on trees.......and those are just petty examples - ones that we have observed, done some "backward engineering" on, and have concluded that we understand the process.

What I would like to know is, starting with raw products, could the best scientist in today's world "mimic" the miracles that are performed each day, around us ?

- Are some "miracles" too much (or too generalized) to ask of God (like, say, "World Peace")?

God, I have understood, has a plan; he has the plot, and I am merely a little cog in a massive machine. I could ask him to miraculously cure my wife of cancer, but I shan't. Sure, I shall ask of him the energy to meet this this vim and vigour, and to allow the two of us to confront this beast with the strength and ability to denounce its growth; our little ant-like scientists have made wonderful inroads into removing and hopefully putting the beast to rest. But, we are still as ants are.

- Is there a cut-off, or a specified number, of "affected" (or resultant) converts requisite before praying for divine intervention (ie, a "miracle") as "worthy"? Would such a proposed "miracle" be "unworthy" (of God's time, attention, and effort) if only ONE convert was realized?

Anyone can pray for divine intervention; be it alone, or in a group of a million; if it is not according to God's "will", the number of supplicants will matter not one iota.

Does your Gnostic faith encompass the notion of inspired miracles, or divine interventions? Believers of many faiths testify to the existence of exampled divine "miracles", even to this very day.

As I have explained, my Gnostic "label" - which, essentially means (as far as I am concerned) that I possess a "knowledge" of God within me - one not foist upon me by some bible bashing pro-thingy-tiser (can never say that word), now by a book supposedly written whilst under the influence of God's word................

I am sure that man could well have completely destroyed this planet by now; maybe God has intervened.............how should I know ?

If you believe these claimed miracles are manifest of God Himself, then what purpose(s) (or whom) do such miracles serve as a visible part of God's Will?

There is no special reason for a miracle. perhaps God moves his shoe a little to one side, to let an ant take a short cut, back to his home.

If you do not believe these claimed miracles are brought about by God Himself (or are in fact, not miraculous acts at all), then what do you suppose drives so many people to believe them to be truly from God?

People believe them to be truly from God, because they recognise that something greater than our understanding has taken place; as I said before, Miracles are merely science; that science is, however, dependent on your frame of reference.

To us, as ants, a Miracle is a miracle. To our supreme scientist God, that miracle was as easy as pushing a coin across a table. Frames of reference.

 

[michel]

Part 2.
[PS. I confess that I have had no practical interactions with self-avowed "Gnostic Christians". Perhaps you could clarify my confusion regarding something I looked up and found here , which defined/explained:
"Gnostic Christianity is a Way of Life based on the original teachings of Jesus Christ. A gnostic is a person who believes that salvation is gained through the acquisition of divine knowledge or gnosis. Gnostic Christians believe that the knowledge necessary for salvation has been revealed through Jesus Christ."
[/quote] What is there to explain? My gnosis - why, I have no idea - is something with which I am blessed. I have some in-built, or maybe amplified relationship with God.

I understand Jesus's death, and the purpose of it; before I changed my title, I quoted myself as being a "follower of Christ"; that means (simply put, that I recognise that he tried to build a bridge between man and God so that we could understand god's ways better, and understand that his love is so extensive that he allowed his son to die for us (in what must have been unbearable physical - and mental agony), so that we might be forgiven our sins, and receive a permit for heaven.......

Is there another source (book, scrolls, tablets, whathaveyou) that more accurately accounts of the "original teachings of Christ" outside of/beyond what is revealed in the New Testament of the Bible (Scripture)? I ask this, because you said; "I, personally define myself as "Gnostic" because my faith is not one based on scripture". OK, then...what?

Personal revelation, observance, and dialogue (which I truly believe is one between me and God).

Is the definition offered by the quote/link I referenced in complete error?

I dare say that there are many definitions. The reason I apply the term to myself is because the word (as I understand it) means

literally, knowledge

I would submit that all Christians may claim to experience a "personal relationship with God/Christ". Would you agree?

I hope so, for their sakes.

[PPS. I read the embedded reference (Sayings of Jesus) within that same page, and I noted in Chapter 5-4:5...
"4) A rich young leader of the Jews, coming to Jesus at night, asked him, "Good Master, what must I do to be saved?"
5) Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? Only the Gods[?] are good, for they are Light, so if I am good, then I am a God, for I am Light. Search that Light within yourself, for it is your goodness and the power of your salvation, when charged with the free gift of the Son of the Eloheim. When you live according to the commandments of the Law, it is the Light that performs your good deeds."

What are the "commandments of the Law"? Specifically? Are they recorded somewhere that others might today read these "commandments of the Law" for themselves?

As I have already said, I am a Christian whose faith comes not from literature; when Christ was incarnated as Jesus, he was essentially "man" - though one whose "Gnosis" was of the highest order.

What is the most compelling extra-biblical definition of "sin"?

Sin (extra-Biblical) ?

Wow, a difficult one - or maybe not so. Biblically, we are all "children of God"; sin is the breaking of God's Laws; my understanding of sin is therefore hurting, or harming a brother or a sister of mine (in God's eyes), in such a way as to let myself down, and cause spiritual hurt to myself, as I have done to my brother or sister.

PS. Nice to chat with you within the forum again. ;-)]

Isn't it just? Unfortunately, fate (oh gosh, don't question me on that!!!:cover: ) has dealt me a hand of cards that is extremely large at the moment. I am running hither and dither, sometimes with the realisation that I am achieving nothing. But, one must try. Why do all "nasties" have to happen all at once?:bow:

 

[female11]

I think that the Vatican have corrupted doctors that can certify miracles. It is not sufficient ?

 

[lew0049]

Great topic - Ill respond when I have more time.

 

[s2a]

I think that the Vatican have corrupted doctors that can certify miracles. It is not sufficient ?

I honestly don't know. Could you provide some magic-decoder ring for your rather cryptic message, so that I and others might hope to better understand what your point is, or what you inquiry seeks as a valued answer?

 

[s2a]

Great topic - Ill respond when I have more time.

Cool. My breath is baited...

;-)

 

[Willamena]

Cool. My breath is baited...

May you should cut back on those sardines.

 

[female11]

I honestly don't know. Could you provide some magic-decoder ring for your rather cryptic message, so that I and others might hope to better understand what your point is, or what you inquiry seeks as a valued answer?

I think that the Pope does not believe in God, and I think that the Pope is not scared to go to hell, because he lives in a city of palaces (too much money and wealth) and you remember the words of Jesus about rich people and the possibilities of them of going to the kingdom of skies.

 

[Random]

I think that the Pope does not believe in God, and I think that the Pope is not scared to go to hell, because he lives in a city of palaces (too much money and wealth) and you remember the words of Jesus about rich people and the possibilities of them of going to the kingdom of skies.

Maybe el Popey believes God predestined him to enjoy the wealth and privilage of his status as head of the Church and Vicar of Christ. Men, especially dishonourable ones, will find justification for their ends in a grain of sand if necessary. Evil knows no bounds.

 

[female11]

Maybe el Popey believes God predestined him to enjoy the wealth and privilage of his status as head of the Church and Vicar of Christ. Men, especially dishonourable ones, will find justification for their ends in a grain of sand if necessary. Evil knows no bounds.

Do you remember the temptations of Christ by the Devil? If the Pope is a Vicar of Christ, he demonstrates clear temptations towards the Demon.

 

[female11]

I honestly don't know. Could you provide some magic-decoder ring for your rather cryptic message, so that I and others might hope to better understand what your point is, or what you inquiry seeks as a valued answer?

In anthropology, the church (catholic church specially) is an instrument of the power in order to maintain dangerous social inequalities without rebellions, thanks to maintain an illusion of hope in the population. The miracles help to maintain this illusion.

 

[lew0049]

Alright s2a, first I'll say that what you are saying makes complete sense as I once thought that same exact thing. I was an atheist and at the time I couldn't agree more with the content of your message. Obviously though, what you are asking for is, more than likely, not going to happen. But I hope you will do what I did, and read numerous books on the subject. I say this because at some point of being a non-believer, I decided that if their was a "truth" of a supernatural-being - then I would find it through logic and reason. I say logic and reason b/c my view of religion is that it is man-made in many ways and an experimental science (so to speak). The whole idea that if a religion makes you a better person then go with it struck me as irrelevant - because I didn't feel that being a better person meant I found any sort of truth (partily b/c it seemed obvious that a "truth" would subsequently make me a better person). If I didn't find a truth then nothing was lost - my position of being an atheist or non-believer would stand and I would be all the more confident.

Getting to the content of your message and miracles. First, as Im sure you realize, faith is difficult - if faith wasn't difficult then I don't how it would be possible for it to exist. As you mentioned, it would be great for the world (even myself) to have undeniable evidence that God exists. But when thinking about the miracles you presented, the word faith would be eliminated. It would be 100% undeniable proof that God exists. Now, this sounds great, but at the same time, it makes no logical sense to me. Meaning, if I am to plausibly believe there is a God and that He gave us "free will" to make choices, it seems apparent that this 100% prof of His existance would completely neglect our free will. Of course, the counter to this is that "we would still have free will to choose" but I don't see how it possible for anyone to deny a God knowingly (meaning that he/she knows the consequences of this denial). Of course there WOULD be some that knowingly deny a God even w/ 100% proof of His existance but I don't consider this as acting on free will - more like being a complete idiot. Actually, the quote I have from C.S Lewis sums this point up and seems quite logical to me:
If you choose to say, "God can give a creature free will and at the same time withhold free will from it", you have not succeeded in saying anything about God: meaningless combinations of words do not suddenly acquire meaning simply because we prefix to them the two other words "God can." -it remains true that all things are possible with God: the intrinsic impossibilities are not things but nonentities. It is no more possible for God than for the weakest of His creatures to carry out both of two mutually exclusive alternatives – not because His power meets an obstacle - but because nonsense remains nonsense even when we talk it about God."

As far as the Bible is concerned, it says that God is a hidden God and that you have to make an effort of faith to find him through clues (prophecies as one of course). One of the most important verses in the Bibe to me is that "Seek and you shall find." What does this mean to me? It means that those who honestly seek God will find Him. It doesn't say that ALL will find him or that nobody wlll find Him. Keep this discussion going with more comments/questions as this is one of my favorite topics. Hopefully I have answered your question will some sense of logic.

 

[Katzpur]

This will probably be my one and only post on your thread, s2a. I haven't read through it and probably won't. I don't know that there is anything "wrong" with your proposal, except that it would be counter to what God wanted to accomplish by putting us here on earth. I don't believe that miracles were or still are performed "to prove God's might and power." I've always been taught that faith precedes the miracle, and not the other way around. People who already believe in God's power and might don't need proof. God doesn't want us to believe because he spells out a message to us with stars. If we had such proof, faith would be completely pointless.

 

[s2a]

Hello michel,

You said:

Bloodied, as I am by your skillful swashbuckling, I shall attempt to respond to your questions as best I can.

Arrrgggghhhh....ahoy matey! Avast ye swabbies!

I previously inquired:
Are all "miracles" intended solely for the benefit of believers (in reinforcing faith)?

You replied:

Perhaps, perhaps not, I honestly will continue to sit on the fence on that one, weary of splinters, but nevertheless weary of your question.

You know...I could readily accept "I don't know" as an answer. Does adherent faith forbid such a position of reasonable uncertainty?

You see, you are using terminology that you have, as yet, not asked me to define - so how can I answer ?

Oh, c'mon. My "terminology" is certainly left to any legitimate debate/correction/clarification/definition. You are more then welcome to introduce your own understanding/definition, in any lent reply... any prospective requests/behests of which (on my part) remain notwithstanding. If I sought to "define" your response beforehand, you might rightly object that I was "leading the witness". I invite you to establish a standard and set of parameters that you choose to operate either from within, our without.

There are two words that are essential to the response I need to give you; "God" and "Miracles".

OK....

Now, God is a "nasty" one (I mean as in my needing to try and define him/her/it to you )

God is, perhaps, if you will "toy" with the idea awhile, the greatest scientist and mathematician of them all.

I "toyed" with that notion years ago, and then considered the words of Paul in 1 Corinthians 13:11. ;-)

I (If I am forced to try and "define him", is an all powerful being, force, all rolled into one that has abilities to do things of which we have no conception.)

If such a "God" indeed defies all conceptual human understanding, then how can the "faithful" claim to "know Him" (or His actions or motives) any better (or with more "revealed" insight) than unbelievers? Either God can be conceptually conceived and appreciated, or such understanding surpasses any/all human intellect. Which is it?

You try and make (what could well have been) an existing planet suitable for the growth and subsistence of various forms of life, and see how far you get.

There is no practical call for me to answer such a challenge...for we all know of one glaring example that we reside comfortably (enough) upon..yet many more may very well be resident within our own cosmological backyard.

The planet Mars (within our own solar system) is certainly inhospitable to any human life absent the aid of shelter, energy, and consumables (like food and water). But humans could certainly "live" there (and probably will), with proper protections/accommodations. Humans can't exist/survive (without certain tools) under the surface of our very own planet's oceans, without similar enhancements. Yet "life" flourishes under the waves...and so?

More so, "life" is hardly limited to a defined human existence. Anything that consumes energy and excretes waste, and also replicates it's own derivative DNA-based progeny, is "life" (as we know it). There is life on this planet that exists in the utter absence of oxygen...or sunlight. Temperature/atmospheric "extremes" do not preclude the (potential) existence of "life as we know it". Life is abundant within Earth's own polar regions, and is found at the very depths of it's oceans (under crushing pressures and unfathomably unlit realms). If somehow transplanted/transported, there are many suitable earthly "Life-form" candidates that might readily carve their own surviving niche upon Mars...today. Does your faith-based "knowledge" suggest/allege that our lone planet is the only place within the entirety of the cosmos that can/could either instigate or support DNA-based lifeforms?

[Liquid] water and (available) energy seem to be the only two prerequisites to "life as we know it". Heck, there's enough available liquid water on Mars within it's frozen poles, that...if melted...would cover the entire planet in three feet of liquid water. And Mars is but one planet relatively adjacent to our own. Just one (other) planet (with orbiting moons), orbiting but ONE star of BILLIONS (each individual star perhaps with it's own planets/moons/planetoids), within but ONE galaxy populated by (as many as) 100 BILLION other stars, within a cosmos of perhaps 100 BILLION to a TRILLION other galaxies (each of which with tens, or hundreds of BILLIONS of stars within)...not all entirely unlike our own. If you "know" the answer, please detail why your God would "create" trillions of other solar systems amongst the cosmos, with no similar prospects of emergent life forms as found on this remote planet and solar system. If that answer is not found in Scripture, perhaps then He has whispered the answer to you?

If your God is a mathematician, He'd whip out His cosmic calculator and see that the "odds" favor "life" as an nearly unavoidable and inevitable probability... being perhaps as ubiquitous as kudzu and as tenacious as English Ivy all throughout the cosmos.

You talk of "miracles"; I am in no way reducing the value of them by saying that I believe that Miracles are (basically) a form of science that is understood by God, but not by us.

OK...

Oh how proud we are of our knowledge; how vain we are..............

Take a native South American from the Jungle (who has, as yet had no contact with any man from a first or second world environment), take an African native who has never been out of his country, and add to the melting pot -say- Stephen Hawkins.....

OK...still with you...

You would have three very different reactions from each of them to anything the three observed at the same instant - say a plane fly.......

The native American would most likely say "There goes God again........why does he fly above us but never come to meet us?" . The African (who has been exposed to these things) would most likely say " Ah, him big airplane; I know men make them, but I am damned if I understand the flaming' things"....and Steven Hawkins might say "Wow, what an out of date contraption!"

So, ummm...God is an...obsolete airplane then? Is ignorance to be the only available (or best) validation of an existent claimed God? Or do you suggest in your metaphor that knowledge and science can (or might) explain "mysterious" phenomena as being completely natural (or mechanical) manifestations that require no requisite deity as some claimed supernaturalistic cause/event, or "creator"?

God, (if he does look), looks upon the air plane as you might do at an ant that is trying to scurry back to his home with a grain of sugar..........

How comforting...

...as no doubt, the ant is reassured and comforted by the notion that humans are entirely and eternally preoccupied with the feelings/concerns of ants, or that our species is an especially kind and merciful one in treating with ants...

I hope the analogy is not lost on you, and that you can see that I am leading to a point at which I can begin to say to you "What is a Miracle ?"...........sure, to us, they (miracles) are, indeed Miraculous.

Hmmm. Do you then suggest that any/all human understanding of (claimed) miracles is therefore founded upon human ignorance, or wishful thinking? If so, then we may very well agree. If not, I then invite you to illustrate then a properly "qualified" and specific "miracle" manifested by your own God within these contemporary times that satisfies both accepted knowledge and demonstrable fact.

Try telling a dead man to rise...........I have had sufficient trouble in the past getting my very "alive" sons to get out of their own beds......

Last time I looked, no person that has been medically certified as being "dead" (and subsequently buried for a week) has ever been "risen" to walk amongst the living again. Why not (your sons gleaning special exemption, of course)?

So, God knows much more than we do; is that so impossible ?

"Impossible" and "implausible" walk the same tightrope of strained credulity.

I wore my vampire-repelling garlic necklace today. Once more, I have eluded any vampire's bite. Is my belief in my necklace any more compelling than my belief in vampires? If I don't wear the necklace, and I avoid the vampire's visit for the remainder of my days, does that prove that vampire's are but a figment of my imagination, or that garlic necklaces are not a factor in repelling undead blood-suckers? My anti-vampire necklace works, and is evidently effective...because I do not walk amongst the undead. Is it impossible to believe that necklaces fashioned of garlic bulbs and wolfsbane really do repel the unwanted advances of vampires?

I would remind you that the "belief" I outlined is not proffered as illustration of any inherent "right" I might claim simply to believe whatever I wish...rather, it presents two utterly unsupported claims as conclusive fact...borne by my own testimonial and "evidence" of personal experience. If you can not adequately challenge my "factual" claims (of either existent vampires or the repellant qualities of garlic necklaces upon the undead) by means of either reason or scientific methodology...shouldn't you then accept such claims as true, or "truth". Why or why not? After all, it's not impossible...correct?

 

[s2a]

I inquired:
Is faith *lessened* in some way by witnessing a "miracle"?

I see what I call miracles everyday; I recognise them as such because, as many times as it happens, I still find something wonderfully un-understandable by the birth of a child, by the blossoming of flowers on trees.......and those are just petty examples - ones that we have observed, done some "backward engineering" on, and have concluded that we understand the process.

I see nature in it's unfolding daily wonder too. I just don't wonder upon any prospective or claimed supernatural causal agent as explanation. In fact, nature seems to "take it's course" beyond any any apparent "external" influences at all. The wind yet blows, the tides at sea abide their inexorable progressions and regressions upon the shoreline, and our planet trudges on in it's orbit about our local star...beyond any apparent interventions of men or gods..though many religions have made gods of the seas, the winds, and the stars.

From a distinctly focused and personalized perspective, I could wonder upon witnessing any human delivery (birth) as uniquely "miraculous". Then again, I might remind myself that human birth's worldwide are as commonplace as dandelions, and as inevitable as sunrise. Sometimes, "the world" is not limited to the familiar boundaries we can only see, and dare not travel beyond.

What I would like to know is, starting with raw products, could the best scientist in today's world "mimic" the miracles that are performed each day, around us?

I guess it depends upon which "miracles" you would prefer to see duplicated. The best illusionists (magicians) appear to fly without any visible support, and make elephants vanish right in front of a goggle-eyed audience. Is it "science"? Is it "magic" Is it "miraculous"?

Within the next ten years or so, "scientists" will effectively/substantially replicate the very moment of "creation" itself (within gigantic and sophisticated cyclotrons...or "atom smashers"). Man will create a "mini" Big Bang" all for himself. Gods need not apply, nor take undue credit.

What "raw product" miracles would you challenge science to mimic, that would otherwise seem left to only be manifest of God Himself?

I asked:
Are some "miracles" too much (or too generalized) to ask of God (like, say, "World Peace")?

God, I have understood, has a plan; he has the plot, and I am merely a little cog in a massive machine.

Is this "plan" outlined anywhere...akin to a building blueprint? In a religious text perhaps? If not, then how might anyone rationally choose/decide as to whether or not one would willingly elect to be a lasting tenant within such a construct?

I could ask him to miraculously cure my wife of cancer, but I shan't.

OK...why not? Would it be "wrong" to ask others of similar faith to pray for such a cure? If you think your situation is a "test" of your own faith, how will you know if you have subsequently "passed" or "failed" that test?

Sure, I shall ask of him the energy to meet this this vim and vigour, and to allow the two of us to confront this beast with the strength and ability to denounce its growth; our little ant-like scientists have made wonderful inroads into removing and hopefully putting the beast to rest. But, we are still as ants are.

Pray for the lost [ant] souls relegated beyond all hope that existed 400 (or 4000) years ago. "Ant-like scientists" were not there, nor did they benefit from the knowledge and technology that modern medicine modestly affords. In 1607, "faith" was the only available "cure" for (undiagnosed)) cancer. Better to faithfully purge the resident "demons" instead with priests and shaman, than to look for any men of medicine.

Is there a cut-off, or a specified number, of "affected" (or resultant) converts requisite before praying for divine intervention (ie, a "miracle") as "worthy"? Would such a proposed "miracle" be "unworthy" (of God's time, attention, and effort) if only ONE convert was realized?

Anyone can pray for divine intervention; be it alone, or in a group of a million; if it is not according to God's "will", the number of supplicants will matter not one iota.

Should it then be understood by the faithful...that all unanswered/undelivered prayers represent the false hopes and and selfish entreaties that are, in fact, contrary to God's Will? Perhaps this explains the failure of millions of prayerful entreaties for God's protection for all soldiers placed in harm's way upon the battlefields of the world...and why they perish anyway.

Does your Gnostic faith encompass the notion of inspired miracles, or divine interventions? Believers of many faiths testify to the existence of exampled divine "miracles", even to this very day.

As I have explained, my Gnostic "label" - which, essentially means (as far as I am concerned) that I possess a "knowledge" of God within me - one not foist upon me by some bible bashing pro-thingy-tiser (can never say that word), now by a book supposedly written whilst under the influence of God's word................

I think I understand. You are but one of millions of others that claim to possess a "unique" and "personalized" revelation of "God". Your "understanding" is your own...just like everyone else's.

I am sure that man could well have completely destroyed this planet by now; maybe God has intervened.............how should I know ?

Why should you not? I should think that you should know more than I...if not...then what is the added value of your faith-based insight and (admittedly limited) understanding of God versus that of a poor ole' unbeliever like me?


If you believe these claimed miracles are manifest of God Himself, then what purpose(s) (or whom) do such miracles serve as a visible part of God's Will?

There is no special reason for a miracle. perhaps God moves his shoe a little to one side, to let an ant take a short cut, back to his home.

How do you claim to know the reason (or lack thereof) for any "miracle"?
You've already said:

"If I am forced to try and "define him", is an all powerful being, force, all rolled into one that has abilities to do things of which we have no conception."

Can you a identify any daily ordinary "miracle" that presents "no special reason"?

If you do not believe these claimed miracles are brought about by God Himself (or are in fact, not miraculous acts at all), then what do you suppose drives so many people to believe them to be truly from God?

People believe them to be truly from God, because they recognise that something greater than our understanding has taken place; as I said before,

I got that.

Miracles are merely science; that science is, however, dependent on your frame of reference.

Ahem. Jabberwocky. Obi-wan speak.

To us, as ants, a Miracle is a miracle. To our supreme scientist God, that miracle was as easy as pushing a coin across a table. Frames of reference.

"Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe."

[PS. I confess that I have had no practical interactions with self-avowed "Gnostic Christians". Perhaps you could clarify my confusion regarding something I looked up and found here , which defined/explained:
"Gnostic Christianity is a Way of Life based on the original teachings of Jesus Christ. A gnostic is a person who believes that salvation is gained through the acquisition of divine knowledge or gnosis. Gnostic Christians believe that the knowledge necessary for salvation has been revealed through Jesus Christ."]

What is there to explain? My gnosis - why, I have no idea - is something with which I am blessed. I have some in-built, or maybe amplified relationship with God.

So...you share an utterly unscientific "ability/affinity" with a God that is, as you describe as being: "the greatest scientist and mathematician of them all"? That's an interesting "blessing"...

Would you entrust your well-being to a surgeon of similar credentials? "I feel like I know what to do. In my heart of hearts, I feel that I'm a doctor."
Would you hire a plumber, or an architect with such credentials? Would you hire a car mechanic that might only claim to (somehow) be "blessed" with an "amplified relationship" with internal combustion engines and automobiles? Don't any of these "blessed" individuals have available reference works and practical honed skills in which to [eventually] practice their artisan crafts?

Doctor says...
"Tell you what. I understand both the emotional and (rudimentary) mechanics of the human heart. May I be the one to perform a triple-bypass surgery for your sustaining benefit?"