Explain to me again why the existence of god (whether all-powerful or mostly-powerful) and the non-existence of empirical evidence of the existence of god are not in conflict with each other.
Let’s not get bogged down in the semantics of empirical evidence. I’m not talking about the wondrous beauty of nature and I’m not talking about inexplicable medical miracles. I’m talking the night and day cold hard dirt of fact. Like the sun and the moon.
If there is a benevolent god, it would seem she/he/it (SHI) is only present in memory and shadow. Like our ethical bent and need for acceptance and love are the remnants left in the pixie dust wake of god’s departure from SHI’s creation. Why would god not speak to our world leaders? Why would god not mention the incoming tsunami that is about to kill thousands? Why would god only channel surf through our history instead of jumping on the dance floor and grinding with the locals?
I’ve labeled myself a hopeful agnostic. So I guess what I’m asking is, “Why does god refuse to speak?”.
Oh wait. He is speaking. I just can’t hear him. Thanks guys. That’s oh so helpful. It’s my fault.
#1 by anonymous - April 7th, 2009 at 23:31
God doesn’t need to be understood by humans to exist. He has revealed some about Himself through nature and the Bible. We need to be content with the fact that we are limited beings with limited understand.
#2 by anonymous - April 8th, 2009 at 00:03
Try reading His Word (the Bible) for a while. After you have done that you can be qualified to tell me He doesn’t speak to us.
#3 by Brad - April 8th, 2009 at 10:12
I read all your comments. Thanks for jumping in the conversation. I’ve read the bible more than a few times. I have a degree in Theology and spent a few years working as a pastor. I’m not coming at this blind or asking these question from inexperience. There are deeper things at work in me right now. The questions might be obvious and silly, but they’re honest and dirty.
#4 by Brad - April 8th, 2009 at 10:14
That said, I’d really appreciate hearing more of your thoughts on God and truth and on your ability and reasons for trusting the authority of the Bible as absolute…
#5 by anonymous - April 11th, 2009 at 06:31
From what we can gather from archeology, and parallel historical accounts, it looks like the Bible is a very accurate history book. I suppose people who have an aversion to the supernatural have trouble accepting the Bible as a good history book. However, they need to prove first that the supernatural never occurs. In order for them to do that they need to have the supernatural ability to go back in time to verify their belief. That of course in contradicts their premise that the supernatural never occurs.
#6 by anonymous - April 11th, 2009 at 06:50
You might try to get your hands on a copy of Josh McDowel’s Evidence that Demands a Verdict. (He has published more books since then) I found it very useful in refuting my professors in college who doubted the accuracy of the Bible.
#7 by anonymous - April 11th, 2009 at 06:53
I would be interested in knowing where you went to seminary. That may have a lot to do with what you are struggling with.
#8 by Brad - April 11th, 2009 at 08:18
I read Josh McDowels book and spent some time in the valley of Hank Hanagraf (hanegraff? heneygraffle? omnigraf?). Deep in the staunch underbellies of protestant evangelical thought. But that was then and this is now, life moved on and I don’t know how to be.
Also, I don’t think it’s humanity’s responsibility to prove that God exists. Nor do I think it’s a religious person (or non-religious for that matter) job to justify their belief system to others. Believe what you believe, with all the conviction you can muster, just leave yourself room to be wrong (or inaccurate) or incomplete or devoid of absolute.
#9 by anonymous - April 12th, 2009 at 04:09
Sounds to me that you are a post-modernist. My son claimed to be one for a while. He told me he believed that there were no absolutes. I asked him if he was absolutely sure that was the case. Realizing the absurdity of his position, he returned to the convictions that he was taught as a child.
#10 by Lisa - April 12th, 2009 at 10:45
Just a thought as I read this. How do you know ’shi’ isn’t speaking to world leaders? How do you know he didn’t mention the tsunami? The assumption I read that it is his fault, not ours. Again, just a thought.
#11 by Brad - April 12th, 2009 at 18:21
Re: Post Modernist
I don’t buy that. I believe in absolutes. I just don’t believe that we can know them absolutely. That is where faith steps in. Whether it’s faith that an empirical truth will hold in a time of need, or faith that our bible is true. Either there is a god or there isn’t. That’s an absolute to me. I’m just not confident we can claim to know this truth absolutely.
Re: Lisa
I never thought about that. I don’t know if I’m looking for fault, just trying to make sense of what is, not finding blame in what isn’t.
#12 by anonymous - April 13th, 2009 at 07:18
There is a lot in the bible that is hard to understand. But, then there is that which is cristal clear. There you can come up with some pretty clear absolutes. However, we only know in part(1 corinthians 13) don’t we. One thing for sure, faith in Him pleases God and He reveals Himself to those who put their faith in Him.
#13 by Brad - April 13th, 2009 at 08:17
RE: Anon 1 Cor 13
I hear what you’re trying to say, and I’ve been there. But you can’t use the bible to prove that the bible is true. It’s circular and isn’t convincing to people who question the bible’s authenticity, validity and/or inspiriation.
#14 by anonymous - April 13th, 2009 at 22:15
You can use archeology and history to prove that a lot of the bible is true. Those who question the authenticity of the Bible have to answer to that. They come up with their alternate theories about what they think actually happened. Yet, they have hardly no historical evidence to back up their own theories. I had a lot of conversations with my religion prof. in college who questioned the authenticity of the Bible. When I pinned him down on something he said in class that cast doubt on the authenticity of the bible, he usually would agree that he was expressing his opinion about something he was really ignorant about. I choose to put my faith in the Bible over the opinions of arrogant ignorant men.
#15 by Brad - April 13th, 2009 at 23:03
You my friend can put your faith where ever you want. It’s your choice to choose. And I believe we all have that *god-given* right. :)
Just don’t call me an arrogant, ignorant man, simply because you don’t feel my personal apologetic meets your muster. Frankly, we can both be idiots, that doesn’t make both of us wrong.
#16 by anonymous - April 14th, 2009 at 21:57
Pardon me for calling you arrogant and ignorant. I am arrogant and ignorant about a lot, too. Who isn’t. That is why I place my trust in something with more authority and objectivity than my partially educated opinion.