What if God Gave Us Proof?

[CatsAndDogs]

As to this topic here: God gave us proof more than we deserved, and when we live open-eyed, we see this prove every day. Beginning from the birth of a child and ending with the harmony of the earth in it’s beauty and unbelievable work of treat for us. Unique in the whole inestimable universe.

CU
Krippenfiguren at t-online.de

I absolutely agree! Though I think there may be other men out there in the vast universe.

How they got there, don’t ask me! They probably did so by way of their preternatural gifts, and got stuck while on some outing by that whole fruit-chomping incident.

Anyway, no supernatural thing is provable in a materialistic sense, but only experience-able in a personal sense, with the net effect being that the materialist is never shown proof of God while the believer is always shown proof of God.

…so the mutual laughing-and-pointing will never end, because God loves a good joke and the lack of will to understand is inherent in the sinful man, both believer and non-believer, who has both concupiscence and free will.

I very much enjoy my sinful pointing-and-laughing at atheists for their willful attitude of anti-understanding about God, and I’m sure that the atheist very much enjoys his sinful pointing-and-laughing at believers.

But, at least I know we’re both being sinful. The atheist knows only that “he’s right” and I’m an idiot. We’re both idiots in our sinfulness, and I’m more culpable than he is my sinfulness.

…sometimes the truth just isn’t what you want to hear, eh!?

 

[Nickkname]

I love the way Pope Benedict XVI answered the OP’s question in “Jesus of Nazareth” (a book I HIGHLY recomment - it WILL deepen your faith). Here’s what he said (my paraphrase):

The world says, “We need more proof! If you are truly God, and not one of the many false gods, than you’re just going to have to give us more proof!” And to Jesus the world says, “If you are truly who you say you are, not just one of the many enlightened individuals who’ve appeared throughout history, than you’re just going to have prove it better than you already have!” And to the Church the world says, “If you are truly the Church of Christ, and not one of the many cults, than you’re just going to have to give more proof!”

The world, however, wants God, and Jesus, and the Church to be in its image. It wants God to be put under specific conditions so it can conduct scientific experiments on him, and likewise, Jesus and the Church. The arrogence that is required to make such a claim will never find God, because it has already rejected God, it has already decided that God is not God. The world wants the Church to be worldly and it wants Jesus’ message, his torah, his teachings, to be in conformity with th world’s maxims. But if such happened, the Church could not be the Church of Christ and Jesus could not be the Christ.

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

**stubborn? Well, I wouldn’t really say so. Some simply don’t have the grace of God to own the gift to be able to believe.
Aren’t we ourselves stubborn in many cases we’ve undergone, and didn’t we slap our forehead so often and said; HOW STUPID OF ME THIS WAS!
I mean – instead of “people”, we ought to say “we”.
Yes, we have so many miracles written down in history. But we have just as many in our present time. Don’t we read every day in the papers:
Child fell off 4th floor – unhurt – and we don’t even then believe in miraculous signs.

We all had experienced heavenly miracles ourselves. Some of us, won’t ever talk about it, as hardly anyone would believe it.
But then we also know, that Jesus – when he met distrust and disbelieve, did not give them signs like in Matthew 16:4: a wicked and adulterous generation looks for a miraculous sign, but none will be given. Jesus then left them and went away.

Would we want Jesus to leave us and go away?! (Because we won’t believe unless we see miracles)

**

 

[lunike333]

To Bertrand Russel’s question of why God doesn’t provide us more evidence of his existence, Dr. Peter Kreeft recommends Lewis’ book, Till We Have Faces. I have read it, and for those like me who are not as brilliant as Dr. Kreeft, I recommend listening to his mp3 relating to the book before actually reading it so the end will make more sense. It is supposed to be one of Lewis’ best books.

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

Bertrand Russel

**I don’t know if Dr. Peter Kreeft and Lewis recommend thinking twice about Russel, but:

Bertrand Russel is hardly qualified to be neither exampel nor motivation for any Christan way of thinking. Russel designates himself an agnostic and atheist, though he pointed out, that the “non-existence” of “a” God can not be proved (just like vice versa) match his essay: Russell’s Teapot).
He also denied any form of sin.

Russel wrote in 1927 and in 1957 the book: The reason why I’m not a Christian”. Christianity Russel explained as a “decease that originates in or out of fear”.

What on earth should Russel, who now (he died in 1970) knows that “GOD IS”, as he saw God, be able to tell a Christian, who thanks God that he knows God by the witness of truth; Jesus Christus.

God beware us of philosophies like Russel’s and those who prefer their word to those of Jesus.

Let’s read in the bible, and as soon as we receive the grace of God to understand, we will know why atheism is the poison that kills anyone for good.
**

 

[lunike333]

**I don’t know if Dr. Peter Kreeft and Lewis recommend thinking twice about Russel . . . .
**

I’m afraid I didn’t make myself clear. Bertrand Russel supposedly asked the question of why God doesn’t provide more evidence on his death bed (if I’m getting the story right). He never supplied an answer to this. Russel meant it as a justification of atheism. Dr. Kreeft responds to this question by citing Lewis’ book, Till We Have Faces. I certainly did not mean to imply that I put more merit in Russel’s beliefs than in Lewis and Kreeft’s.

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

Bertrand Russel asked the question of why God doesn’t provide more evidence on his death bed… never supplied an answer to this.

**No Dear; you made it all perfectly clear and nobody blames you.

But isn’t it amazing that an atheist like Russel, so to speak excuses himself (I wonder to whom they try to find an excuse >in fact it’s God; for everyone has deep inside a knowledge of God – as we all originate in God<) - excuses himself for his disbelief, of which he is terribly incertain of.
On his death bed, he suddenly thought – “gosh me – what about if it’s true after all…”
Of course HE couldn’t supply an answer to this question that shook him. How should anyone do so, when all his life he fought for atheism and against the church and against God – against all the stupid Christians…
Sure they want to justify atheism. They must justify atheism, in order to not loosing their face. Of course they will. Justify atheism before God! Before God in a way like: “Oh well you know… - as you didn’t give us further proof…”
The word FURTHER will get stuck in his throat, for that’s a great deal worse, than if a Son asks for proof if he’s really he son of his father.
This justification of his disbelief won’t work in the least.

With all we get to know and read and study, we ought to check it up with the Holy Bible, for that is the truth. The one and only truth.
Philosophers like Russel, Marx, Lenin, Richard Dawkins or any Atheist, might have written many books in excellent language. It all remains to be a crusade of the blind against the existence of colour.
Let’s be careful in mentioning their “works” as literature and even more careful to adopt some of their ideas. They are as wrong as can be. Deadly wrong. Absolutely wrong.
Trash too can be pronounced in lovely and most sophisticated words – and still remain trash.

Why doesn’t any atheist wonder, why Jesus’ words remained valid for 2,000 years, whilst thousands of trashy philosophies simply are words and phrases; namely those of atheists. Nicely put, but just good for language – nothing else, and soon forgotten.
**

 

[Neil_Anthony]

To Bertrand Russel’s question of why God doesn’t provide us more evidence of his existence, Dr. Peter Kreeft recommends Lewis’ book, Till We Have Faces. I have read it, and for those like me who are not as brilliant as Dr. Kreeft, I recommend listening to his mp3 relating to the book before actually reading it so the end will make more sense. It is supposed to be one of Lewis’ best books.

Do you have a link to the mp3? I’d love to hear it, might have the answers I was looking for

 

[Blade_and_Blood]

Personally, I believe that God truly isn’t afraid of some people doubting him, He just didn’t want to leave us here with just that: doubt.

I also believe He’s just up there watching us, hoping that even if we’re different in faith, color, and language, we will love each other… and still be able to hold our diverse faiths close to our hearts.

Besides, if we had proof, that would be catastrophic. It He wanted to give us proof, He should’ve done it in Jesus’ time–which, technically, He did, but that just wasn’t enough.

Ironically Yours, Blade and Blood

 

[lunike333]

Do you have a link to the mp3? I’d love to hear it, might have the answers I was looking for

Here is a link to a page with a bunch of Dr. Kreeft’s mp3’s:
peterkreeft.com/audio.htm

Till We Have Faces is number 16. (The other stuff is great too!)

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

**
Blade an Blood:

If He wanted to give us proof, He should’ve done it in Jesus’ time–which, technically, He did, but that just wasn’t enough.

When Jesus life, Jesus word and Jesus death and Jesus resurrection wasn’t enough for atheists, then disbelievers must hurry, for this life is all they’ll have. Luke too wrote down in Luke 16:31: Abraham already said around 1,800* years before Christ: ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if the dead arose from their graves.’

Further proof wouldn’t really be catastrophic, but human race simply did not deserve further proof and besides, believe is not necessary if we had so much proof that disbelief even for the dumpest person would be impossible.
What would atheists do with all that proof? Voluntarily go to hell and announce “there is no God?” Well, in that case they’d finally be true
**
*Abraham lived approx. 2ooo before Christ.

 

[Leela]

For me, the strongest argument of a non-believer is to ask “Why doesn’t God give us some solid proof that He exists?”

Hi Neil,

I don’t think we usually have anything close to proof to justify our beliefs? I think the real question is, are there any good reasons to believe? (I’m not aware of any.)

Best.
Leela

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

are there any good reasons to believe? (I’m not aware of any.)

**I still keep wondering, if at all we’d be allowed to ask such question, as I pointed out in this thread:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=4223644#post4223644
whether or not we are at all allowed to ask such question like
“are there any good reasons to believe?” or “What if God Gave Us Proof?”

Now; would we dare to ask anyone who comes to see us:
Are there any good reasons to believe you are whom they say you are?

In fact, we are baptized. That means, we are member of God’s own people. How can we dare then, to ask if there is God?!
The mere question doubts God! Let’s remember what Jesus said in Mark 16:16
“Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.”
Let’s not be careless about Jesus’ words.

“Any good reasons to believe?” – oh, there are Millions!
There is the fact that we live. No person lives out of himself. Neither out of his parents. They didn’t know it’s going to be you. We exist, because God wanted us to live because we where not aborted.
• There is the fact of unbelievable order in Nature. A nature without God’s creating and order, would grow like cancer in chaos.
• There is the fact of Jesus Christ’s word. No human being of low rank to the world, would’ve been able to preach words like this, as precious to the world as Jesus words, which have been printed and read countless times by countless people to whom they gave so much.
• And there is the fact, that countless people can tell you out of own experience, that they bodily and spiritually felt the existence and presence of God.
And there are many more facts, how the world experienced the truth of God.
Those who seek, will find.
**

 

[lunike333]

Hi Neil,

I don’t think we usually have anything close to proof to justify our beliefs? I think the real question is, are there any good reasons to believe? (I’m not aware of any.)

Best.
Leela

Ms. Leela,

I humbly would suggest listening to the lectures numbered 8 and 18 (especially 18), at the following web address:
peterkreeft.com/audio.htm

Although the aforementioned arguments cannot conclusively confirm the existence of God, they may provide you “good reasons to believe.” Many people today give some of these classic arguments for God’s existence short shrift, and instead characterize the arguments as straw men (and then easily refuting them based on their faulty understanding); however, if you deeply understand the arguments, you may find some of them are truly compelling.

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

the aforementioned arguments cannot conclusively confirm the existence of God

**no argument of this world will ever be able to confirm the existence of God.
Else, believe wouldn’t be necessary.
Forever it will remain to be believe and faith in God, as precondition for being Gods own people.
Otherwise heaven would be a undeserved present for unworthy people (pearls before swines).
It’s just one thing we need, and that thing is
BELIEVE AND FAITH IN GOD.
If we believe only then when we have proove, we are nothing than any creature on earth – not human in any case; unworthy to be called human being, for they are created by God as a present to live forever in Gods kingdom together with God.
**

 

[Tellme_my_rites]

I’m sure if god did exist he could manage to provide some evidence of his existence. At least he could do better than he is currently doing.

If god does in fact exist, what purpose do you think hiding accomplishes, other than leading many to disbelief?

My question to you is this: What makes man so prideful so as to think his finite mind has the capability to eventually comprehend all knowledge? If there is a greater intelligence on other planets, what makes man so prideful so as to think that man will eventually learn or evolve to comprehend the knowledge the greater intelligence possesses? What makes an athesist think their mind is not finite? What makes them think they are capable of all the answers? Is it not quite possible that a mentally impaired man can know more about the unknown than a man of intelligence if the mentally impaired man has opened the door to the Spirit, allowing the Spirit to permeate his own spirit - while the man of intelligence remains closed to the Spirit’s knowledge and ways of understanding through the Spirit? Though man can learn and know more when he welcomes the Spirit, or the knowledge of a greater intelligence, man has to humbly admit with his finite mind he will never be able to grasp the knowledge of a Being that is Infinite or of a being that has an intelligence well above the plane man’s finite mind sets.

 

[Leela]

My question to you is this: What makes man so prideful so as to think his finite mind has the capability to eventually comprehend all knowledge?

Hi Tellme,

Ok, Tellme, you seem to be looking for an argument? I’m your huckleberry…

When an atheist doesn’t know something like why the universe came into being or how the first self-replicating molecules formed, they admit it! Pretending to know things one doesn’t know is a profound liability in just about every aspect of life with one exception: faith-based religion.

What your post demonstrates is a monumental irony in religious discourse: the all to frequent example of a person of faith praising himself for his own humility while criticizing another for his pride. Note that you do this while claiming to know facts about history and science that no historian, cosmologist, chemist, and biologist could claim to know within their own fields. I call that not merely prideful but arrogant.

While I have the gloves off…what could be more narcissistic than to believe that the creator of the universe takes a special interest in you personally?

So which one of us is really the one who has an inflated idea of his own intelligence and importance?

Best,
Leela

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

no argument of this world will ever be able to confirm the existence of God.

That would be like expecting milk to prove the existence of cows to someone unfamiliar with cows - but more so. The created world has not the capacity to manifest its Creator, other than in a very defective way. Someone not knowing what (Whom) to look for, would not find God by looking at the world, but only a defective “God”: an idol. Unless God circumvents the search by acting from Himself. ​

Else, believe wouldn’t be necessary.
Forever it will remain to be believe and faith in God, as precondition for being Gods own people.
Otherwise heaven would be a undeserved present for unworthy people (pearls before swines).

**## But it is undeserved **

**It’s just one thing we need, and that thing is **BELIEVE AND FAITH IN GOD.
If we believe only then when we have proove, we are nothing than any creature on earth – not human in any case; unworthy to be called human being, for they are created by God as a present to live forever in Gods kingdom together with God.

​

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

But it is undeserved

**Yes of course undeserved, as pointed out in Romans 3:24: “we are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus”.
And in Romans 6:23: “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”
An undeserved GIFT to those who believe, as Jesus said to several people: “your faith has saved you.” (match e.g. Matthew 9:22)
**

 

[cranster]

what could be more narcissistic than to believe that the creator of the universe takes a special interest in you personally?

Best,
Leela

Because the person of Jesus Christ who historically rose from the dead to prove His divinity has revealed that to us, and a part of that revelation is that God is omniscient and knows all things perfectly. Even more than that holds all things in being at all times. If the creator of the universe didn’t take a personal interest in us we wouldn’t be here to converse.

Maybe a better question is, how can an intellect as advanced as the creator of the universe not know all things about all of His creation at all times?

I’m sure you’ve heard the saying “God is love”. If you combine omniscience with perfect love then you have a God who takes a very intense personal interest in us… who knows and loves us perfectly and completely. I think it’s we that don’t take enough interest in Him.