Tags
apologetics, atheism, blogging, brains, Christianity, cognitive dissonance, conspiracy realities, cranky people
In the course of atheist blogging, this idea keeps coming up that suggests “if God wants me to follow Him, He’ll prove Himself to me.” First of all, the evidence of God’s existence is all around us. For me that sounds a bit like somebody demanding the sky prove itself.
I’m not sure what language one requires God to speak to them in, but I can see evidence of Him in the synchronicity of math, in the rhythm of music, in people’s acts of sacrificial love, in the collective consciousness of humankind, in fairy tales and art and love. I can also see him in reason and logic and Greek Philosophers and in theology and scripture. Sometimes I can see him in most banal things, like kitchen sponges and missing socks in the dryer. Whatever language you speak, God speaks it too, and is more than willing to reveal Himself to you.
In the process of these discussions, this idea came to light that God should just physically appear before our eyes and show Himself. That actually made me smile simply because people just don’t understand. That would be a bit like flying too close to the sun. At the very least you’d go blind, if not just completely insane. Nobody really gets to “see God” right now while we exist in the physical, because our brains just can’t handle it. That would collapse your psyche, crush your perception of reality, and send your spirit reeling somewhere outside of your body.
Just imagine how many bits of information your brain has to process when you encounter something OF God, or catch a glimpse of the edge of God’s robe, or encounter the Holy Spirit. It’s an on-your-face-instantly experience, I assure you. Profoundly mind altering. Everything you thought you knew is gone in an instant, your concept of time, your definition of physical reality, who you think you are in the equation. Everything your brain must process is alien, foreign to it. You have to lean heavily into the Spirit there, because those little neurons in your brain simply have nothing to relate the experience to. It’s unlike any other.
Sometimes I suspect people have no idea how gentle God is with us. His intervention in our lives is like delicate brain surgery with just the right amount of anesthesia. People who are confronted with too much data at once, emotional overload or brain strain from trying to process paradoxical ideas, often develop post traumatic stress disorder and personality splits.
God is extremely gentle with us. He gives our brains time to process the data, to accept what we are perceiving. It takes a while to grow into faith, to let your mind become flexible enough that it is open and trusting. You have to be able to feel Him, to surrender to Him, to trust that He’s not going to let you fall.
Faith is a process, it requires practice. You have to embrace it and expand and grow with it. Like anything else in life, you don’t get to see the fruits before you even begin the work. It’s called a leap of faith for a reason.
Most of us who engage with atheists really aren’t trying to do battle. From my perspective the battle was already won on the cross long ago. God’s existence is not dependent on your belief in Him. It’s really simply more a case of wanting to show you Something remarkable, amazing, incredible, Something that will blow your mind and bedazzle you with the wonder of it all.
See, there's this thing called biology... 
As a student, I’ve been studying the origins of the ‘concept’ of God and it’s mainly in Islam/Christianity that God is seen as gentle, omnipotent, omnipresent figure who is perfect. Because we consider him to have a form, a nose or eyes we humanise him. These days, I’ve been thinking that God perhaps is Energy, like many religions like to believe. And as you know, energy is everywhere and cannot be created or destroyed. Doesn’t God, in this way seem more present? Just a thought. I really like the way your words flow. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I like that very much, yes energy, but unlike any kind of energy we understand here on Earth. Yes indeed, energy cannot be created or destroyed 😉
LikeLike
You know, IB, I’ve asked Christian bloggers for evidence that God exists. “It’s all around,” isn’t even an answer to the question. Point out something specific that could be measured and tested. That’s the evidence that is being asked for. Your beliefs can’t be measured or tested. This is why some other atheist bloggers (or at least myself) have said that the basis of your belief is limited to you. It does nobody else any good, because nobody else has your exact experiences and point-of-view.
Some atheist bloggers, myself included, are not seeking to do battle with Christians on things. Rather, we’re just asking for some honesty here.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good comment, sirius, and there is really no tangible proof that Christians can show you that says, “SEE! Here’s GOD! right there!”
For us, who are believers in God, we believe in Him based on the assurance of things hoped for and the conviction of things unseen, because that’s what faith is…knowing that something exists even though you can see it, touch it or feel it but being convicted of it’s presence.
Have you ever experienced a time in your life where you were working on something and had no answer or proof of an answer, but you knew beyond any doubts that there WAS an answer? If yes, then that’s how we believers accept God’s existence. We just know He is.
If no…then you’re missing out and I really wish you could see what we see and feel what we feel. It’s quite amazing.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I meant to say *even though you can’t see it*
LikeLike
I have this discussion with my brother all of the time. I ask him for proof, and not a theory, about how life started on Earth. I point out that Earth was a cauldron at one point and sterile. His reaction? The proof hasn’t been discovered yet but science will find it. To which I answer that he has faith that science will answer his questions, and I have faith that Christianity will answer my questions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I would just like to say at this point that I’m a de-converted Christian, so I am quite familiar with the emotions you are talking about. That said, you’ll find the position expressed above doesn’t begrudge any Christian his or her faith in God; I do recognize that people do believe they feel the Divine in their lives.
What I am getting at is when atheists are told to accept this in substitution of their own experience. Such a position is ultimately inequitable, as one side is demanding the other must conform.
LikeLike
WFOI,
I don’t think this is really the best line of argumentation.
For instance, not too long ago, I was madly in love. I knew that she was the one for me, so much so that I asked her to marry me. Despite all the evidence that said we should just break it off, I knew that I wanted to spend the rest of my life with her. In the end, our engagement simmered out, and so what I knew to be true – that I was going to spend the rest of my life with her – turned out to be wrong. People are wrong all the time, WFOI.
LikeLike
Yes, people are wrong all the time, but God’s never wrong.
LikeLike
Right, WFOI, but when you said:
you weren’t speaking of God’s knowledge, you were speaking of our knowledge. We, people, are wrong all the time. Even if we, as you put it, know “beyond any doubts” something, we still end up wrong. Which is why I say this is not a good argument.
LikeLike
let’s agree to disagree, shall we? 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sirius, it’s awkward sometimes discussing atheism with individual atheists because I don’t want to step on any toes or invade anyone’s personal space, but you guys really know how to reveal yourselves in your own words. Your post about how Christian love isn’t supposed to leave scars, is absolutely heartbreaking. You went on to try and disprove the existence of Christian love entirely, and to then imply that there really is no difference between a good or a bad Christian.
I once had a similar kind of wounding but it came from atheism. I imagine it’s even more difficult if you come from a Christian background, because that now also taints your relationship with faith.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Actually, IB, the relationship I had with Christians isn’t what tainted my faith. “Bad” Christians, “Good” Christians–any Christian can have whatever faith they desire. If anything taints my view of Christianity, it’s how its adherents conduct themselves.
LikeLike
Just one other thing, IB. The post I wrote today isn’t trying to disprove Christian love entirely. Rather, what it is showing is that some Christians do not do anything that can be remotely construed as loving.
There’s a huge difference there, and I would appreciate it if I wasn’t misrepresented.
LikeLike
Sirius, there are definitely some Christians who do abominable things. I’m not trying to misrepresent you. Your post however was called “Christian Love No thanks” which is a pretty good indication that you perceive Christian love in a negative light.
LikeLike
In the course of atheist blogging, this idea keeps coming up that suggests “if God wants me to follow Him, He’ll prove Himself to me.”
Over 40 years of atheism, I said the same thing.
He did.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Thanks for the link, Wraith! I enjoy your comments and I am so glad He revealed Himself to you 😉
LikeLike
Amen to that Wraith
LikeLike
Simply powerful. I mean, this part just sings…
“I’m not sure what language one requires God to speak to them in, but I can see evidence of Him in the synchronicity of math, in the rhythm of music, in people’s acts of sacrificial love, in the collective consciousness of humankind, in fairy tales and art and love. I can also see him in reason and logic and Greek Philosophers and in theology and scripture. Sometimes I can see him in most banal things, like kitchen sponges and missing socks in the dryer. Whatever language you speak, God speaks it too, and is more than willing to reveal Himself to you.”
(!?!) That is some absolute wisdom! But wow, very amazing that you wrote about this today. Just this morning, I was standing in my kitchen and suddenly had this whole topic spring to my mind of all these conversations with atheists and the demand for “proof” etc. I mean, I for one can certainly relate to that inner feeling of wondering “Well, why the heck can’t you just appear to me God, just for one minute?” I literally used to lay in my bed as a younger person and pray as “hard” as I could for this very thing, with my eyes closed, and then would slowly open them to see if Jesus would be standing there at the foot of my bed…
I know now of course that it just really isn’t that simple after all, as much as I would think it should be, because I’ve had to learn the hard way that the most vital factor isn’t what I do or don’t perceive with my visual organs, but it’s the condition of my own heart.
Anyhow, standing in the kitchen in the midst of my sudden reflection on this stuff, it was like God just zapped into my brain this thought:
The next time an atheist demands you show them evidence that God exists, just simply say: “Well, the first thing on the list is YOU”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The thing about God is that in order for a person to believe, they must experience Him for themselves. Nothing we can say can change their mind. They have to be open to the possibility, or in my case, it just happened unexpectedly. Sometimes unexpected things happen that turn our entire belief system around.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This wonderful post is yet another vivid description of how atheists wink God out of existence because he doesn’t act the way atheists think he should act.
That type of thinking is dangerously irrational.
LikeLike
You’ve been sneeking a peek at Doob’s post without commenting , haven’t you IB? ha! I agree completely with you. Well said.
LikeLiked by 1 person
LOL, you ratting Doobster out, Paul?
Thanks for the heads up, I was at work and didn’t get a chance to read his blog.
LikeLike
Exactly!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Some things never change huh. Mockers in the days of Noah, mockers harassed the God of David, and one of the greatest acts of mischievousness, ‘Come down from the cross………………..that we might believe in you.’
Today, people tempt God with absurd ‘challenges,’ which is a polite way to say ‘mocking.’ But out of all your observations, all being true, what does this God do in spite of such blatant disrespect?
Nothing.
His patience and grace in light of people walking His earth, and only giving glory to themselves, may be the greatest proof that He IS. Very good post here.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Reblogged this on Citizen Tom and commented:
I just wrote a post. So the last thing my ego wants is to post a reblog in front of it, as a commenter said “Simply powerful.” Then he cited a portion of it that just sings…
insanitybytes22 points out in her post something simple, but profound. Actually seeing God would destroy us, and the Bible says as much. None of us could survive the proof the Atheist demands.
Would miracles work? If miracles were routine, then whats a miracle? There are over seven billion of us. Can you imagine if each of us got the sort of miracle we might demand as proof God exist? What we call the laws of science would cease to exist. The orderly universe we now experience would descend into chaos.
Instead of the miracles we might ask for, our Creator gave us His Creation, a miracle beyond our comprehension. Look around. How is it dog barks, squirrels leap through trees, and each leaf grows in indescribe detail just to colorfully fall and carpet the ground? Get away from city lights and look up into the night sky in wonder.
Psalm 19:1-4 New King James Version (NKJV)
19 The heavens declare the glory of God;
And the firmament shows His handiwork.
2 Day unto day utters speech,
And night unto night reveals knowledge.
3 There is no speech nor language
Where their voice is not heard.
4 Their line has gone out through all the earth,
And their words to the end of the world.
Those words were written long before men made teleoscopes or flew into space. Yet, the truth has not changed. The more we gaze the more incredible we find what we see. When we don’t even understand what we see, what more could we ask?
LikeLiked by 3 people
Reblogged this on A Conservative Christian Man.
LikeLike
I think you are mistaken, IB, if you think that atheists want God just physically appear before our eyes and show Himself to us. That’s not at all what we want. We just want tangible evidence that God is not a figment or your imagination. It’s very convenient to say that, even though we don’t need or want to actually have God appear before us, that our little pea-brains couldn’t handle it because it would collapse our psyche, crush our perception of reality, and send our spirit (not sure what that is) reeling somewhere outside of our bodies.
So it’s easy to claim that God exists when human beings can’t see God without blowing their minds and when God cannot, even being all powerful and all knowing, offer up any empirical evidence that he/she/it even exists.
As siriusbizinus suggested, “point out something specific that could be measured and tested,” rather than just saying God is everywhere. That was the gist of my post this morning. If God is everywhere, if God is all around us, show us some evidence instead of just saying it and expecting me (and some others, I presume) to believe it to be true.
If it really is, as you said, “a case of wanting to show you Something remarkable, amazing, incredible, Something that will blow your mind and bedazzle you with the wonder of it all, then dammit, show it to me. I’m wide open to it. Just show it to me.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Doobster,
Since God is infinite he would cause any measuring instrument to overload.
Consequently, the way to determine God’s existence using physical means is through a technique called inference.
Scientist use inference all the time because when dealing with the super large or the super small it’s almost impossible to get evidence that screams the way atheists demand that it scream.
That atheists refuse to infer the existence of God from the evidence that the readily universe provides proves that atheists aren’t really interested in either evidence or science.
LikeLike
SoM…whatever!
LikeLike
Doobster,
I find it uncanny that when I describe atheist thinking, someone like you comes along and proceeds to fit the description to a tea.
I’d like to tell you that I know atheists like every square inch of my glorious naked body, but I don’t want to scare you away.
LikeLike
You’re one funny guy, SoM. And by funny, I mean totally fucked up.
LikeLike
“I think you are mistaken, IB, if you think that atheists want God just physically appear before our eyes and show Himself to us.”
Doobster, I just read 12 blogs from atheists that demand precisely that. I have verifiable, objective, empirical evidence of that fact…….and yet you don’t believe me. That is because you have defensively walled yourself off and chosen to preemptively not believe me, to take a leap of faith and declare me mistaken in spite of having absolutely no evidence of that fact.
That’s how atheism works, it rejects the evidence before it can even present itself.
Now I could provide you with all 12 links and the direct quotes from atheists who actually do demand that God physically appear before them, but your own brain would begin immediately spinning, seeking to force the evidence to conform with your current worldview by either dismissing it, ignoring it, or attempting to rationalize it away.
We haven’t even gotten to the concept of God yet. In fact we’re only on the fifth word of your first sentence and you’re already wrong.
LikeLike
IB, if you say that you have found 12 blogs from atheists today who have specifically said that they want God to show himself to them, then I think you’re spending way too much time reading blogs by atheists. Of course I can’t say that you haven’t, and if you say you did, I will accept on your word that you did.
But you didn’t read that in my blog today. And I know a lot more than 12 atheists and not one of them has ever expressed a desire for God to show himself to them. They have all expressed a desire to see some verifiable evidence of the existence of God. And, by the way, I’m an atheist and I don’t read too many other blogs from atheists because I don’t really care what other atheist think, although it seems that you are rather obsessed with what atheists think if you read 12 by atheists just today.
If you can make a blanket statement that atheists reject evidence before it can even present itself, allow me to make a blanket statement. Christians find evidence of God even when no such real evidence exists because, just like God, all that evidence is in their heads. There, we’ve both made gross generalities about atheists and Christians. Do you feel better now?
I don’t reject evidence unless that “evidence” is, “take my word for it, God exists. He’s everywhere, you just have to have faith, you just have to open your eyes and you just have to stop walling yourself off.” That, IB, is not evidence. That is you expressing your own, personal faith, your own beliefs, your own opinions and telling me that that is all the evidence I need.
So again, IB, you said in your post that God wants “to show me Something remarkable, amazing, incredible, Something that will blow my mind and bedazzle me with the wonder of it all.” I’m waiting.
LikeLike
“…I think you’re spending way too much time reading blogs by atheists…”
Doobster, didn’t I just say that when presented with the evidence, your own brain would begin immediately spinning, attempting to rationalize it away? So what did your brain just do? Exactly what everyone’s brain is designed to do, exactly what I said you would do. You spun.
I did not read your blog before I wrote this post, but even your declaration that “you didn’t read THAT in my blog today” is a bit funny, because your whole post was about “a desire to SEE some verifiable evidence of the existence of God!”
LikeLiked by 1 person
IB, if you think that my saying, “I think you’re spending way too much time reading blogs by atheists…” is spinning and rationalizing, then you have totally lost your sense of humor.
Yes, my whole post was asking for someone to show me some verifiable evidence of the existence of God. But what you wrote in your post is that atheists want God to physically appear before our eyes and to show himself. Well, that’s sort of a non sequitur. If atheists truly don’t believe that God exists, they would not demand that this entity that does not exist show himself before their eyes. Again, what I said in my post was that, if God is, as you and others claim, everywhere, if God is, indeed, all around us, show us the evidence. There is a difference.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Doobster:
Let me pose a question. Atheists frequently claim that there is no innate concept of God in humanity; and the belief in God is a relic of prehistoric evolution when men saw natural phenomenon they could not explain.
The question is: if there is no innate understanding of God, why did primitive men invent one? There’s no evolutionary need to postulate the existence of a God—so where did the idea come from?
Certainly, it could be argued that savages believe that, for example, violent storms or earthquakes represent the anger of one their gods—but wouldn’t it be just as logical for the same savages to impute a naturalistic explanation (however erroneous)? For example: a primitive people experience an earthquake. If they were atheists by nature, wouldn’t their logical conclusion simply be that the ground was somehow unsuitable for habitation and move elsewhere? Why would they invent a God?
And the same can be said for blessings: when savage races have a good harvest, for example, they offer sacrifices to their gods in thanksgiving. Doing these sacrifices is counter-intuitive, unless they have an innate sense of a God who created them.
LikeLike
Eric, you seemed to answer you own question. You asked why primitive man invented gods right after you said that primitive man saw natural phenomenon that they could not explain. So primitive man invented gods to explain what primitive man could not.
No disrespect, Eric, but evolved man who had a greater sense for geology and a better understanding of the natural world would be more likely to react to an earthquake by deeming the area unsuitable for habitation and moving elsewhere. But primitive man, not knowing any better, and being frightened by earthquakes, floods, or violent storms, would seek an explanation. And so, they invent some supernatural beings and attribute characteristics to them like anger or vengeance as the reason these supernatural beings would punish them with violent storms and earthquakes. And, in order to appease the supernatural beings, these primitives would pray to them and offer sacrifices to them.
It was not about whether or not primitive man did or did not have an innate sense of a God that created them as much as it was a natural desire to find answers to the unanswered or unanswerable. And so primitive man created his gods or God as the answer.
LikeLike
Doobster:
But that’s where I see the problem lies. Atheists often claim that belief in God, the soul, and spirit are irrational. The question I’m asking is why primitive man would have invented an irrational explanation—one which the atheists correctly say serves no evolutionary purpose—unless the idea had already been implanted in their minds and passed down through generations.
I don’t think that it can be attributed to priestcraft alone. If you postulate a primitive society composed of atheists, why would they suddenly begin to adopt religious notions and more to the point, why would every primitive tribe in known recorded history observe some kind of religion? It’s now known that even the Neanderthal race practiced a religion: which would imply that religious belief existed from deep into prehistoric times. IOW, if man was by nature atheistic, atheism, not religion, would predominate ancient cultures.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on BLOGGING BAD w/Gunny G ~ "CLINGERS of AMERICA!".
LikeLike
Pingback: Why doesn't God show Himself? | Christians Anonymous
Hi IB (I noticed people calling you IB and I hope you don’t mind me doing the same),
I want to first thank you for writing this post – it was truly really well written. Particularly this bit:
I must, however, disagree, with your conclusion here. I too experience all these things; I too experience the wonder in the ostensibly banal, but I don’t see God. I see Beauty. I’m moved and swayed by it. What then are we to make of this discrepancy? Why is it that you and other theists experience God where I simply experience beauty? There are a number of your commentators who said that we (non-theists, a term I prefer in referencing my stance on the whole ‘God’ issue) need merely to leave ourselves open. I find this a bit disingenuous, as if all non-theists, or agnostics, or atheists are willfully closed-off.
I will say that I used to be one who argued that it would be easy for God to simply reveal Himself to us. Even if it failed to convert everyone, it would certainly increase the number of believers, therefore saving that many more people from eternal damnation. I’m still of the impression that God, in his omniscience, is aware of something that will conclusively convert each and everyone of us – that one thing that will give me pause and force me to re-examine everything, in the same manner I say Nietzsche did with me (though a more apt metaphor would be that he forced me to re-evaluate everything while holding a gun to my head). I can say in all honesty that I’ve sought this out my whole life and have yet to come across God, have yet to come across this gentility of which you speak. Being raised in a Christian household, being exposed to Christianity my entire life, even being able to (and I say this with all the confidence I can muster) argue for the existence of God with the best of them at one point, I still pled with God to reveal Himself to me. I just never felt it. My spirit was never stirred by God in the same way that, say, music has stirred me so. I no longer ask God to reveal Himself to me – whether it be in burning bushes, or tucked in between rests of a Beethoven sonata, or hidden in Whitman’s prose, or in the intoxicating aroma of sandalwood, or in all His majestic, celestial glory – but the question must be pressed that if God truly does have an interest in the salvation of all, why not reveal Himself in some form or other to us? Not even necessarily in an empirically verifiable format. I suspect that you maintain that God is a personal One – then why not reveal Himself in such a personal manner? Surely God, of all existent beings, would know of a way to reveal Himself in such a way that we don’t implode, or go blind, or whatever else may happen if we experience him directly or indirectly.
This is not a challenge to God, or to anyone, mind you. This is a question that I ask time and time again and have never been given a satisfactory answer. So please – you or anyone – why?
LikeLike
Thanks for your comment.
“I find this a bit disingenuous, as if all non-theists, or agnostics, or atheists are willfully closed-off.”
I regret to inform you that non believers are simply people like any other people, and therefore more than capable of walling themselves off to ideas and concepts they wish to resist. That is who we are, that is what we do. Being a non believer does not exempt one from possessing the qualities that afflict all other humans.
“I don’t see God. I see Beauty”
But then what is Beauty? It’s something we seek out and recognize with our higher selves. So apparently we have higher selves designed to deliberately seek out and recognize beauty when we find it. Beauty then is this pleasurable thing that brings us closer to our Source, a source we are forever trying to reunite ourselves with.
Or beauty is simply a few random misfirings of our chemically soaked brains and serves no real purpose in our completely meaningless lives.
LikeLike
Thank you for taking the time to reply, IB. Unfortunately, you didn’t answer my question of ‘why?’.
Believe me, I’m aware of the fact that people – non-theists included – have the capacity to wall themselves off. But the implications given here are that non-theists are only so because, and only because, they are walled-off. That’s what I find disingenuous. If only us non-theists would leave ourselves open we would experience God. How does one do this – leave himself open? Like I said, I experience all that you experience, but see beauty where you see God.
I’m really not sure what you speak of when you refer to a higher self, or a Source. As such, I obviously don’t adhere to this definition of beauty and our capacity to appreciate it, or even what we come to find beautiful. I would agree more with your last sentence, but not completely. Our capacity to appreciate beauty is not “random misfirings”, but rather our brain firing exactly as it should. That there is no real purpose in this life is what makes these ostensibly banal things beautiful – the temporality, the transience of it. A thing does not have to have objective or transcendent worth for me to appreciate it or to find it absolutely amazing.
LikeLike
“But the implications given here are that non-theists are only so because, and only because, they are walled-off.”
That’s because it’s true! If one doesn’t believe in love, they are walled off from love. If one doesn’t believe in the benefits of exercise, they are walled off from the benefits of exercise. If one doesn’t believe that art has any value, they are walled off from seeing the value in art. Non believers are somewhat unique in that they tend wall themselves off and then go looking for validation and support after the fact.They also tend to strongly deny they have walled themselves off, because unlike the rest of humankind, their walling off comes from a place of sound judgment and superior thinking skills.
“If only us non-theists would leave ourselves open we would experience God. How does one do this – leave himself open?”
By surrendering all and letting go of resistance. That’s scary and hard because it forces you to confront the things that have caused you to wall yourself off and it leaves you vulnerable and in need of a Savior.
“Our capacity to appreciate beauty is not “random misfirings”, but rather our brain firing exactly as it should”
Who says? How do you know your brain is firing exactly as it should? By whose standard are you measuring that?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Funny thing…of what possible evolutionary advantage is the concept of ‘Beauty?’ Seems to me, a caveman lost in contemplation of a sunset would have been eaten by something that snuck up on him. If anything, the fact that we’re capable of more than simple, utilitarian logic is the proof of God’s existence–and goodness–staring us right in the eye.
LikeLiked by 1 person
IB,
It doesn’t matter if someone believes in exercise or not. For example, I’m well aware of the health benefits exercise provides – having a theoretical knowledge of it, though, isn’t going to actually do anything for me unless I get off the couch and actually exercise. Similarly, I could think exercise is total bunk, yet if I exercise the results are still going to happen. I say this because one’s belief may not necessarily represent what actually is, and vice versa.
It’s not that I’m walled-off, it’s that I haven’t felt God, haven’t experienced God. And once my rational argumentation for God’s existence faltered, there was nothing for me to lean back on. How can you say with any kind of sincerity that a child, a self-proclaiming Christian, pleading with God for this experience that theists are always speaking on occur is not being open? Imagine the isolation this child must’ve felt when everyone around him is supposedly experiencing this grand thing in their lives, yet he remains outside of it all, left in the dark. Why would God not reveal Himself to such a child he cried for this revelation? Even during college, while I was still a Christian, pontificating on Aquinas and Swinburne, still pleading and still not experiencing, how was I not being open? There is actually nothing that has walled me off aside from simply not having a reason to believe. I’m not opposed to the idea of God, and if I’m presented with even an argument that proves God to me, then I’ll convert. My lack of belief isn’t me being stubborn, or walled-off, I don’t believe because I don’t see a reason to believe. To ask me, or anyone to have faith in God and then He will reveal Himself is completely backwards as to how anyone believes anything. You don’t believe in something without first having reason to believe in it – even if your reasoning is bad, there’s still a reason. Even if this were the process that one should employ, then why would God not reveal himself to me when I was child or in college when I did actually believe in His existence?
To answer your question of ‘standards’: fair enough. I don’t particularly know if my brain is completely misfiring and my experience of everything is wholly unique, but that doesn’t bother me. My misfirings can be wholly unique, yet they’re still wholly wonderful – why should I need an objective standard? Objectivity wouldn’t improve my experience. A thing is only valuable if we consider it valuable, irrespective of objectivity.
Finally, IB, you have still yet to answer my question – a question that I have found myself reverting back to in every one of my replies. It’s actually my central point to everything I’m saying, and I’m left a bit befuddled that you haven’t addressed it yet.
Wraith,
I’m afraid I’m not an evolutionary biologist. Moreover, I’m not even particularly concerned right now with why we appreciate beauty, but rather that we appreciate beauty. The fact that I can derive so much pleasure from everything is amazing and I seek to enhance those experiences, by, as Emerson would put it, living life on such a low register that the subtlest qualities of this life can give me pleasure: like the warmth of the sun on my face, or how the wind whirls and twirls and dances around me.
But I don’t want to leave you hanging, so I’ll try to answer your question, regardless. I suspect the origins of aesthetic value had to do with propagation of the species: I think of the male peacock with its ostentatious display, or of birds who create aesthetically pleasing nests. It was used as a means of, and I say this only because of my limited vocabulary, seduction. It was a means to attract a mate. It’s easy to see how one can from these origins to now. As time goes on, and as we are more and more conditioned to look for the aesthetics, it would make sense to have more visceral reactions to that which is more aesthetically pleasing.
LikeLike
Oscar,
For some people exercise is pure hell and doesn’t render the much advertised benefits of well being, weight loss and the much sought after super bod.
The experience of God can be much the same, that is, it varies from person to person.
For example, my ground breaking experience with God happened much the same as Saul of Tarsus, a man who was completely full of himself and his spiritual achievements.
In one fell swoop, God scared Saul nearly to death and shattered him into a million blubbering pieces.
Saint John of the Cross wrote about the “Dark Night,” often referred to as the dark night of the soul. He attributed this excruciating experience to our earthly corrupt flesh being burned down as it attempts to approach the divine light of God.
Mother Teresa wrote of a similar experience.
God took the stiff necked Hebrews on a difficult forty year journey through the desert. The desert is a metaphor for deprivation, difficulty, abandonment.
Maybe you are a spiritual fatty for whom discipleship starts out as emptiness, your personal journey through the desert through the desert, so to speak.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“There is actually nothing that has walled me off aside from simply not having a reason to believe…”
LOL, Oscar, there’s a huge moat right there with alligators and everything, walling you off!
The reason so many of us find God when we hit bottom, in the midst of great suffering, is because when you lose absolutely everything, you often suddenly acquire a deep awareness of what “having a reason to believe” is all about. When you reach that point of complete despair, you tend to lose all resistance and illusions of control, and once “You” are no longer blocking the view, there’s Christ standing right there where He’s always been.
Some people who grow up somewhat comfortable and free of suffering, like you often find in the Western world, sometimes actually suffer from this sense of not needing God, from not really perceiving themselves as a sinner, from this deception that suggests you are the sole captain of your own fate and destiny.
LikeLike
Oscar R-
What ‘proof’ would you ultimately find satisfactory for you to accept the existence of God?
You stated ‘surely God would know of a way to reveal himself……………….’ yes, that’s what many are saying here: ‘SURELY he has.
Greater minds have bowed the knee to the Creator having lesser demands.
Many people have ‘seen’ because of a dewdrop. Then there is this thing called a conscience, a tear in the eye, the stars, water, the breath of life, and a million other proofs.
What proof are you ultimately looking for?,,
LikeLike
ColorStorm,
I’m not looking for a particular proof. And unlike other non-theists you’ll speak to, I’d be satisfied with a completely personal experience, as the Christian God is meant to be a personal god.
You stated that greater minds have bowed their knees. This is absolutely true. And it’s also true that greater minds than my own have also not believed. Have also seen these tears, these stars, water, these infinite breaths of life, and have only seen in them what I see in them: beauty. So trying to tell me that greater minds have believed is not convincing.
To put it succinctly, literally anything that would even give me an intimation of His existence.
LikeLike
Well Oscar,
You have a few options, either of which should be convincing.
You have the God of Creation, which you say is possible,
Then you have the God of redemption. Both are are within grasp. but the God of redemption can easily be seen (again many here) by admitting to your sinnership, which by the way, nature finds us all as misfits.
Need proof? yea we got that. Take your pick. It’s everywhere
LikeLiked by 1 person
ColorStorm,
I apologize for my lack of understanding, but I simply don’t see how uttering His variances is any kind of evidence. I believe I have also articulated a fairly decent response in my discussion with IB as to your point of proof – I encourage you to read those responses. I’d be interested to read your thoughts on the matter.
LikeLike
Oscar-
Imagine my frustration if I was born blind, and you tried to explain the color ‘Blue.’ What would your context be, inasmuch as it is so clear to you, yet I am blind?
Yet this impossible task is the very way God reveals Himself to man. He explains this blue to our conscience; it’s just a matter of whether of not we want to see it.
The post above and many comments speak to the ‘personal’ element of your concern; yes, God is an awesome God because He is also personal;
We can be here for 50 years, and I can not help you.see blue. but One can…. .
But there are many painters at this site. 😉
LikeLike
ColorStorm,
I could certainly imagine your frustration. That doesn’t mean I couldn’t try to describe ‘blue’, though. For example:
I could describe blue in terms of where it falls on the color spectrum, its wavelength in relation to other colors. But that does nothing to evoke its descriptive properties, or what others feel when they see blue. I would thus describe ‘blue’ as the color of the sky on a beautifully sunny day; the color of peace and tranquility; blue is the color of the calm sea; it is the soothing balm to the fiery, passionate red. True, you would still not know what blue looks like, but you’d have a better understanding of what is felt when people see blue. And that’s my whole point.
I don’t take offense when you indirectly call me blind for not seeing, for not experiencing, what you see and feel. But here I am asking you to describe blue to me, and you and others call me blind for not knowing what blue is. I know I’m blind in your eyes – but why won’t you help me understand? Why when I ask you and others here what blue is is the response always “just look around you” or “you just don’t want to see what blue is” or, my favorite, “if you’d only believe that blue exists, then you’d know what blue is”. I’m asking you to describe blue to me; I’ve been asking all my life and no one has given me an answer that will give me a hint, a mere whisper, of what it is.
But fair enough, ColorStorm. I know there are many painters on this site, as there are in the world. I also know there painters of different forms, there are sculptors, there are musicians and poets and novelists. And so I’ll keep asking around.
Thanks for the discussion, CS.
LikeLike
Oscar-
I’m sure most will agree here that the ‘blindness’ is not insulting, for ALL have vision trouble,
Even the astute writer of Amazing Grace John newton,said: ‘Was blind but now I see.’
It is the ultimate compliment to God!, He makes us see. He gets the glory.
The painters’ are all the posters who tell of their own colors, by words, examples, testimony, and this is the ‘personal’ touch that u inquired of. I see tons of evidence of the hand of God in these posts.
And I believe He is showing you these things as well..
all the best to ya
LikeLike
Great post.
People usually demand that God show Himself so they can believe knowing He will never do so to their satisfaction.
This makes their lack of belief God’s problem and absolves them, they think, of any responsibility for rejecting Him.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Beautiful post. I agree. =) Actually, the more I observe the world and the magnificent workings of our body, the more clearly I see God’s imprints and image. Example re: the rhythm and order of the universe. The human body (as well as that of animals) functions in cycles in keeping with the cycles of the cosmos. We see this at the micro and macro levels. We eat, rest (break from eating, to digest), work/think/move, empty, refill, do it all over again. The woman’s body is a living avatar of the Cycle. So much more to say. It is when we disrupt these cycles and don’t know how to live that we create illnesses and imbalances.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh yes, there is a huge mind, body, spirit, relationship that we haven’t even begun to understand yet. Women often do get to have a unique perspective on the importance of that cycle and how it all relates. Good comment, you always intrigue me 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Intrigue.
Ha ha.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I shall have to reply here, IB, from your comment above.
Earlier quote: “You went on to try and disprove the existence of Christian love entirely, and to then imply that there really is no difference between a good or a bad Christian.”
Later quote: “Your post however was called [‘Christian “Love”? No Thanks. Part 1’] which is a pretty good indication that you perceive Christian love in a negative light.”
I am quoting these misrepresentations of what I wrote. In the first, I did not imply that there is no difference between good or bad Christians: I actually argued it. Also, I did not try to disprove the existence of Christian love entirely. Rather, the post reflected my thoughts on Christian practices that try to be loving, or sound loving, but aren’t actually loving. And it illustrates the resulting harm that comes from it.
From there, I can also say that your later quote is a misrepresentation of what I wrote. You are not accurately stating my position. I do not view all Christian love in a negative light. It’s why I put love in quotation marks in my title. It is fine if you didn’t read the post. But it is not fine if you are making generalizations about it to other people, asserting things that were never said nor implied in my post.
You don’t even have to make these misrepresentations to make your point.
LikeLike
Sirius, I’m not trying to misrepresent you. People can click your link and read it for themselves. I’m also not trying to judge you or criticize you or complain about what you’ve written. You have every right to “not try to disprove the existence of Christian love entirely.”
LikeLike
Is this where the cool kids hang out, SB? Nice to see ya around.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nice to see you around too, Oscar! I’ll say this is where the cool kid is hanging out, because you’re here. XD
LikeLiked by 1 person
Maybe God is trying to prove Himself to atheists, but atheists are just shrugging all His little hints and patterns and rhythms away? When science discovered the universe is not eternal but rather had a beginning in the finite past, several atheists sputtered, “I’m SURE science will find a way to accommodate this evidence in a way that will show the universe is still eternal.” And why so hung up on the so-called eternity of the universe? Because if the universe began to exist, then the Law of Causation suggests that it had a cause, a cause that exists outside of time in order to create our temporal universe.
Other scientists try to use theories like the World Ensemble Theory and the Theory of Everything to explain why the universe has a cause, but they have no significant evidence to support their theories – that’s all they are: theories. Their reliance on these theories is very similar to faith.
LikeLiked by 2 people
There are a couple points here I’d like to address.
(1) “Maybe God is trying to prove Himself to atheists, but atheists are just shrugging all His little hints and patterns and rhythms away?”
While in the abstract this is possible, it is equally as possible that there is no God, and that all this evidence that has been referred to is simply Oscar’s point about Beauty. Arbitrarily assigning a reason to something doesn’t inherently make it valid.
(2) “Their reliance on these theories is very similar to faith.”
This is also a misconception about scientific theory. There is evidence to support a theory that can be tested and falsified. That’s why experiments are published: so others can repeat and find out for themselves whether it is true. With faith, you cannot test feelings that God exists, or suspicions that God exists.
LikeLike
Mm, nope, it’s actually not a misconception at all. There’s absolutely no evidence for the World Ensemble Theory; it’s purely wishful thinking.
Riddle me this: if things can only be true if verified by empirical science, well, what empirical science have scientists come up with to verify this statement? Has there been an experiment done to prove that the statement “only things that can be proved through empirical evidence can be true” is a true statement?
LikeLike
Your comment is non-responsive to my earlier comment. Let me simplify it for you so you can understand it.
(1) That you believe in something does not require other people to believe it too. If you’re relying on your own beliefs, then other people can use their beliefs and be just as right as you are.
(2) Scientific theory is not like faith. Faith requires adherence to dogmatic beliefs without question, or at least believing in something despite any evidence to the contrary. Scientific theory relies on experiment and testing to produce results.
Also, no one here is claiming that science has all the answers, or that science is the only source for truth. That would be silly.
LikeLike
Sirius,
Christianity works every time it’s tried.
That is more than can be said about science.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“(1) That you believe in something does not require other people to believe it too. If you’re relying on your own beliefs, then other people can use their beliefs and be just as right as you are.”
I agree. I’m not forcing anyone to believe in anything. Although I don’t believe that more than one thing can be true at the same time. God cannot both exist and not exist. His existence cannot be determined merely by peoples’ beliefs.
“(2) Scientific theory is not like faith. Faith requires adherence to dogmatic beliefs without question, or at least believing in something despite any evidence to the contrary. Scientific theory relies on experiment and testing to produce results. ”
Really? Because my dictionary here says faith is “complete trust or confidence in someone or something.” It doesn’t describe how that faith is achieved at all. And there’s actually a lot of evidence for the Christian worldview; you only have to look for it.
“Also, no one here is claiming that science has all the answers, or that science is the only source for truth. That would be silly. ”
That’s fairly inconsistent with most of my discussions with atheists. Most of them do in fact believe that something can only be true if proven by science. The reason many atheists believe morality is subjective is because they believe, rightfully, that under naturalism, morality is nothing more than social conditioning and love is nothing more than chemical reactions in your brain, because this is what science has led them to believe. Thus, no one culture is necessarily more morally right than the other – they were simply conditioned that way through evolution. Therefore there’s no reason to necessarily intrude on another culture’s way of life and tell them they’re doing it “wrong,” because we were simply brought up to believe that it is wrong, while they were raised to think it is right.
LikeLike
I think the more you discuss things with atheists, the more you’ll find that the only thing we have in common is our lack of belief in deities. Some atheists believe in fairies, and I think they’re wrong for that belief.
That being said, the reason why science doesn’t provide all “truth,” or more accurately, “knowledge that a person can rely upon” is that it wouldn’t allow for children to learn language or develop their own sense of cognition, or account for moments of insight.
Now, what I will say is that science is by far the most reliable method we have for obtaining knowledge that we can rely upon. Take any of the above things I mentioned, and science can improve them.
With regards to your evidence that is allegedly all around for the existence of God, please give me a for instance. Also, please note that I’m asking for something that I can experience and evaluate on my own, and that I could share with others that is testable, non-testimonial evidence.
LikeLike
“With regards to your evidence that is allegedly all around for the existence of God, please give me a for instance. Also, please note that I’m asking for something that I can experience and evaluate on my own, and that I could share with others that is testable, non-testimonial evidence.”
I think you might be interested in coldcasechristianity.com The author is a detective and crime-scene investigator who used to be an atheist before he looked into the credibility of the Christian worldview. He rarely ever mentions personal experiences and testimonies. What I meant by “you can find it if you look” is if you simply looked up “evidence for the Christian worldview” you’d find a number of results involving apologetics. And if you examine them objectively while keeping your presupposition biases (we all have them) in check, there’s no reason not to think that it isn’t reasonable. It’s how I went from an agnostic to a Christian.
As for something you can experience and evaluate on your own, you can literally pray for God to reveal Himself to you. I won’t guarantee that it will be an immediate revelation – for some people it is, for others it’s more of a process. Only God knows how to reveal Himself to you in a way that you will understand and recognize. Answered prayers that come in uncanny ways is how I grew deeper in faith, after researching apologetics.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’ll check out the website.
As to prayer, I had yet over the course of almost 30 years as a Christian to have one answered in a supernatural fashion. While I’m not foreclosing on the possibility, I am saying one person’s answered prayer is another person’s good fortune.
And with regards to presupposition, it’s a tall order saying everyone has them. I was able to de-convert after losing my presupposition that God exists. However, different results are to be expected when different people weigh evidence according to different standards (and no, I’m not talking about standards that automatically assume one position is already correct).
LikeLike
Sirius,
God is not a jinn who is at the beck and call of our every whim.
Prayer is how human beings take part in the will of God.
If you have trouble praying why do you insist on blaming God?
Maybe the problem is your demand that God act according to your own will instead of the other way around.
Garbage in. Garbage out.
Or so the saying goes.
LikeLike
Actually, SOM, I’m glad you raised this point.
I never had a problem praying. I used to attribute answered prayers to God’s will. Looking back on it, none of those answered prayers excluded natural phenomena.
Furthermore, this isn’t a case of me not praying and wanting something enough. It isn’t even about wanting God to perform circus tricks. I had one simple prayer for the last six months of my faith: that God end my life so I wouldn’t have to take it.
And here’s the amazing thing, SoM, that offer still stands for God. He can do it at any time, and I won’t mind at all. It’s a simple thing. He obliterated Sodom and Gomorrah. I’m a sinful being. How hard can it be for one Creator to kill ONE HUMAN BEING?
There’s a simple answer to that question, SoM. That there is no God.
LikeLike
Sirius,
If there is no God, then that means everything just happened all by itself.
That notion is so ridiculous that atheism must be rejected outright by people who value reason.
LikeLike
Sirius, that is the saddest thing ever, praying for God to end your life and then being angry at God for not doing it. I’m sorry for your pain, honestly.
LikeLike
I’m not angry at God, IB.
At the last moments of my faith, I was bitter. But losing my faith helped me recover from that bitterness. It’s why I can sit here and say that there is no God and feel just as happy as anyone who says they feel His presence.
LikeLiked by 2 people
IB, I don’t think I could convince many people that I didn’t write my post yesterday after reading yours, especially your concluding thoughts:
I did have one thought that takes a right turn from the bulk of your post—all of which I agree with, in light of this right turn. You said
My answer to that argument is, He already did that! That’s why rejecting Jesus is so heinous. God did precisely what a number of the atheists say they want, but instead of embracing Jesus and saying, Now I see God, they pooh-pooh Christ’s supernatural birth, the miracles He performed, and His life-changing resurrection. At best they say He was a man who inspired many people.
Jesus is not that. He is precisely what the atheists say they want: God come down. That He came two thousands of years ago to other people in a different culture doesn’t negate the truth that He did what they say they want. If they’re serious, they should become students of Jesus Christ. Then they’ll know God.
Becky
LikeLiked by 2 people
You really do make the best points. God did come down and appear right before our eyes. He did show Himself in a form our brains could handle and many of us still rejected Him.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If one doesn’t see God, can’t find them in the world, can’t see its signs, of course one possibility is that there is no God. But another possibility is that the one looking is himself God and that’s why he can’t find himself. Think about it, only God can be atheist, only he has no God, etc. I’m not saying that man is God. But man is God forgetful of himself. Something like that. Atheism is the lowest point of human intelligence. If I posit that it is stupid to believe in something that has no empirical evidence, it is equally stupid to believe in its non-existence. Atheist is just a new Scholastic catholic; I don’t know why people bother with them or even care to respond to them. Let them indulge in their own dogma. Real scientists condemn atheism as they do theism. Let them have their fun.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: On Belief from Experience | Pretentious Musings
Pingback: On Belief From Experience | Christians Anonymous
Christians often “just know” the truth, but they should really learn more about their own faith.
Biblical Christianity is in fact the only one based on the evidence of facts, history, archaeology, science, and REASON.
500 witnesses saw Christ. Over 300 Old Testament prophecies told of him. Daniel wrote the entire then-future history of the succession of world empires to come in summary form but with enough detail to verify, including the lightning fast conquest by Greece (Alexander) over the Persians, the breakup of the empire against his wishes, the four parts it broke into, and their fall to the next empire, and the division of the Roman Empire and the breakup of those during this time, and the fast-forming new world government. “The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy”, says Revelation.
Alexander did not sack Jerusalem because he was so pleased by the rabbis showing him the prophecy in Daniel. The Romans burnt the temple to the ground and “not one stone [was] left upon another” that was not “thrown down” just like Jesus said (Matthew 24).
The Bible speaks to the cycle of rain, rivers, oceans, evaporation, clouds and rain. The Bible speaks of DNA in Psalm 138, but look at the KJB, because the modern versions are corrupted by disbelief. Nahum saw an obvious vision of a modern freeway at night (Nahum 2).
Not only the 500 witnesses, but the solid conviction of that truth of Resurrection drove the first few generations of believers to die happy, knowing they would follow Christ in rising again.
Isaiah Chapter One pleads with the violent abusers of widows and thieves and oppressors to “Come let us REASON together, saith the Lord”. (My emphasis on the word REASON).
The epistle of First John says “God is love” and if you hate your neighbor, there is no God in you.
Jesus said he came NOT to condemn the world but that the world through it might be saved. John 3.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Reblogged this on Trutherator's Weblog.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for the reblog. Much appreciated.
LikeLike
Another insanely good post – ‘scuse the pun!! 🙂 I would love to be able to tie together my beliefs so neatly as this. I agree with every word in this post, so I feel it is worthy of a re-blog!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for the reblog. Glad you enjoyed the post. 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on Humble Heart Scribbles and commented:
I couldn’t have written such a brilliant explanation of “God Is Everywhere” if I tried. I would love to start a spiritual discussion via this post. What are your thoughts on faith, the existence of God, whether you can personally know Him, etc?
LikeLike
The Disciples asked Jesus to increase their faith, it would be wise if we did the same.
Luke 17:5 And the apostles said unto the Lord, Increase our faith.(KJV)
Jesus tells us to Seek, Ask and Knock we need to ask for His wisdom too and the Holy Spirit’s empowering.
Proverbs 4:7 Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding.
Luke 11:13 how much more shall your Heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him?
Christian Love -Anne
LikeLiked by 1 person
Fascinating dialog, in the end we will all see God, personally while I see God and his handiwork in nature, my fellow humans, and even scientific endeavors; I’m not ready for a face to face. Like an old cowboy once told me, “just because heaven is my home, don’t mean I’m itching to get there!” It isn’t important to convince atheists, only to live like we believe! I learned long ago I could not “make” anyone Christian.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Words of wisdom there! Thanks for your comment 😉
LikeLike
I guess it all comes down to “believing”, I should be dead by now, and I´m 32. How did I make it so far with what has happened to me….that is a miracle.
LikeLiked by 2 people
LOL, oh, me too! Left to my own devices I would have been long gone by now 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
I feel as though absolute evidence that God exists would not take away from the needed faith that He is still going to take care of us. And if He exists, does it not limit His power to say that if He showed himself, it would be too powerful for our brains to comprehend? If He is omnipotent, then certainly he can show himself in a way that will not collapse my psyche. If He can show himself to Moses through a burning bush, can he not provide a sign saying “Hey I’m here”? One still needs faith to believe that God will provide for his children and ultimately come back to save them. In the synchronicity of math and the rhythm of music, I see that beauty of science all around me. But I have yet to see God in the way that I see water droplets create a rainbow, or the wind destroys structures. The wind may also be invisible, but at least it shows its power without any doubt or hesitation.
LikeLike
Pingback: GOD’S EXISTENCE AND THE PROBLEM OF PROOF – Citizen Tom