proof of the true God?

[shunyadragon]

it could not be we only had trains,no cars and no planes. Actually there are tribes who have still not heard the gospel and many in China and India though missionaries have been there there is still many people there that have not heard the gospel.

BTW if we went by that,I just read Mormon history here it is

In the years 1830 to 1899, it is estimated that about 12,827 missionaries were called to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ. From 1900 to 1950, the total number increased to 50,143. From 1951 through 1989, about 402,372 missionaries served. Since 1990, however, approximately 534,658 missionaries — or more than half of all missionaries who have ever served — have accepted the responsibility to share the message of the Church of Jesus Chris

So even if you were right you'd still be wrong. Mormon were in Missions by then.

The requirement is to taught in all NATIONS, and that in reality took place before 1844. Yes we had trains and many other means of travels.

From: http://barnabasyohannes.com/BibleBahai.htm
These are the three signs and their fulfillments.

1. The First: And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. (Matthew 24:14)

This prophecy was fulfilled in 1844 when the missionaries preached the Bible in the last nations of Central Africa and Tibet in China. Now, if you go to any nation in this world, you will find at least few Christians with the "gospel of the kingdom". The following two books confirm to this assertion:

'Christian missions began their activities amongst the African people in 1844.' (Year Book Guide to East Africa; Robert Hale Ltd).

'It was in 1842 that five treaty-ports in China were opened to commerce and to missions - advance steps in the opening of all China to the Gospel...' (Our Day in the Light of Prophecy; Spicer p.21).

 

[DPMartin]

The requirement is to taught in all NATIONS, and that in reality took place before 1844. Yes we had trains and many other means of travels.

From: http://barnabasyohannes.com/BibleBahai.htm
These are the three signs and their fulfillments.

1. The First: And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. (Matthew 24:14)

This prophecy was fulfilled in 1844 when the missionaries preached the Bible in the last nations of Central Africa and Tibet in China. Now, if you go to any nation in this world, you will find at least few Christians with the "gospel of the kingdom". The following two books confirm to this assertion:

'Christian missions began their activities amongst the African people in 1844.' (Year Book Guide to East Africa; Robert Hale Ltd).

'It was in 1842 that five treaty-ports in China were opened to commerce and to missions - advance steps in the opening of all China to the Gospel...' (Our Day in the Light of Prophecy; Spicer p.21).

i would say the Gospel goes way back further then you've mentioned. catholic missions and the like have been everywhere roman influences were. especially in trade. which would include China and the whole of the African continent. Muslims killed anything that wasn't converted or submissive to Islam long ago in the Africa. and Marco Polo was in china long before 1800's not to mention any trading before that time. the Gospel has been around the world longer then you give it credit for. the catholic church and china go back as far as the 8th century.


actually its the new world that is probably the lands that heard of Jesus Christ.

 

[shunyadragon]

i would say the Gospel goes way back further then you've mentioned. catholic missions and the like have been everywhere roman influences were. especially in trade. which would include China and the whole of the African continent. Muslims killed anything that wasn't converted or submissive to Islam long ago in the Africa. and Marco Polo was in china long before 1800's not to mention any trading before that time. the Gospel has been around the world longer then you give it credit for. the catholic church and china go back as far as the 8th century.

There were distinct regions and areas of Africa, Asia, and South America that were no reached by Christian until the early 1800's

actually its the new world that is probably the lands that heard of Jesus Christ.

There is absolutely no evidence of this until the European settlement, conquest, and colonization.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Its not being done globally actually its being done less. I know China itself has started making it harder for Christians to have curc, and they have to worship in houses, but now they say thy are being ahrder for churches to exist there.
Most likely parts of China have not been reached for Christ and there's been quite a few places like India as well who have made it harder for Christians too sorry.
Sense churches attendance is going down down there will be eventually many churches closing as well.

I find you are so right about church attendance and that in fulfillment of Revelation chapter 17 that religious ' waters ' ( people ) would be drying up spiritually. Just like the waters surrounding ancient Babylon were diverted (dried up) so that Babylon was conquered in one night.

There are many Chinese living here and get the ' message of Matthew 24:14 ' to people back home.
That preaching is done in an 'under ground way ' when necessary.
There were many missionaries in Taiwan waiting for the opportunity to spread the' good news message ' in China.
Plus, Scripture is in more than 900 languages.
Russia too is against anyone who is Not part of their orthodox way.
That does Not mean banning stops the spreading. Just that corrupted Christendom is in her lasts days.

Remember: as time goes on we will see more fulfillment of Matthew 10:22 of being hated.
That hatred does Not make Jesus' teachings as wrong, but proves what Jesus taught is right.

 

[DPMartin]

There were distinct regions and areas of Africa, Asia, and South America that were no reached by Christian until the early 1800's



There is absolutely no evidence of this until the European settlement, conquest, and colonization.

"its the new world that is probably the lands that heard of Jesus Christ last"


how do you know that? the continents of Africa and Asia have been visited and concord by "christain" nations for over 1000 years. shipping boats have been going around the horn of Africa as far back as some historians say 500 and some BC if not farther.

its so very doubtful what you stated is true at all, priest traveled with shipping in the days of the catholic church so even then where ever there was trade there was exposure to the Gospel.

 

[shunyadragon]

"its the new world that is probably the lands that heard of Jesus Christ last"


how do you know that? the continents of Africa and Asia have been visited and concord by "christain" nations for over 1000 years. shipping boats have been going around the horn of Africa as far back as some historians say 500 and some BC if not farther.

its so very doubtful what you stated is true at all, priest traveled with shipping in the days of the catholic church so even then where ever there was trade there was exposure to the Gospel.

Large regions of the Amazon Basin was unexplored up until the 1800's.

How do I know? In the absolute sense it is possible aliens spread the message of Jesus Christ. All I have to go on is the best available historical evidence.

There is absolutely no evidence that the central part of Africa was explored or visited Westerners before the~1820s to the 1840s.

 

[1robin]

what about revelation of God, His Spirt, His Word?

Yes that would be another one. However among materialists I find this argument unconvincing. While both a believer and unbeliever should accept history, science, and philosophy for example but the unbeliever will not accept God speaking or acting. This also usually ends up in just begging the question in a lot of situations. Your are right in that it is another argument for God just not usually a persuasive one.

 

[DPMartin]

Yes that would be another one. However among materialists I find this argument unconvincing. While both a believer and unbeliever should accept history, science, and philosophy for example but the unbeliever will not accept God speaking or acting. This also usually ends up in just begging the question in a lot of situations. Your are right in that it is another argument for God just not usually a persuasive one.

The truth is the “argument” is always against the existence of God, and if that doesn’t work then the “argument” is no one can know God.

As long as people believes these things, then information about God, is a sources not of God.

 

[Muffled]

is your reasoning but not a proof or a lead to the proof. many see that the cosmos is the reason you are.

I believe you think it is magic. Things just magically come together in an organized way.

 

[DPMartin]

I believe you think it is magic. Things just magically come together in an organized way.

did i say that's what i believe? or is that what you see whether i said it or not?

 

[1robin]

The truth is the “argument” is always against the existence of God, and if that doesn’t work then the “argument” is no one can know God.

Truth itself is not an argument. It is what is called a properly basic belief concerning something. Truth is what is used to make an argument.

As long as people believes these things, then information about God, is a sources not of God.

Correct, as long as people deny the belief in God then what God has to say is not persuasive to them. Christians do care about what God has said but those outside of faith don't find it relevant.

 

[paarsurrey]

What or where is the proof of the true God, the Creator and Judge, the Living God, the Most High who lives forever and ever?

One proof of G-d is that he helps his messengers/prophets against all odds, like He helped:

~Moses against all odds
~Krishna against all odds
~Buddha against all odds
~Zoroaster against all odds
~Jesus against all odds
~Muhammad against all odds
~Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908 against all odds

Right, please?

Regards
____________
Quran
*[40:52]
Most surely We help Our Messengers and those who believe, both in the present life and on the day when the witnesses will stand forth,
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 40: Al-Mu'min

 

[Vinayaka]

One proof of G-d is that he helps his messengers/prophets against all odds, like He helped:

~Moses against all odds
~Krishna against all odds
~Buddha against all odds
~Zoroaster against all odds
~Jesus against all odds
~Muhammad against all odds
~Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908 against all odds

Right, please?

Regards

Wrong. That's just your belief. It's not proof at all. It means nothing, other than it's a statement of your belief.

 

[Jacob Samuelson]

What or where is the proof of the true God, the Creator and Judge, the Living God, the Most High who lives forever and ever?

Your question is the proof. What makes you ask it? Is it a desire for there to be or not be that God.

 

[paarsurrey]

Wrong. That's just your belief. It's not proof at all. It means nothing, other than it's a statement of your belief.

Please read my post again.
It is a solid proof. If not, why not?
Regards

 

[Vinayaka]

Please read my post again.
It is a solid proof. If not, why not?
Regards

There is no proof that God exists, for starters. Certainly there is no proof that those people were messengers of said God. Krishna, to Hindus, is no Messenger of God. They could easily have been fairly ordinary people who gathered a following. If you want to believe it's proof, that's fine.

 

[DPMartin]

Your question is the proof. What makes you ask it? Is it a desire for there to be or not be that God.

no

 

[DPMartin]

One proof of G-d is that he helps his messengers/prophets against all odds, like He helped:

~Moses against all odds
~Krishna against all odds
~Buddha against all odds
~Zoroaster against all odds
~Jesus against all odds
~Muhammad against all odds
~Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908 against all odds

Right, please?

Regards
____________
Quran
*[40:52]
Most surely We help Our Messengers and those who believe, both in the present life and on the day when the witnesses will stand forth,
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 40: Al-Mu'min

nope

you are trying to sell all are of the true God. and for example Moses' God was witness by hundreds of thousands of Israelites and Mahammad's god was an idol he found in a building Muslims march around in Mecca. therefore not the God of Abraham.

there is no truth in trying to make others believe these different religions worship the same God namely the God of Abraham.

 

[paarsurrey]

nope

you are trying to sell all are of the true God. and for example Moses' God was witness by hundreds of thousands of Israelites and Mahammad's god was an idol he found in a building Muslims march around in Mecca. therefore not the God of Abraham.

there is no truth in trying to make others believe these different religions worship the same God namely the God of Abraham.

In other words one is not ready to accept that the Truth supported all these messengers/prophets of G-d, namely Buddha, Krishna, Moses, Zoroaster, Jesus, Muhammad, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908 and many more such persons in many lands of the globe. Is it so, please?

Regards

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Your question is the proof. What makes you ask it? Is it a desire for there to be or not be that God.

Being honest. Thats reverse psychology or something.

Like I go into a car dealership and ask about X car and the dealer says, "so I see you want to buy this car" when in actuality, the customer just wanted to compare prizes for his husband while he, the customer, rides off in a new Mercedez.

It also confirms to the dealer that people actually come on the property for the soul and only purpose to buy his decided car (where he is told to stand) rather than letting the costumer shop around..even more so, that person may want a job, may need to speak to management, may know another co-worker, there are a list of reasons.

Not everyone who asks about god wants to believe in it. Its coersion of somesort. It works on a lot of seekers and others who dont challenge that question because of the accusational tone it sends.

While genuine, there are a couple of ways to approach it without mind-reading (form of cognitive distortion) that the other has a contextual goal not actually written on screen.