Should God show himself?

[PAUL MARKHAM]

The flood was real, in my opinion.
When I destroyed a piece of art of mine, I wasn't psycho either. Even if I would have destroyed a good one.


I don't think it was dead on.

don't compare me to people that, according to you, think a human controls the weather with his mind.

Seems god likes to destroy. Bible Atrocities: Atrocities in the Bible

 

[thomas t]

The records contain lessons of the Spirit, given in Metephor.

Tony, that's a very wise decision to take.
However, I don't see a reason of why the metaphorical level should preclude the literal level from being true also.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

You have nothing to back the bolded assumtion up. In my opinion, it's mere presumption.

Evolution is a bold assumption. LOL

Please give us evidence to back that up.

evolution - Google Search

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

That is indeed life, great thing is you have choices and God has not compelled and does not compel you to have Faith.

So you have a choice to consider why such choice is allowed and what would creation be if you did not have that choice. Part of that reflection, is to consider life that does not have the freedom of such choice.

Regards Tony

God does a lot of compelling. Bible Atrocities: Atrocities in the Bible

 

[thomas t]

Shouldn't take a psychologist to know if disprove if flood would make any difference.

but I say, it can't even be disproven.

You most likely don't know any geology, so
that makes it harder to explain.

I'm not a geologist, I have rudimental knowledge. But God gave me the gift of understanding scientific evidence if presented. At least I believe so,

But for now its goodnight lil audie good night

Oh good night!

I really need to get some sleep now but first...
Can you describe the flood? Like entire world,
Water 15 cubits over mt everest, or local, or what? Do you feel there is any physical evidence that it happened?

it's a worldwide event that happened on earth #1. According to the Bible this is earth #2, see 2 Peter 3:5-6.
I personally bet there was no Mt. Everest on earth #1.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

but I say, it can't even be disproven.


I'm not a geologist, I have rudimental knowledge. But God gave me the gift of understanding scientific evidence if presented. At least I believe so,

Oh good night!


it's a worldwide event that happened on earth #1. According to the Bible this is earth #2, see 2 Peter 3:5-6.
I personally bet there was no Mt. Everest on earth #1.

evidence the biblical flood never happened - Google Search

age of mount everest - Google Search

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Tony, that's a very wise decision to take.
However, I don't see a reason of why the metaphorical level should preclude the literal level from being true also.

I see the story is built upon people's worldview at that time, which in a time of advanced knowledge, we know it is not a worldview we now have.

But I see the flood is Global in this age.

Regards Tony

 

[thomas t]

The flood wasn't as the bible describes, it was a local flood of the Black Sea.

I hold that the Biblical world wide flood isn't a myth.

DNA proves there was no worldwide flood, the lack of a layer of bones in the ground also proves there was no world wide flood.

DNA, as I see it can't show anything, if God quickly recreated the animals after the flood.
If scientists can't find the layer... then God did not want it to be there.
Maybe he didn't like the idea to have something in the earth that would constantly remind him of that event.

So what do you have, give us your evidence.

I didn't come up with any bold claim. I said I believe.

Evolution is a bold assumption. LOL

that wasn't what I said. I said.... claiming that God didn't do it is a bold claim. You can't rule that out, in my opinion.

You posted 4 links, let me explain you: I don't have time to go through all 4 of them. I'll have a look at the first one.
My strategy: argueing that the first source doesn't rule out a global flood, so it makes sense to assume that the other links don't either.
The source gives 21 reasons of why the flood never happened, according to what they say. I'll show you that the first 3 don't keep their promise... so it makes sense to assume the other 18 don't either.
The first 3 reasons analyse the geology of present earth. I say, the flood happened on the previous version of it, see 2 Peter 3:5-6.
So, if we don't see evidence in the earth layers today.... God could have cleaned the site up after the flood and made earth #2 from scratch apparently.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

I hold that the Biblical world wide flood isn't a myth.


DNA, as I see it can't show anything, if God quickly recreated the animals after the flood.
If scientists can't find the layer... then God did not want it to be there.
Maybe he didn't like the idea to have something in the earth that would constantly remind him of that event.
I didn't come up with any bold claim. I said I believe.

that wasn't what I said. I said.... claiming that God didn't do it is a bold claim. You can't rule that out, in my opinion.

You posted 4 links, let me explain you: I don't have time to go through all 4 of them. I'll have a look at the first one.
My strategy: argueing that the first source doesn't rule out a global flood, so it makes sense to assume that the other links don't either.
The source gives 21 reasons of why the flood never happened, according to what they say. I'll show you that the first 3 don't keep their promise... so it makes sense to assume the other 18 don't either.
The first 3 reasons analyse the geology of present earth. I say, the flood happened on the previous version of it, see 2 Peter 3:5-6.
So, if we don't see evidence in the earth layers today.... God could have cleaned the site up after the flood and made earth #2 from scratch apparently.

And then god dropped fossils everywhere just to confuse us. LOL

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf...y42LjguMpgBAKABAaoBB2d3cy13aXo&sclient=psy-ab

Just in case some think it did happen.

 

[Trailblazer]

Even if he did show himself and prove beyond doubt he was GOD, there would still be some that refuse to admit their ideas were wrong and cling to them.

That's right, so what would be the point?

 

[Trailblazer]

If God showed himself to us we would love him. And is that not all that matters. If he showed himself to Adam and Eve why not show himself to us?

Because God wants us to choose to love Him or not, sight unseen.

I do not believe that God ever showed Himself to Adam and Eve; that was just an allegorical story and it contradicts what Jesus said:

John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

1 John 4:12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.

 

[Trailblazer]

Why would seeing such a psycho monster cause me to love it?

It might not, but it would certainly cause you to fear it.

That is one reason God does not show up, it does not want to scare people into believing.

 

[Trailblazer]

just show yourself then everyone knows you are real

That's one reason God does not show up. God does not want to be obvious.
He wants us to figure out if He exists using our own innate abilities.

 

[Trailblazer]

To use a bit of humor, God loves "hide and seek". He hides in the human heart and asks us to seek him there.

Well said. That is fully congruent with my beliefs.

“Dispute not with any one concerning the things of this world and its affairs, for God hath abandoned them to such as have set their affection upon them. Out of the whole world He hath chosen for Himself the hearts of men—hearts which the hosts of revelation and of utterance can subdue. Thus hath it been ordained by the Fingers of Bahá, upon the Tablet of God’s irrevocable decree, by the behest of Him Who is the Supreme Ordainer, the All-Knowing.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 279

 

[Trailblazer]

Do people seriously feel that these types of things sound wise?

Why would it matter what people feel?

 

[Trailblazer]

It reads to me as baseless foolishness written about baseless foolishness.

We all have our own personal opinions.

 

[Trailblazer]

He did, under the name of Jesus.

God did show up, in the name of Jesus...

Jesus was a clear mirror, and God became visible in the mirror. This is why Jesus said, “The Father is in the Son” (John 14:11, John 17:21) meaning that God is visible and manifest in Jesus.

“I and my Father are one” (John 10:30) means that the Manifestation of God, in this case Jesus, and God are one and the same, so whatever pertains to the Manifestation of God, all His acts and doings, as well as whatever He ordains and forbids, is identical with the Will of God Himself.

 

[Kenny]

God did show up, in the name of Jesus...

Jesus was a clear mirror, and God became visible in the mirror. This is why Jesus said, “The Father is in the Son” (John 14:11, John 17:21) meaning that God is visible and manifest in Jesus.

“I and my Father are one” (John 10:30) means that the Manifestation of God, in this case Jesus, and God are one and the same, so whatever pertains to the Manifestation of God, all His acts and doings, as well as whatever He ordains and forbids, is identical with the Will of God Himself.

I like that!

 

[Trailblazer]

So you would rather get it from messengers than god. Why?

It is not about who we would RATHER get it from. It is about who God decides we get it from.