The God of OT vs the God of NT? Are they the same?

[Blastcat]

I refrain from judging God harshly (or by humanistic standards, however noble) because God declares himself to be good, just, merciful, righteous, holy and perfect: therefore as soon as I admit the slightest inequity or malice to God's dealings with mankind, I am obligated by plain reason to cease believing his testimony.

Yikes, I can really see how you would be stuck. Think about god's morality and you're out. I see a problem. And you want to stay IN .. and keep your belief.. so.. questioning is out of the question.. as it were.

Of course I have serious questions that remain unanswered.

Are you saying that you DO question your belief that God is good? or.. something else here.. because.. you either do or you don't in my way of thinking..

If God has established himself to my mind as a real person, and if Jesus' words are also established as being the "spirit and life" he claimed them to be, it follows logically that I should accept the unknown or unfathomable judgments of God as inscrutable, and leave unanswered such questions as how a good God can send innocent babies to a miserable death. I don't exactly know how he justifies that, but I do firmly believe his justification is sound.

You believe his justification is sound.. but you don't know how it is.. ok.. I would agree that you don't know God's justification for doing ANYTHING ... and yet, hmm it has to be good or else you lose your ability to keep believing.

But how do you know that god HAS established himself to your mind as a real person?.. Is this a real person , or an imaginary person? .. By what method did you arrive at the conclusion that your god is speaking to you .. and that you aren't just imagining that your god is speaking to you? As an atheist, I can't tell the difference.

And I would have to know what you mean by "Jesus' words are established as being the spirit of life". I can guarantee you that I have NO idea what that means. Magic words?..

Thanks.

 

[Thief]

And I would have to know what you mean by "Jesus' words are established as being the spirit of life". I can guarantee you that I have NO idea what that means. Magic words?..

Thanks.

If I may....the parables are clues to the scheme of things in the next life.....
I suspect...figure it out and you live....if not you die.

That's the way I read the text.

 

[Blastcat]

If I may....the parables are clues to the scheme of things in the next life.....
I suspect...figure it out and you live....if not you die.

That's the way I read the text.

er.. but now I have MORE questions.. thanks but?

so, by "life" we don't actually mean real life as we know it on earth.. while we live ... we mean that other kind of life.. the spiritual life that can go to heaven or hell?

I'm really just guessing at your words.. but thanks for your interesting interpretation.

 

[Thief]

er.. but now I have MORE questions.. thanks but?

so, by "life" we don't actually mean real life as we know it on earth.. while we live ... we mean that other kind of life.. the spiritual life that can go to heaven or hell?

I'm really just guessing at your words.. but thanks for your interesting interpretation.

I believe in life after death.
You can call that belief based on assumption ....if you like.

I then assume more.....
Heaven is greater than earth.
Greater disciplines and grace are then the next order of.....'life'.

 

[Blastcat]

I believe in life after death.
You can call that belief based on assumption ....if you like.

I then assume more.....
Heaven is greater than earth.
Greater disciplines and grace are then the next order of.....'life'.

And you assume all this why?

 

[Thief]

And you assume all this why?

Cause and effect.
Science would have you believe....for every effect there is a cause...
and for every cause there is an effect.
You cannot disassociate the two items.
Experiment is dependent of the notion.
If the results cannot be attributed to the effort....the effort and the results are disregarded.

So.....we have reality.
Is mine different than yours?
Apparently.

But I lean to the notion of detail and complexity as evidence of Something Other......than coincidence.

Too much detail...all working in such manner as denial is difficult.

Easier to say....I AM!

 

[RossRonin]

How can the death of a man supposedly make the world "reconciled to God"...What evidence is there that they have supposedly received better treatment?

You want evidence? Look around you. We're still here, and we continue to populate earth and provoke to anger God on a daily basis. (King David wrote in Psalms, "God is angry with the wicked every day.") I'd say God's longsuffering, patience, and mercy have been influenced by what Jesus says to him. New Testament scriptures says Jesus is continually an intercessor and advocate on behalf of mankind ("there is one God, and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus"). So yeah, I think he keeps God'a wrath at bay, and mollifies God's judgments.

Not only does Jesus himself help us get better treatment, but Christians also serve as the "salt of the earth" and the "light of the world" in God's sight, who like Jesus are appointed to pray for others. Therefore, making intercession for one's neighbors by virtue of God having "sent the Spirit of his dear Sons into our hearts, whereby we cry, Abba, Father" also helps mankind in general receive better treatment from God. At least, that's the theory.

You believe his justification is sound.. but you don't know how it is..

Well, it's like when you're a little kid. If you have decent parents, you know they love you, and regardless of whether you understand why they issue certain commandments and judgments and restrictions and punishments, you tend to trust them anyway. You don't run away from home the first time dad or mom give one of your siblings a harsh punishment, just because you don't understand why. You don't renounce your parents because their thoughts are, to you as a child, sometimes unfathomable, as so are some of their actions. So it's not unreasonable, if you see God as a parent, a Father, to recognize he loves you and thinks on a higher plane than you, and sometimes his judgment just has to be accepted even though it's not fully understood. You have faith in his goodness, regardless of the questions that might trouble you.

But how do you know that god HAS established himself to your mind as a real person?.. Is this a real person , or an imaginary person? .. By what method did you arrive at the conclusion that your god is speaking to you ..

I don't hear voices, if that's what you mean. Basically, over a period of years, I discovered that following the precepts of the New Testament does in fact put me in a position where I can seek God for something specific, whether it be for my needs or someone else's, and then expect to see the results of those prayers. Yeah, there are times God communicates directly with my mind and heart, with distinct thoughts or heartfelt compulsions in such a way that I'm fully confident they are not just a product of my imagination. And those, along with answered prayer, all stand as proof that "God is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him."

The trick is to get to the point where seeking is continual, and obedience consistent. I don't claim total success in those areas yet.

Cause and effect.
Science would have you believe....for every effect there is a cause...
and for every cause there is an effect.

Absolutely. If I did not perceive "cause and effect" in the affairs of my life and the lives of those I've prayed for, and if I could not rationally exclude pure randomness or chance as the causes of the effects I've witnessed, then I would not believe God exists, or hears prayer, or rewards us for diligently seeking him. But I have to admit, the things I pray for are not the things most people want God to do for them. And the proofs of God's existence, which to my mind consist of verifiable empirical evidence, are only evidence that can ultimately serve as proof to one person: me. I think God wants it that way: a personal, private relationship that exists by faith and persists by diligent obedience.

 

[Blastcat]

Well, it's like when you're a little kid....You have faith in his goodness, regardless of the questions that might trouble you.

It's like when you're a little kid...No REASON.. just hope . Faith.. IN but.. not by way of any actual reasoning. It's like you cross your fingers, hope that you can make sense out of some.. Bible verse.. and then.. if your intuition is working fine.. BINGO.. you get an "answer" .. and you call that "from" God.

And this is fact for you. This is proof of God for you. Faith, hope, wishes, intuition.. dreams, maybe.. We can all use our imagination.. but to say that this god is ACTUALLY talking to you?... Really?.. Surely , you mean as a metaphor, as a .. poem.. as a .. pretending.
But as a fact? You are actually making the CLAIM that this is a fact, that your god is actually TALKING to you.. and not using words.... hard to tell what you mean?

I don't hear voices, if that's what you mean.

I don't mean anything.. I'm trying to figure out what YOU mean. .. IF you don't hear WORDS... or voices.. what IS going on that convinces you this isn't your imagination going hay-wire?.. Because, from an atheist's point of view, you seem to be describing a problem telling the imaginary from the real. Like some 3 year old.. no offence, but they are KNOWN to get their imaginations and reality confused a bit.. THEN .. they grow out of that.. and THEN.. it seems to come back.. God speaks.. but not by voice.. hmmm.. and this is REAL.. not imaginary... ok... right. Any real way to verify that for us here?

Basically, over a period of years, I discovered that following the precepts of the New Testament does in fact put me in a position where I can seek God for something specific, whether it be for my needs or someone else's, and then expect to see the results of those prayers.

Don't get offended, but I would call that confirmation bias.. something to be avoided, in my way of thinking, and NOT encouraged.

Yeah, there are times God communicates directly with my mind and heart, with distinct thoughts or heartfelt compulsions in such a way that I'm fully confident they are not just a product of my imagination.

In such a way.. hmmm very mysterious. So, you are CONFIDENT that this communication isn't simple IMAGINATION.. because... it happens in such a way AS to make you feel confident. It's all very confusing to me.

And those, along with answered prayer, all stand as proof that "God is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him."

You find what you are looking for, and you are looking for God, and lo and behold you DO find God. That sounds exactly like confirmation bias to me. As a virtue, and NOT as a vice. And as I learn more and more about critical thinking .. I come to understand that confirmation bias is a very bad way of finding if something is true or not. You almost guarantee that you will ONLY find what you WANT to find. And then.. it's a surprise that you find it?... hmm Not to ME it isn't. No surprise at all.

It's just circular thinking to me.. I'm sure you're aware of confirmation bias and circular thinking, right? And how they DON'T lead to reliable conclusions?

The trick is to get to the point where seeking is continual, and obedience consistent. I don't claim total success in those areas yet.

Ouch. Confirmation bias continual.. OBEDIENCE consistent. It seems to me that .. you're almost guaranteed not to be able to tell if something is true or not using that method. I could never use those methods.. Seeking for a rationalization continuously.. If something doesn't seem to fit, keep looking.. until you can find something that does fit. Something that is going to give you the appearance of internal consistency. Never mind that none of this Bible interpretation has any evidence.. that's not the point. OBEDIENCE is the point.

Don't think.. be like a child, obey.. don't ask any questions.. and look for something that can make it seem like it makes sense to you to rationalize it somehow.
I could never do that.

But I have to admit, the things I pray for are not the things most people want God to do for them. And the proofs of God's existence, which to my mind consist of verifiable empirical evidence, are only evidence that can ultimately serve as proof to one person: me. I think God wants it that way: a personal, private relationship that exists by faith and persists by diligent obedience.

So, you pray for things.. that God doesn't have to do?...Or... that can't be verified in any way?.. Because if you DID have proof that your prayers were answered, wouldn't THAT be great.. but you only seem to have the kind of empirical evidence that YOU can see. It's not perceivable by others. We know that prayers don't really work.

The test results are in.. Empirically, prayer does NOT work. When put to the test.. they fail. Consistently. Is God hiding?.. ok.. God is hiding. And maybe God doesn't exist..

BUT YOU GET personal private secret .. and you say VERIFIABLE?... empirical evidence. Well.. NO. If you had empirical evidence, you could show it, you could have it verified by OTHERS.. that's what verified means. You can't say you have empirical evidence if it's secret or private or just for you. That's no use at all.

That's not what empirical means. Empirical means that OTHERS can verify your evidence. Sorry. What you describe is something OTHER than empirical evidence.

A lot of people say that God wants it that way.. secret. one on one.. personal.. private.. and so on.. BUT they have no way of falsifying THAT belief, either. That's just a claim.. or as you put it.. a thought.. but it's not a fact. And there is no evidence for it.

A LOT of people make claims that are unfalsifiable.. not just about YOUR god.. should we believe them too?.. are they all CORRECT?... What are your thoughts... Why are they wrong.. presumably wrong.. and you are correct?

You do know that people imagine all kinds of weird things, right?.. And then they claim what they imagine to be true?... Yes?.. and you are different from these people how, exactly?.. because you are CONVINCED?... They are very convinced too.

Conviction that something is true is no guarantee that it is true.

 

[Desert Snake]

How can the death of a man supposedly make the world "reconciled to God", regardless of what Paul may think? What evidence is there that they have supposedly received better treatment?

Huh? Who is 'they'. Unless you actually think that Xians are the ones whose sins were forgiven; if not, why did you write ''make the world'', ...

inconsistent.

 

[Thief]

Absolutely. If I did not perceive "cause and effect" in the affairs of my life and the lives of those I've prayed for, and if I could not rationally exclude pure randomness or chance as the causes of the effects I've witnessed, then I would not believe God exists, or hears prayer, or rewards us for diligently seeking him. But I have to admit, the things I pray for are not the things most people want God to do for them. And the proofs of God's existence, which to my mind consist of verifiable empirical evidence, are only evidence that can ultimately serve as proof to one person: me. I think God wants it that way: a personal, private relationship that exists by faith and persists by diligent obedience.

I like it....but I must have a grain of salt....

My personal interventions came without my asking....and a good thing they did.
wish I could offer such things as proof absolute.

For example.....
That car wreck was preceded by a nervous desire to find my seat belt....which I found out of reach.
Then my elbow on the door lock.....
Then my back to the door.....
Then my butt sliding over the front edge of the bench....
and the driver wanted to know if I felt alright.

I told him....just drive the car.

Some drunk pulled out in front of us and my driver never got a chance to hit the brake.

60 to 0.... my face into the dashboard (old style steel glove compartment)

Can't say 'ouch'....I didn't see it.....didn't feel it.

Had I been sitting upright...I would have been through the windshield and dead.....more than 40yrs.

Proof?......sorry.
Getting nervous without an obvious reason is not proof.

 

[metis]

You want evidence? Look around you. We're still here, and we continue to populate earth and provoke to anger God on a daily basis. (King David wrote in Psalms, "God is angry with the wicked every day.") I'd say God's longsuffering, patience, and mercy have been influenced by what Jesus says to him. New Testament scriptures says Jesus is continually an intercessor and advocate on behalf of mankind ("there is one God, and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus"). So yeah, I think he keeps God'a wrath at bay, and mollifies God's judgments.

Not only does Jesus himself help us get better treatment, but Christians also serve as the "salt of the earth" and the "light of the world" in God's sight, who like Jesus are appointed to pray for others. Therefore, making intercession for one's neighbors by virtue of God having "sent the Spirit of his dear Sons into our hearts, whereby we cry, Abba, Father" also helps mankind in general receive better treatment from God. At least, that's the theory.

Sorry but no can buy. I simply do not see any significant difference between let's say things being better in the "Bible belt" than they are in Japan or Singapore. Are Christians intrinsically healthier? less prone to disease? murdered less often? No evidence of that.

 

[metis]

Huh? Who is 'they'. Unless you actually think that Xians are the ones whose sins were forgiven; if not, why did you write ''make the world'', ...

inconsistent.

You seem to have some serious problems with words in the English language. I reread my post, and I think it's quite clear as to how "they" was being used.

This is about the third time you've chimed in on questioning a word that has a context that is really quite clear, and this will be the last time that I'll respond to your intentional or unintentional ignorance on what is being said unless it's clear that I've made a mistake. You're the only person I've ever run across here who seems to not understand what I'm trying to say.

Plus, if you don't what I meant by "they", then how could you assume that I was "inconsistent"?

"Bizarre", and you might want to look up that word if you can't understand what it means.

 

[outhouse]

Yeah, there are times God communicates directly with my mind and heart, with distinct thoughts or heartfelt compulsions in such a way that I'm fully confident they are not just a product of my imagination

Could we use trained imagination combined with emotion?

Really this is a personal experience that is not out of the realm of self induced experience.

 

[Thief]

Could we use trained imagination combined with emotion?

Really this is a personal experience that is not out of the realm of self induced experience.

Comment on #190?...just for fun....

 

[paarsurrey]

The 1st Crusade has more to do with the Book of Revelation than the Old Testament.

Please quote from the Book of Revelation to prove your point.

Regards

 

[Augustus]

Please quote from the Book of Revelation to prove your point.

Regards

It's not about individual quotes, more about general ideas regarding eschatology, the apocalypse, redemption etc. that were common currents in medieval Christianity. Revelation is the major source for these.

For example, knights who went on the Crusades had to pay to do so. Horses, armour, weapons, food, their entourage, etc., this often required them to sell many or even all of their lands and possessions. Most weren't going for the prospect of financial reward, just for a place in heaven and to absolve the sins they had committed in their life as a soldier.

The book of Revelation is the main source of ideas like this and many later medieval Christian millenarian movements.

 

[RossRonin]

Sorry but no can buy. I simply do not see any significant difference between let's say things being better in the "Bible belt" than they are in Japan or Singapore. Are Christians intrinsically healthier? less prone to disease? murdered less often? No evidence of that.

What if most professing Christians are disobedient, or unfaithful, or doubting, or double-minded at least part of the time? Most of my afflictions are self-inflicted, the result of my faults and failures as a Christian. And in my experience, that is the rule rather than the exception among Christians. The reason you see no difference between large populations is because there are no large populations of genuinely spiritual Christians who walk in the Spirit and maintain continuous good relations with God. Maybe I'm wrong. But I don't think so. Real saints are few and far between.

You only seem to have the kind of empirical evidence that YOU can see. It's not perceivable by others...Empirically, prayer does NOT work. When put to the test.. they fail. Consistently...maybe God doesn't exist. BUT YOU GET personal private secret .. and you say VERIFIABLE?... empirical evidence...If you had empirical evidence, you could show it, you could have it verified by OTHERS.. that's what verified means. You can't say you have empirical evidence if it's secret or private or just for you. That's no use at all.

Well of course it's no use to you, unless you decide to take my testimony on faith and assume I am being completely honest. Which I am.

So I maintain that God hears and answers prayer. The verifiable empirical evidence stored in my memory is not imaginary. It comprises numerous events and circumstances from my life in the visible world, and in total it is more than sufficient to establish beyond doubt (to my mind, at least) that God is truly what he claims to be: "a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." Let me elaborate:

A prayer that I have prayed (1) in faith, and (2) in accordance with God's will, and (3) in all earnestness, and (4) during one of those admirable if infrequent periods in my life marked by serious and determined obedience to God's precepts and the avoidance of all and any offenses to my own conscience, is the kind of prayer I have seen God respond to. I can share scores of such testimonies with you right here, and in every instance you could say, "That was not a miraculous or supernatural answer to prayer! Random probability can just as easily explain that outcome!" The recovery of a sick kid, the overcoming of a bad habit, the unexpected means to pay off a huge debt...yeah, none of those signify proof of anything to your mind, because they were not your problems. All I can say is, seek God and find God on your own, and prove God to yourself. Ultimately, that is the only proof that matters.

My personal interventions came without my asking....and a good thing they did.
wish I could offer such things as proof absolute.

My contention is that if we all quit offering excuses, believe the New Testament scriptures, act on them willingly in faith and complete obedience, and then begin to seek God consistently and diligently, every one of us would be able to amass more than enough evidence that God answers prayer. Admittedly, that evidence is going to be verifiable and empirical primarily with respect to our own experience, perspective, reason and intellect. But who wants a second-hand relationship with God anyway? Prove him for yourself, to yourself. The only proofs in religion that thoroughly convince us are those we confirm to ourselves, to our own satisfaction, and not to everyone else's. It's not the scientific method, of course; but religion is not supposed to proceed from science but from conscience.

 

[metis]

What if most professing Christians are disobedient, or unfaithful, or doubting, or double-minded at least part of the time? Most of my afflictions are self-inflicted, the result of my faults and failures as a Christian. And in my experience, that is the rule rather than the exception among Christians. The reason you see no difference between large populations is because there are no large populations of genuinely spiritual Christians who walk in the Spirit and maintain continuous good relations with God. Maybe I'm wrong. But I don't think so. Real saints are few and far between.

There's simply no scientific nor observational evidence to support this from what I've read, plus it really isn't terribly logical to begin with. Take a look at what happened with the apostles, some of which died terrible and/or premature deaths. How about Jesus himself? Just because one may be a believer, does that somehow intrinsically mean they'll live longer and not contract any serious illnesses?

And the only scientific indication that prayer may work is that if people know that others are praying form them, statistically they have a better chance at recovery. OTOH, if they don't know people are praying for them, then statistically it's roughly the same as if there weren't any people praying for them.

Source: studies as reported in Scientific American

 

[Blastcat]

Well of course it's no use to you, unless you decide to take my testimony on faith and assume I am being completely honest. Which I am.

- I have no reason to doubt or endorse your honesty. What I want is some kind of proof. Why would I decide to take your testimony on faith, and not any other religious person claiming completely unverifiable things?

So I maintain that God hears and answers prayer.

- Yes, we notice that you make a claim.

The verifiable empirical evidence stored in my memory is not imaginary.

- As you claim.

...yeah, none of those signify proof of anything to your mind, because they were not your problems. All I can say is, seek God and find God on your own, and prove God to yourself. Ultimately, that is the only proof that matters.

- That's right. They were not my problems, and so, I was not emotionally motivated to overestimate the results. Being more objective, I simply notice that your claims are unsubstantiated by any empirical evidence. What I do notice, on the other hand is a strong case of confirmation bias. This is very common.

My contention is that if we all quit offering excuses, believe the New Testament scriptures, act on them willingly in faith and complete obedience, and then begin to seek God consistently and diligently, every one of us would be able to amass more than enough evidence that God answers prayer.

- Yes, if you believe, you believe. That's true. If you don't use critical thinking, you will be more able to convince yourself of what you really want to believe is true. But all the belief in the world doesn't make magic real. Sorry.

Admittedly, that evidence is going to be verifiable and empirical primarily with respect to our own experience, perspective, reason and intellect.

- That isn't empiricism, that's pure subjectivism. You confuse the two.

The only proofs in religion that thoroughly convince us are those we confirm to ourselves, to our own satisfaction, and not to everyone else's.

- Subjectivism.

It's not the scientific method, of course; but religion is not supposed to proceed from science but from conscience.

- Exactly my point. This is not empiricism. This is not the scientific method. It's pure subjectivism. George Berkeley would be proud.

 

[RossRonin]

That isn't empiricism, that's pure subjectivism. You confuse the two.

Well, if empiricism only yields valid data to groups and never to individuals, or only to external observation by third parties and never to one's private spiritual experiences, then maybe I am confusing it with subjectivism.

But I think objectivity is not impossible when applying the scientific method to the realm of private spiritual experiments and their outcomes. One's inward realm can only accommodate a single observer: but does that diminish the reality of experiences and experiments conducted in that realm? To the sole observer, it does not.

Sure it's true that "confirmation bias" is more likely to plague the religious and the superstitious, but scientists are not immune to it either. Whether motivated by personal pride, the desire for prestige, or the need to sustain a grant-funded clinical research program, a scientist's human nature is potentially just as injurious to his or her objectivity as a non-scientist's. Yet I'm sure you don't mock scientists for publishing results achieved by independent work in the lab, nor do you dismiss what they say simply because you don't have your own lab with which to duplicate their results and confirm their conclusions.

Personal, private experiences and experiments in the area of religious faith are always, of necessity, going to be conducted solo; likewise empirical data will always be collected from the same unique person's sensory input, and verification performed by a panel of one as well. Understanding these insurmountable limitations, why not at least allow for the possibility that religious testimony may in fact be a sincere attempt at objectivity, instead of dismissing such conclusions as hopelessly and inevitably subjective?

If you don't use critical thinking, you will be more able to convince yourself of what you really want to believe is true. But all the belief in the world doesn't make magic real. Sorry.

In the first place, why assume I am trying to convince myself of anything? If prayer was wholly ineffective it would save me time and effort to give it up altogether. Why wouldn't I be interested in objectively proving its efficacy to myself, beyond doubt? Yes, I do apply "critical thinking" in evaluating spiritual or religious experiences. And I'm neither a mystic nor a believer in magic.

The New Testament scriptures instruct believers to "prove all things." And God, speaking in the first person in the Old Testament, challenges believers with the command, "Prove me." So that's what I've done, independently, privately, systematically and with meticulous attention to details. What you seem to not consider is that by taking a position like the disciple Thomas, who was a skeptic either by choice or by nature, you forever distance yourself from God, and from the possibility that he will prove himself privately to you, as well.

Thomas said, "Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe." He refused the eye-witness testimony of his fellow disciples: "I want PROOF!" he declared, the same demand you make; like you, he dismissed his fellows' testimonies because they could not offer proof; and the kind of proof you demand is even more difficult to provide. What kind of proof would truly convince you? How about a video of a man praying for such-and-such in scene 1, and in scene 2 the answer to his prayer being manifested. Would that suffice? Probably not. You would want him to repeat the same prayer over and over, and record the same fulfillment of that request over and over, because you apparently conceive of God as a genie in a brass lamp who indiscriminately grants wishes--or (more likely) who is altogether a figment of believers' imaginations.

The God depicted in scripture is not like that. He demands faith and patience. He demands obedience. He demands prayers that are fully in line with his will. That's a tall order that doesn't easily submit itself to scientific examination by skeptics. God takes pleasure in confounding those with worldly wisdom, Paul writes, by hiding things from them. His proofs are plain enough to those with whom he deals personally and privately; but to skeptics and doubters they are ridiculous. You have to step out of the role of skeptic before you can hope to experience God for yourself. Thomas was given an opportunity almost nobody else enjoys: and that means the rest of us are forced to rely first on the testimony of others, and only afterwards on the evidence we accumulate privately in our hearts and minds.