Why does god withhold evidence?

[Ringer]

Why does he discriminate and not provide everyone with their own form of "ample evidence"?

If you talk to most Christians, they will tell you that God has provided enough evidence that people should believe. I can't answer why God doesn't come down to us when we are drinking our morning coffee and say, "Hey...just wanted to stop in and see what's up. Oh, is that Starbucks Premium Roast? Mind if I have a cup? No, no that's ok....I take mine black thanks. Well I better run. Just wanted to let you know I'm around." But, as we can tell from scripture, doubt isn't unexpected. We are dependent upon God to remove the blindness and irrationality caused by sin and to enable to look at the evidence as it was meant to be looked at. Many won't ask that though and regardless of what me or anybody tells them, they will go through their whole lives denying they have enough evidence to believe in God. To believe in God means they will be required to live a life that will make them accountable for their actions.

2 Corinthians 4:4
4The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

1 Corinthians 1:20-24
20Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.

1 Corinthians 2:4 & 5
4My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit's power, 5so that your faith might not rest on men's wisdom, but on God's power.

Are you sick of my scripture quoting yet?

 

[lilithu]

If the god of the bible exsist, why does he not provide everyone with the evidence they require in order to accept his actuality? ... If it is god's primary desire that we all come to know him, come to love him and come to be with him in paradise, why does he not make his presence incontrovertibly apparent to everyone?

God does it all just to tick you off, logdog. Every little thing that you think God does that is irrational or unfair, God does just to annoy you.

 

[LogDog]

No, I think he'd rather have you search him out than just deny His existence, and whine about Him at the same time. I have been provided with the exact same evidence that you have and I didn't need "aid" (meet Him face to face, or even show himself in physical form to me). I was given the evidence, I searched for a long time, and found God to be a truth. It took work, and the work made me who I am, and I am a better person from all the searching. God wants you to seek knowledge. You want God to pander to skeptical nature by showing Himself to you, or give give you some concrete evidence of His existence which you could swallow. The question is, would you then believe?

If your god were to pander to my skeptical nature and reveal himself to me, yes, I'd believe. I'd also be scared s***less.

I have found in a lot of atheists (not all, I repeat, NOT ALL) that the general viewpoint on God is this:

1) God does not exist
2) I hate Him

Interesting. But are you sure it's not more like 1) God does not exist. 2) I hate the idea of him (god). To say "I hate him" would mean acknowledging the actuality of a god.

P.S. What does hell have anything to do with knowing whether God exists or not?

Consider for a moment that god is witholding evidence of his existence from the skeptic who would accept the evidence and the actuality of god if it were presented to him. Because god chooses not to adequately reveal himself to the skeptic, the skeptic does not believe. Since he does not believe, many xtians (not all) are convinced that his "soul" will be condemned to an eternity of torment (hell). What I'm getting at is that if "god is love" why would he not give aid to his skeptical creation, adequately reveal himself and prevent a "soul" from being subjected to such a fate.

 

[matthew.william]

If your god were to pander to my skeptical nature and reveal himself to me, yes, I'd believe. I'd also be scared s***less.

In my view, He has revealed Himself to us. I think those who don't are uncomfortable with the idea of God and would rather not search into that possibility. He won't force you into believing in His existence, and if you don't want to search for Him, He won't pester you.

Now, you are familiar with the concept of hell, correct? Some form of punishment will fall on those who disbelieve. God does not send people to hell, people send themselves to hell. You are fully aware of the two end destinations. You don't want to seek God, or any idea of Him at all, even when you are aware of the end if you are incorrect. If you do not wish to seek God, and He can't make you, you are making a willful choice to live a life apart from God. Your decision carries on to your next life. If in this life you hated God, why would you want to spend eternity with Him later?

Now you could retort with, "But why didn't God make it proof-positive of His existence for me?" But again I would have to say that the evidence is there, at least enough for the majority of the world to believe, but the problem for you is you have decided before seeing the evidence that you don't want it to be true, or you don't really wish to seek it out.

Interesting. But are you sure it's not more like 1) God does not exist. 2) I hate the idea of him (god). To say "I hate him" would mean acknowledging the actuality of a god.

That's like me saying I hate the idea of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I don't believe he exists but his stance on bow-tie pasta is unjust. Besides, hating the idea of something that can't be proven to exist empirically is much in the same as just "I hate Him".

Consider for a moment that god is witholding evidence of his existence from the skeptic who would accept the evidence and the actuality of god if it were presented to him. Because god chooses not to adequately reveal himself to the skeptic, the skeptic does not believe. Since he does not believe, many xtians (not all) are convinced that his "soul" will be condemned to an eternity of torment (hell). What I'm getting at is that if "god is love" why would he not give aid to his skeptical creation, adequately reveal himself and prevent a "soul" from being subjected to such a fate.

The problem is that a skeptic could be presented evidence, but by his nature explain it away into something else. I believe there is a fantastical amount of evidence for those who truly wish to seek God. If you don't like the idea of God or what He's about, He's certainly not going to pester you, or pop up at your door everyday until you believe.

There is evidence of God if one wishes to seek God, and God won't just show up if you hate Him (or the idea of Him ). Now if you seek God, along the way, you gain knowledge, and a deeper appreciation for the things he has done, and you understand His character more and more. Instead of Him just showing up and saying, "Hello, I'm God", we must search out the details and grow in knowledge.

Here's a way to look at it, if one wishes. Let's say you are a scientist. You are going to hypothesize that you can figure out how to build a time machine. In the course of research you find out the solutions to several other problems outside the field of time travel.You cured cancer, found a way to curve space, etc. When you are done and have the time machine built, you know it from top to bottom. You know all the wires, and screws and flux capacitors by heart.

Now, let's say you are a scientist who doesn't believe time travel is possible. The idea of it is stupid. One day you walk into your office, and there is a time machine just waiting for you. "Hmm, I guess I was wrong. Neat." You don't know how it works, and you certainly didn't learn anything else about the world or time travel with no actual research. It just showed up.

Which is more beneficial?

~matthew.william~

 

[Wandered Off]

If you do not wish to seek God, and He can't make you, you are making a willful choice to live a life apart from God. Your decision carries on to your next life. If in this life you hated God, why would you want to spend eternity with Him later?

Why wouldn't you, if you were suddenly certain of God's existence? We are dynamic beings. I used to really like some things I no longer do. Do you think it makes sense to hold us irrevocably and eternally to decisions we were forced to make on faith during this tiny existence? What if someone asked you what your favorite food was when you were four, and then never let you eat anything else? At four, we didn't have adequate information or perspective to make a decision with such tremendous consequences. Sure, whoever held you to that decision gave you free will, but because you were not equipped to properly handle it, it was cruelty.

Then there's the notion that we are getting punished for a choice we didn't know we had to make. It's not as if most people are saying, "Sure, I believe in God and how wonderful God is, but no thanks, I'd rather just spend eternity suffering."

It's impossible to make a coherent case that God respects our free will if God provides uncertain evidence of any decision much less God's existence then holds us eternally and irrevocably accountable for that decision. Someone who respects free will would lay out the choices and consequences clearly and with certainty - especially if the consequences were that drastic. With those consequences, allowing conflicting and false information to be given with the same amount of evidence is unconscionable. This simply can't be how a benevolent God would work.

 

[LogDog]

In my view, He has revealed Himself to us. I think those who don't are uncomfortable with the idea of God and would rather not search into that possibility. He won't force you into believing in His existence, and if you don't want to search for Him, He won't pester you.

I'm uncomfortable with the idea of the god depicted in the bible and would tend to avoid him rather than seek him out. But consider the possibility that a skeptic, presented with satisfactory evidence, could change his mind and accepts god's salvation, is it your position that even though "god is love", eternal torment is a just consequence for such an individual? God doesn't provide the skeptic with the evidence he craves but will provide him with an eternity of torment for not being able to set aside the skepticism god gave him in the first place. Sounds like love to me.

Now, you are familiar with the concept of hell, correct? Some form of punishment will fall on those who disbelieve. God does not send people to hell, people send themselves to hell. You are fully aware of the two end destinations. You don't want to seek God, or any idea of Him at all, even when you are aware of the end if you are incorrect. If you do not wish to seek God, and He can't make you, you are making a willful choice to live a life apart from God. Your decision carries on to your next life.

Sounds a bit like Pascal's Wager. Was that your intent?

If in this life you hated God, why would you want to spend eternity with Him later?

I'd be able to decide if I truly hated god and didn't want to spend an eternity with him if I first, knew he existed, and second, knew he was the kind of guy I'd want to hang with forever and ever and ever and ever...

Now you could retort with, "But why didn't God make it proof-positive of His existence for me?" But again I would have to say that the evidence is there, at least enough for the majority of the world to believe, but the problem for you is you have decided before seeing the evidence that you don't want it to be true, or you don't really wish to seek it out.

What I call fabrications of wishful thinking, you and "the majority of the world" call "evidence". This IMHO is delusional. If the god of the bible is real, he should make himself known to everyone. That said, if he's anything like the character depicted in its pages, I'd want nothing to do with him and certainly wouldn't waste my energy seeking him out.

That's like me saying I hate the idea of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I don't believe he exists but his stance on bow-tie pasta is unjust.

What's so wrong about the above phrasing?

Besides, hating the idea of something that can't be proven to exist empirically is much in the same as just "I hate Him".

I disagree and will leave it at that.

The problem is that a skeptic could be presented evidence, but by his nature explain it away into something else.

You assume. And maybe if god hadn't created him with such a skeptical nature, things would be different.

I believe there is a fantastical amount of evidence for those who truly wish to seek God. If you don't like the idea of God or what He's about, He's certainly not going to pester you, or pop up at your door everyday until you believe.

There may be a fantastic amount of fabricated claims based on wishful thinking for those who truly want there to be a god to call "evidence", but none of it has convinced my skeptical mind which I'm told your alleged god has blessed me with.

There is evidence of God if one wishes to seek God, and God won't just show up if you hate Him (or the idea of Him ). Now if you seek God, along the way, you gain knowledge, and a deeper appreciation for the things he has done, and you understand His character more and more. Instead of Him just showing up and saying, "Hello, I'm God", we must search out the details and grow in knowledge.

Your god sure seems to like being mysterious and ellusive. This apparent characteristic plays into your argument quite convienently.

Here's a way to look at it, if one wishes. Let's say you are a scientist. You are going to hypothesize that you can figure out how to build a time machine. In the course of research you find out the solutions to several other problems outside the field of time travel.You cured cancer, found a way to curve space, etc. When you are done and have the time machine built, you know it from top to bottom. You know all the wires, and screws and flux capacitors by heart.

Okay.

Now, let's say you are a scientist who doesn't believe time travel is possible. The idea of it is stupid. One day you walk into your office, and there is a time machine just waiting for you. "Hmm, I guess I was wrong. Neat." You don't know how it works, and you certainly didn't learn anything else about the world or time travel with no actual research. It just showed up.

Which is more beneficial?

Sort of depends on what the scientist who didn't believe it to be possible accomplished with the time he didn't spend exploring the matter.

 

[Storm]

Logdog, I have to ask, why do you focus so much on (what's wrong with) Abrahamic theism? If you reject it, I understand (I do as well), but why not just move on? Do you reject all God-belief due to the flaws of this one form? Is your knowledge of theology limited to Abrahamism? If so, how can you honestly call yourself an atheist, being so extremely and falsely limited in your options? If not, why do you limit your discussions to Abrahamism?

I just don't understand atheists who reject the concept of God based on a single theology, or those who feel the need to attack belief wherever they find it.

 

[ayani]

If the god of the bible exsist, why does he not provide everyone with the evidence they require in order to accept his actuality? Why is it fair for god to hold nonbelievers "accountable" for refusing to accept his reality when he has the ability to present them with the evidence they need to be convinced? If it is god's primary desire that we all come to know him, come to love him and come to be with him in paradise, why does he not make his presence incontrovertibly apparent to everyone? Is it not the case that god withholds evidence that would cause some people to believe that he exists?

LogDog-

i can only answer you from my own spiritual perspetive, which does not follow to the letter many of the ideas and doctrines put forth by the Bible.

i do not believe that God witholds evidence of Himself at all- rather i believe that He reveals His will through the messages expounding on love and piety that He has sent and continues to send. the teachings of Jesus, the Buddha, and Baha'u'llah come closest to what i envision here.

my own faith is based upon contemplative prayer- and in one aspect asks not that we may rationalize suffering, but respond to it with both reason and compassion. neither does my faith ask me to condemn those who lack compassion, but to pray for them and seek to correct them where they lack. holiness starts with ourselves, not with uselessly griping about the state of the word.

 

[Super Universe]

matthew 5;5
Happy are the mild-tempered ones, since they will inherit the earth.

But the meek ones themselves will possess the earth,​

And they will indeed find their exquisite delight in the abundance of peace. psalm 37;11
(Isaiah 45:18) For this is what Jehovah has said, the Creator of the heavens, He the [true] God, the Former of the earth and the Maker of it, He the One who firmly established it, who did not create it simply for nothing, who formed it even to be inhabited: "I am Jehovah, and there is no one else.
(Revelation 21:3) With that I heard a loud voice from the throne say: "Look! The tent of God is with mankind, and he will reside with them, and they will be his peoples. And God himself will be with them.

Yes, I know all this May but you are looking at this passage with a very small view. Widen it a great deal, then double it further.

The meek will inherit the earth because all people will evolve and stop creating unnecessary drama. The sons and daughters of our sons and daughters will live much more meek and humble lives, the earth will be more of a paradise than it already is but still it will never replace heaven.

We're not meant to live forever on the earth.

 

[may]

Is it your position that the bible itself is not manmade?

the original were inspired of God , but translators have clouded the thoughts of God because of manmade doctrine . but no worries the true knowledge has become abundant DANIEL 12;4
Read the Bible Online

 

[may]

We're not meant to live forever on the earth.

IS THIS life all there is? By encouraging us to "get a firm hold on the real life," the Bible indicates that there is more. (1 Timothy 6:17-19) If our present life is not the real life, what is?
The context of the foregoing scripture shows that it is "everlasting life" on which a God-fearing person should get a firm hold. (1 Timothy 6:12) For the vast majority, this means everlasting life on earth. Adam, the first man, had the prospect of living forever on a paradise earth. (Genesis 1:26, 27) He would die only if he ate from "the tree of the knowledge of good and bad." (Genesis 2:17) But because Adam and his wife, Eve, disobediently ate from that tree, God pronounced the death sentence. ‘In the day they ate from it,’ they died in God’s eyes and began their tumble into physical death. Their life was no longer of the quality that they had enjoyed at first.​

The

Way to "the Real Life"​

In order to make "the real life" possible, Jehovah God made an arrangement to rescue mankind. To help us understand this arrangement, let us imagine a small factory. All the machines in it are faulty and cause trouble for the operators because the first worker years ago ignored the operator’s manual and damaged all the machines. Present-day operators can only do their best to work with what they have. The factory owner wants to rebuild the machines to help his workers, and he is setting aside the funds necessary for that purpose.​

The first ‘machine operator,’ Adam, did not treasure the life he had been given. Hence, he passed on to his offspring an imperfect life, similar to a malfunctioning machine. (Romans 5:12) Like the later operators in the factory, who could not remedy the situation, Adam’s offspring have been unable to attain the real life for themselves. (Psalm 49:7) To correct this seemingly hopeless situation, Jehovah sent his only-begotten Son to earth to buy back everlasting life for mankind. (Luke 1:35; 1 Peter 1:18, 19) By dying a sacrificial death for the sake of mankind, God’s only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ, provided the funds—the life that corresponds to the one Adam lost. (Matthew 20:28; 1 Peter 2:22) With this precious sacrifice, Jehovah now has the basis for providing the real life............. And yes it will be on the earth , man was made for the earth, and it was Gods original purpose for man to live forever on a paradise earth . and that purpose has not changed .
For obedient mankind, Jesus’ ransom sacrifice will mean life eternal on a paradise earth. (Psalm 37:29)
Jesus taught that for a "little flock," salvation means their being resurrected to heavenly life to share with Christ in Kingdom rule. (Luke 12:32) For the rest of mankind, salvation means a restoration to the perfect life and relationship with God that Adam and Eve enjoyed in the garden of Eden before they sinned. (Acts 3:21; Ephesians 1:10) Everlasting life under such paradisaic conditions was God’s original purpose for mankind. (Genesis 1:28; Mark 10:30)

​

​