Evidence for God from Science

B. W. wrote:

Kenny wrote:[...Why not reveal himself to all with no strings attached?

God did, but their are folks like yourself who are around who deny the evidence and defend their stance on nothingness at all cost...

If evidence of God were as obvious as the Sun in the sky; who needs deniable evidence when you have facts? As far as nothingness, if nothingness is the idea that nothing exists, I doubt there is a person on Earth who defends that position, so I have no idea why you keep bringing it up.

B. W. wrote:[ What does atheism really have to offer Ken?
-

Atheism is a default position. It doesn't offer anything. What's the point of your question?

Ken

When I first imagined what it would be like if God's existence was obvious to everyone I thought he would be seen as the 'big boss', like the president of the universe; people would be approving of or complaining about the 'things God's doing these days'. I realised though that if we were all aware of God's love for us and his plan for humanity we really wouldn't have much choice about whether to trust him (really believe in him) or not; it would be crazy not to. Do we really need that freedom to choose though? I think maybe in the fact that we have to seek God he's saying that spiritual things are more important than the physical; choosing God and being prepared (unlike many people) to obey him and be refined through struggles is more important than everyone being saved. I hope that makes some sense...

Going back to the discussion about nothingness I had the feeling Kenny was saying he feels this life is complete and good in itself and he's not concerned if our consciousness totally ceases to exist at the end of it. Sometimes though that hope of a perfect life after death and a bigger plan for humanity is a huge help in our lives, when things are far from perfect here.

I like to simplify the cause thing by saying, 'nothing makes itself, so the universe could not have made itself.' Kenny said he thought it was possible that matter had always existed - I find that a little hard to get my head round though. Somehow it's easier to think of God always having existed - he's outside time and time only began once he had begun creation so maybe 'always' is not really the right word. It made me think of that slide-show someone posted a link to a while back regarding the timeline of creation with reference to the theory of relativity - amazing!

Kenny wrote:

B. W. wrote:Therefore human beings do make their own morals primarily based upon Epicurean thought - anything goes.

Many man made laws are based upon morality. When you look at the real world, does it seem most laws are based upon Epicurean thought? I don’t know what country you live in, but not in my country.

Human beings are more than capable of making their own laws as this link shows: History of Law Link This simply shows that none can really live by those laws for any length of time. Why is that?

Kenny wrote:

B. W. wrote:People always slide toward justifying an immoral form of morality no matter the evidence of the harm caused by bad behaviors. Alcoholism is one example, sexual deviance another,

In my country, alcoholism is vilified and seen as a disease that needs to be cured. Many types of sexual deviant behaviors are actually illegal.

What country do you live in Kenny? I live in the USA...

Kenny wrote:

B. W. wrote:Investigate Miley Cyrus to see further what I mean or ISIS for another different example. Human beings are not prone to create the 10 Commandments as there are too many things to worship rather than God, like self, philosophy, atheism, fornication in all forms, taking what belongs to others, etc and etc

You are aware Christianity is not the only religion that has a list of laws to follow; are you? Many religions have them. They may not be called commandments, and they may not be 10, but they are basically the same thing for their religion as the 10 commandments are for yours. Buddhism for example has the 5 Precepts.

What the others lack is this and it is the main stumbling point for you: You shall Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your mind, and all your strength.

With that in play, one can exercise the next part more readily: Love thy neighbor as yourself. On these, hang the entire law. What other ancient and modern civilizations do is make their own laws to enforce respecting each other by right of suing, discrimination cases, who gets what, etc...

This brings us to the point about Law - law proves - empirically proves, that all human beings miss the mark of love, as you do Kenny and do amply demonstrate here so far on this thread. You have no respect for God, or us, and your true tolerance is showing...

Christ love to you Ken is empirically shown here by permitting you a place to vent and state your case. God works through frail human beings too, Ken.

What caused the hate in your heart toward God, Ken, can you be really honest?

Kenny wrote:

B. W. wrote:For Aristotle one compares moral virtue with its opposite such as Courage is superior to fear and thus courage good. Modesty is superior to shame, etc and etc You also have three social virtues of amiability, sincerity, and wit that make life pleasant. Basically Aristotle basically goes down the Golden Rule and leaves out the part of loving God with all ones being

Since when did the Golden Rule have anything to do with loving God?

See the above for the answer...

Add to it this, God proved his love to us so we can love God. He took away the barrier of law and its strings so we can, by God's grace shown, return to him without strings. This manner of speech is foreign to those who hate God and have an ax to grind to show that they are superior and above God and can make their own rules to enforce their superiority

Kenny wrote:

B. W. wrote:and simply bases his ethics on doing unto others as you would have them do unto you as the bases of his ethics. Sound familiar?

Yes! That’s the Golden Rule. I believe Confucius was the first religious leader to state it on record; since then plenty of other religious leaders have quoted the Golden Rule on record as well; your Jesus included.

King Solomon became king and writer approximately in 967 BC and Confucius lived 551–479 BC. As you can see, there was ample time for Confucius to have read Solomon since ancient Israel was at the crux of a major trade route. What Confucius leaves out - you guessed it - is what you leave out too: You shall Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your mind, and all your strength.

The purpose of law is this, to lead us back to God's love for without him, we will only break any laws we make. How many traffic tickets - or lies do we justify to break any law while touting our adherence to law?

Only God's love can change the heart. Laws cannot.

Kenny wrote:

B. W. wrote:While we can create morality, we cannot maintain it because one man's virtue is another man's vice. Instead, you have a constant influx of conflict between good and evil. Evil derives pleasure of happiness being evil and good derives pleasure of happiness trying to be good. There is no solid foundation to base or guide what is absolutely right or wrong when God the creator is left out of the picture

Laws are the solid foundation created by mankind. They ain’t perfect but it’s the best we’ve got. With God in the picture, there is no solid foundation because nobody agrees on what God says and God doesn’t speak for himself but has others going around speaking for him.

This is a biggie for atheist and leaves out much while trying to make a point against God because people mess things up. All this shows is that there is a need for a savior to save us from ourselves. You need that savior too, Ken... There is a solid foundation, but however, you Ken, reject this solid foundation in exchange for your own mental superiority which in reality is defending nothingness.

Who are you, that any should listen to you?

Now let's apply that to this: Who is God, that any should listen to Him?

So God answers in silence. Human contempt shouts - prove yourself God! God's silence proves we need a savior to save us from this contempt and sent forth the means to die in our place to expose this contempt for what it really is, what it does, what it causes. That perhaps one will hear how loud the silence is and turn away from this contempt.

What you see Kenny in yourself and others is proof of the human condition called the Human sin nature. If that ability for not being perfect exist, so then is God, and his remedy to fix it. That, you and atheist miss, in exchange to live for nothing, defend nothing, and die for nothing.

Kenny wrote:

B. W. wrote:Actually, the ability to discern morality proves that human beings were designed to be moral beings morally accountable to God who teaches right from wrong. However, atheism rejects this and extols the virtue of nothingness as supreme. Nothingness as in non being. Very simply not existing. It's not a material nothing but a complete nothingness atheist defend.

Judging from your description; I doubt there is a person on Earth who fits your description of Atheism. Now what does that tell you?

It proves my point: Atheism defends nothingness with blind faith, just as you here are now doing and proving beyond all doubt.

When you die, atheism teaches one goes off into a non-being state of nothingness. That is true atheism. When you die, one becomes no more than a dead hunk of decaying meat that turns into dust on a planet that one day will whose sun will implode destroying all.

That is true atheism. Anything else, and any hint of atheist believing in a possible afterlife in any form is simply a form (or forms) of agnosticism...
-
-
-

Kenny wrote:

B. W. wrote:

Kenny wrote:[...Why not reveal himself to all with no strings attached?

God did, but their are folks like yourself who are around who deny the evidence and defend their stance on nothingness at all cost...

If evidence of God were as obvious as the Sun in the sky; who needs deniable evidence when you have facts? As far as nothingness, if nothingness is the idea that nothing exists, I doubt there is a person on Earth who defends that position, so I have no idea why you keep bringing it up.

B. W. wrote:[ What does atheism really have to offer Ken?
-

Atheism is a default position. It doesn't offer anything. What's the point of your question?

Ken

You stated this: Atheism is a default position. It doesn't offer anything. What's the point of your question?

If it does not offer anything, then, isn't that nothingness?
-
-
-

B.W.... gotta ask, does your life experience pre and post Christian and pre and post NDE just frustrate the heck out of you when in these discussions. I mean been there done that is the founding principle for old guys like us, that, in your instance, no one else I know has !

just wondering...

EssentialSacrifice wrote:B.W.... gotta ask, does your life experience pre and post Christian and pre and post NDE just frustrate the heck out of you when in these discussions. I mean been there done that is the founding principle for old guys like us, that, in your instance, no one else I know has !

just wondering...

No, not frustrating at all. In fact... it is more compassion and a willingness to to shout to those who were once like me who bounced into agnosticism and then into full blown militant atheism. I once believed that when you die you become no more than a dead hunk of meat that turns into dust. I tried to live by standards of goodness I derived but found myself breaking all the time as evidenced by how I treated others, myself, and my contempt of God.

Nowadays: My desire is simple, I don't care about myself. I want to see folks avoid standing before the living God, having their real self exposed, which is beyond all terror one can imagine - to see one's self as they really-really are, without one plea, excuse, no way out. Next, in hell, one's real nature is slowly exposed as recompense. I want all who will listen to simply avoid these two events at all hazards and have our lawyer, and doctor, Jesus Christ expunge the evidence of who and what we are really like from our eternal record and heal our broken hearts from the wounds of the past. In fact, the healing he infuses and setting us free from bondages, these alone are proof of God's healing love as well as of his existence without doubt. There is a transformation out of darkness into real light that occurs changing the heart that no human work can or could ever produce.

No, it is not frustrating - it is compassion...
-
-
-

No, it is not frustrating - it is compassion...

I understand this. My thoughts were more on the order of you've actually experienced the place, heard, smelled, touched, felt the agony... and I think if it were me, I would feel very compelled to do as you do and have done. To relay the experience so as to warn others of impending horror if you don't at least try and find the path to Jesus. You have the opportunity that Lazarus requested, of Abraham to let him go to his brothers and tell them of what awaits if changes in their lives were not made.

A number of people here on site have rejected your attempts to explain what awaits. It seemed to me that you, as one who actually experienced it, might be frustrated to a degree with another who simply will not take seriously that which is truly the most serious of all things and events in our life, our eternal wellness.

I am glad it is compassion. I am just as sure that is exactly how Jesus wants it. I wish for more compassion in all our life's experiences on our own and with those neighbors whom God loves every bit as much as he does any of us who believe. I hope for all.

Nicki wrote: Going back to the discussion about nothingness I had the feeling Kenny was saying he feels this life is complete and good in itself and he's not concerned if our consciousness totally ceases to exist at the end of it.

My understanding of nothingness is the idea that nothing exists. To look around and see other people, trees, myself, and everything else around me and claim it is nothing is absurd. Why someone would accuse me of promoting such a position is beyond me.

Nicki wrote:Sometimes though that hope of a perfect life after death and a bigger plan for humanity is a huge help in our lives, when things are far from perfect here.

To me, the idea of life after death is a contradiction in terms. IMO, to believe a person consists of a soul and a body, and upon death of the body the soul continues to live and is eventually fitted with a new body; that isn’t death; that’s going from one life to another! And if that second body never dies, that is the belief that you can live forever.
Now as awesome as that sounds, wishing it isn’t going to make it true. Even though fantasy is always more fun than reality; I’ll stick with reality.

Nicki wrote:I like to simplify the cause thing by saying, 'nothing makes itself, so the universe could not have made itself.' Kenny said he thought it was possible that matter had always existed - I find that a little hard to get my head round though.

I can respect that, even though it makes perfect sense to me.

Nicki wrote:Somehow it's easier to think of God always having existed - he's outside time and time only began once he had begun creation

Outside time? Now that’s difficult for me to wrap my head around. Does time have parameters? Does it start here and end there?

Ken

BW
Human beings are more than capable of making their own laws as this link shows: History of Law Link This simply shows that none can really live by those laws for any length of time. Why is that?

Ken
Most laws most people can live by.

BW
What the others lack is this and it is the main stumbling point for you: You shall Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your mind, and all your strength.

Ken
That isn’t a stumbling point, what’s important for your religion may not be all that important to another religion; or even myself

BW
law proves - empirically proves, that all human beings miss the mark of love, as you do Kenny

Ken
I do not miss my mark of love; that’s what matters to me.

BW
and do amply demonstrate here so far on this thread. You have no respect for God, or us, and your true tolerance is showing...
Christ love to you Ken is empirically shown here by permitting you a place to vent and state your case. God works through frail human beings too, Ken.
What caused the hate in your heart toward God, Ken, can you be really honest?

Ken
Such an absurd accusation is not worth a response so I will ignore it.

BW
Who are you, that any should listen to you?
Ken
I am a man just like you. So why should I listen to you?

BW
Now let's apply that to this: Who is God, that any should listen to Him?
Ken
I’ve never heard God; all I ever hear are people claiming to speak for God. So who are you to claim to speak for God and expect to be taken seriously?
BW
So God answers in silence. Human contempt shouts - prove yourself God! God's silence proves we need a savior to save us from this contempt and sent forth the means to die in our place to expose this contempt for what it really is, what it does, what it causes. That perhaps one will hear how loud the silence is and turn away from this contempt.
Ken
Silence and the non-existent sound the same to me.

Ken

B. W. wrote:

Kenny wrote:

B. W. wrote:

Kenny wrote:[...Why not reveal himself to all with no strings attached?

God did, but their are folks like yourself who are around who deny the evidence and defend their stance on nothingness at all cost...

If evidence of God were as obvious as the Sun in the sky; who needs deniable evidence when you have facts? As far as nothingness, if nothingness is the idea that nothing exists, I doubt there is a person on Earth who defends that position, so I have no idea why you keep bringing it up.

B. W. wrote:[ What does atheism really have to offer Ken?
-

Atheism is a default position. It doesn't offer anything. What's the point of your question?

Ken

You stated this: Atheism is a default position. It doesn't offer anything. What's the point of your question?

If it does not offer anything, then, isn't that nothingness?
-
-
-

No. Nothingness is the absurd idea that nothing exists. To not be offered something is to not be bribed.

Ken

Kenny wrote:

Kurieuo wrote: So then, to go through a list of issues I'd perceive you having against God's "hiding" if you will.
Purely for just interests sake.

You: Why doesn't God dwell amongst us in plain sight like the Sun?
Me: Why should God dwell amongst us?
You: Well, if God wants us to all believe, then that would do it!

I'd agree with you. It is in fact stupid of God, if God wants us to merely believe He exists, that God doesn't make Himself as clear as the Sun.

BUT, let's look at some points between a world wherein God is clearly known like the Sun versus a world like ours where a knowledge of God can be buried and hidden.

1) The two worlds setup a quite different relationship between us and God, in particular, our personal freedom to accept/deny God is greatly affected.

When you say the freedom to accept/deny, do you mean the existence of? or the freedom to ignore? Because I don’t have the freedom to deny the existence of my parents, the Sun, or even you yet I don’t feel any loss of freedom.

First up, I'm not really making an argument that I can see.
I just notice your barriers seemed raised right up in your response, not wanting to give any inch.
BUT, then I can understand that you are also responding to others here and such exchanges aren't as congenial, so there is perhaps some spillage.

In any case, in response to your questions above, I'm simply exploring differences between World A and World B.
With that I guess we can agree/disagree on certain points... it doesn't matter too much.

So then, what are some differences between World G (wherein God dwells within in as plain as the Sun) and World H (wherein God doesn't as evidently dwell and so knowledge of God can be H]idden i.e., a world like ours).

Once we know those differences, then for arguments sake assuming God exists, we might be able to understand a little why God would created a world like ours wherein people can bury knowledge of God and hide.
Right? So then that's all I was putting my minds to. No argument intended.

In any case, I think you make some responses back to my own numbered thoughts that I previously offered.

It seems evident to me that in comparing World G to World H (as defined here above) that is it much easier to deny God more fully in World H.
Indeed, in Atheistic terms, that is the argument they make of a world like ours (World H) when they ask "Why doesn't God show Himself and make Himself known."

So I really never expected this difference to be debated.
Clearly, if God created World H then obviously He is giving more freedom to His creatures (us) in denying Him than in World G.
Right?

Ken wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:2) In a world where God dwells with us, would we also live forever in such a world? (what would be the point of making it temporary?)

No; we don’t live forever now! why would it need to be eternal if God’s existence were empirically observable? The point of making it temporary would be the same point of it currently being temporarily.

I suppose we wouldn't need to live forever if God dwelt with us as clear as the Sun.
You say, "The point of making it temporary would be the same point of it currently being temporary" -- but what is that point to you?

In World G wherein God is evident there is no real point to making it temporary that I'd see.
That is, the same "point" in World H couldn't be served in World G as I see matters.

Ken wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:3) On (2), what of pain and suffering if this world be made forever? Tools that form true character.

Let’s assume the world is not forever.

Ok.

Ken wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:4) Extending (3), should God also give us complete happiness, spoil us, give us every pleasure?

He doesn’t do it now; why if his existence were empirically observed?

I guess it comes back to the "point" of it all.
If God is with us, then His kingdom is too.
I think that a lot of "points" (purposes) found in World H become either greatly dulled and void in World G.

Ken wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:5) Could we seriously reject God in such a world wherein He exists as the Sun.

Of course we could! Just as I have the option to reject my parents.

So say you lived in medieval times.

You come before a king to plead for something.
If he raises his hand, you can remain and say your words.
If he lowers his hand, you might be beheaded.

This situation, is one of sovereignty.
The king is a royal sovereign, and you are lowly peasant.
You would likely hold your king with awesome fear, respect and reverence.
Since he obviously holds such power and sway over your life or death.

Do you seriously believe you could as freely reject your king as you could your parents?
How much more the Creator who holds the balance not just of your life, but existence of everything.
Seriously now -- you'd have the same option to reject? You'd remain physically and psychologically uninfluenced?

Turning to the text recorded by Israel's scribes and words passed on by the Apostles,
a mere encounter with an angel naturally seems to causes people to fall down due to their awesome presence.
Paul went blind in his apparent encounter with Christ, and until such a time persecuted Christians and condoned their killing (Acts 22:20).
Moses' face apparently lit up like the Sun and he had to wear a veil.

Yes, I suppose God could tone His awesome majesty down so as to be more acceptable to us.
The question is how much so. The more God tones down His raw awesomeness, the closer we get to World H.
Should God dwell with us in human form when hiding His majesty so-as to not frighten or negatively affect us?

Ken wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:Should we be able to hide from God?

Can you hide from him now?

Yes. My denial of God has no immediate life/death repercussion.

Ken wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:Now if God made himself known in the world, there would also be a reverse of the question: "How can I accept God if God doesn't make Himself positively known" --
-- this question would become "How can I reject God if He forces Himself onto my life in the world."

Now how did we get from “empirical evidence of his existence” to “FORCED into my life”? I must have missed something.

Hopefully my previous words here provide a bit more clarity on my reflections.

Ken wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:In summary, we can clearly see many things would be different in our relationship with God, indeed even in the world, if God decided to live along side us as clear as the Sun.


The question then is, which one would we expect a divine entity (God) to choose?
Obviously it depends upon God's intentions and purpose in the world that God creates, right?

It seems a world wherein God allows us to hide, and bury knowledge of Him, is the best world to uncover our true heart.

I’m not getting this “hide and bury knowledge” thing you're getting at. how is it possible to hide from a God that knows everything? And how does one bury knowledge?

If God created us, then we likely have a built-in knowledge of God.
We bare His image of what is good and proper, even if such a moral compass becomes ruined through selfishness, greed and pleasures.

In fact, morality is probably a good example.
How does one bury knowledge of what is right and wrong?
It has been said, that even mobsters consider themselves moral -- that they're the "good guys".
And yet, they carry out some quite horrible acts.

Why was Hitler morally wrong to order the extermination of Jews?
Why is it wrong to freely rape and kill others for your own pleasure or gain?
Well... it may be wrong by and large as seen by us, but one can bury that through their own justifications.

Ken wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:Those who love, will seek and God (according to Christ and the Apostles) promises to reveal Himself to us.

Why not reveal himself to all with no strings attached?

I really don't see any strings attached.

I'm just going to quote Paul's words here in Romans 1:18-25 although you will reject it outright.

• 18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22Professing to be wise, they became fools,23and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
  
  24Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

Ken wrote:It’s getting late, I will respond to the rest later

Hope you had a good sleep!

Kenny wrote:Atheism is a default position.

While not aimed at me, and I could be misunderstanding your words in the context you used them,
but Atheism isn't a default position.

Kuriuo
So then, what are some differences between World G (wherein God dwells within in as plain as the Sun) and World H (wherein God doesn't as evidently dwell and so knowledge of God can be H]idden i.e., a world like ours).

Once we know those differences, then for arguments sake assuming God exists, we might be able to understand a little why God would created a world like ours wherein people can bury knowledge of God and hide.
Right? So then that's all I was putting my minds to. No argument intended.

Ken
Okay I think I’ve got it. Hidden is like now where his existence isn’t empirically obvious; like now.

As far as the differences between the 2 worlds; if God’s existence were obvious like the existence of the Sun, I think everybody would worship the same God and all the religious hatred would cease to exist, and the world would be a bit more peaceful than it is right now. People would still find a reason to hate; they just wouldn’t hate over religion.
If God’s existence were as obvious as the Sun and he kept in constant contact with his creation; I feel there would be less confusion, over God’s message and religious denominations and sects would not exist because any confusion could be settled at the source. Atheism would not even be a word, cults wouldn’t exist, and the powerful people would not dare try to use religion to their advantage

Kuriuo
Clearly, if God created World H then obviously He is giving more freedom to His creatures (us) in denying Him than in World G.
Right?

Ken
You see this is what I am not getting. Why do you feel the option of ignorance is more freedom than knowledge?

Kuriuo
I suppose we wouldn't need to live forever if God dwelt with us as clear as the Sun.
You say, "The point of making it temporary would be the same point of it currently being temporary" -- but what is that point to you?

In World G wherein God is evident there is no real point to making it temporary that I'd see.
That is, the same "point" in World H couldn't be served in World G as I see matters

Ken
I don’t see a real point in making either world; "G" or "H" temporary. Why not do it right the first time and keep it that way?

Kuriuo
I guess it comes back to the "point" of it all.
If God is with us, then His kingdom is too.
I think that a lot of "points" (purposes) found in World H become either greatly dulled and void in World G

Ken
If God’s existence were obvious, his Kingdom can still be out of our reach; like a distant star.

Kuriuo
So say you lived in medieval times.

You come before a king to plead for something.
If he raises his hand, you can remain and say your words.
If he lowers his hand, you might be beheaded.

This situation, is one of sovereignty.
The king is a royal sovereign, and you are lowly peasant.
You would likely hold your king with awesome fear, respect and reverence.
Since he obviously holds such power and sway over your life or death.

Ken
Any monster who would end my life (or anybody else's) without a second thought; might have my obedience, but he could never have my respect.

Kuriuo
Do you seriously believe you could as freely reject your king as you could your parents?

Ken
I love and respect for my parents; such a monster I would hate.

Kuriuo
How much more the Creator who holds the balance not just of your life, but existence of everything.
Seriously now -- you'd have the same option to reject? You'd remain physically and psychologically uninfluenced?

Ken
Let’s just say….. he would have my obedience; and we’ll leave it at that.

Kuriuo
Turning to the text recorded by Israel's scribes and words passed on by the Apostles,
a mere encounter with an angel naturally seems to causes people to fall down due to their awesome presence.
Paul went blind in his apparent encounter with Christ, and until such a time persecuted Christians and condoned their killing (Acts 22:20).
Moses' face apparently lit up like the Sun and he had to wear a veil.

Yes, I suppose God could tone His awesome majesty down so as to be more acceptable to us.
The question is how much so. The more God tones down His raw awesomeness, the closer we get to World H.
Should God dwell with us in human form when hiding His majesty so-as to not frighten or negatively affect us?

Ken
When God walked in the Garden with Adam, his presence didn’t cause him any harm then, don’t cha think he could do it now?

Kuriuo
Yes. My denial of God has no immediate life/death repercussion.

Ken
So you equate hiding from God with denying God? Thanks for clearing that up for me.

Kuriuo
If God created us, then we likely have a built-in knowledge of God.
We bare His image of what is good and proper, even if such a moral compass becomes ruined through selfishness, greed and pleasures.

In fact, morality is probably a good example.
How does one bury knowledge of what is right and wrong?
It has been said, that even mobsters consider themselves moral -- that they're the "good guys".
And yet, they carry out some quite horrible acts.

Why was Hitler morally wrong to order the extermination of Jews?
Why is it wrong to freely rape and kill others for your own pleasure or gain?
Well... it may be wrong by and large as seen by us, but one can bury that through their own justifications.

Ken
So to “bury knowledge” is to justify bad behavior? Thanks for clearing that up for me. To respond to the original point, In world “G” we would still be able to “bury knowledge” (AKA justify bad behavior) as long as he allowed us freewill; don't cha think?

Ken

I'm not sure how to respond back.
Some points are clearly not coming through, and, I'm also feeling that you are quite defensive.
I'm not sure why as there's no argument being made -- not by me.

In any case, I can think of many reasons why God created this world as He did.
You want God to show himself physically. I believe God did, on his own terms.
God isn't out to prove He exists. Nor am I out to do that to those who don't want to believe.

I tend to agree with CS Lewis who stated in The Great Divorce,

• "There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, in the end, "Thy will be done." All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell. No soul that seriously and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek find. Those who knock it is opened."

And re-reading your words Ken, this appears to fit you perfectly.
You cannot see God in a positive light, why is that? What happened in your life that was so bad.
God's sovereignty, His being rightful Lord over all creation appears to be seen by you as something tyrannical.
I'm guessing it is because you ultimately disagree with how God did things, if He truly exists. Therefore God is unfair, unjust, unloving, vindictive, etc.

Do you ever ask yourself why are you here? Seriously.

In any case, another time Ken.

Kurieuo wrote:I'm not sure how to respond back.
Some points are clearly not coming through, and, I'm also feeling that you are quite defensive.
I'm not sure why as there's no argument being made -- not by me.

In any case, I can think of many reasons why God created this world as He did.
You want God to show himself physically. I believe God did, on his own terms.
God isn't out to prove He exists. Nor am I out to do that to those who don't want to believe.

I tend to agree with CS Lewis who stated in The Great Divorce,

• "There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, in the end, "Thy will be done." All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell. No soul that seriously and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek find. Those who knock it is opened."

And re-reading your words Ken, this appears to fit you perfectly.
You cannot see God in a positive light, why is that? What happened in your life that was so bad.
God's sovereignty, His being rightful Lord over all creation appears to be seen by you as something tyrannical.
I'm guessing it is because you ultimately disagree with how God did things, if He truly exists. Therefore God is unfair, unjust, unloving, vindictive, etc.

Do you ever ask yourself why are you here? Seriously.

In any case, another time Ken.

It was not my intention to come across as defensive. My intent was just to answer the questions you asked. If I chose my words wrong and they came across in a hostile manner; that was not my intention and sorry if it appeared that way

Peace
Ken