Steve had a unbeliever, I believe his name was Chris, on the show. He brought up the hiddeness of God. Why doesn't God speak to us, tenderly, daily? If we really do have "free will" would not more evidence accomplish more conversions? The Calvinist on the other hand, does not have this problem - since God will regenrate the elect, and more proofs, in the end, would not be necessary.
Thoughts?
The Hiddeness Of God
The Hiddeness Of God
Thanks to the human heart by which we live, thanks to its tenderness, its joys, and fears, To me the meanest flower that blows can give thoughts that do often lie too deep for tears. Wordsworth
-
darinhouston
- Posts: 3114
- Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am
Re: The Hiddeness Of God
No time to post just now, but this article comes to mind to fuel the fire of the discussion...
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/god5.htm
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/god5.htm
Re: The Hiddeness Of God
Darin, that is a pretty effective attack on the Christian position. Most Christians don't understand how powerful the argument is... And it does bear on the subject, the hiddeness of God.
Thanks to the human heart by which we live, thanks to its tenderness, its joys, and fears, To me the meanest flower that blows can give thoughts that do often lie too deep for tears. Wordsworth
Re: The Hiddeness Of God
Jim, I see one rather obvious point that could be made to counter this argument. I'll use myself as the example. I'm a believer in Christ and yet I've never experienced a miraculous healing or even witnessed one of which I'm aware. I've never seen the face of God or anything that would be considered a miracle. And I didn't grow up in a Christian home. Yet I'm a believer.
So what accounts for my belief? I believe the Holy Spirit draws open minded people to be persuaded by the same evidence that's available to anyone willing to look at it. This includes the accuracy and detail contained in the OT prophets (particularly Isaiah and Daniel) and using deductive reasoning which simply means going from the general (does God exist?) to the specific (has God revealed himself?).
Of course it's difficult to argue this way because it sounds rather arrogant to point to oneself as a case for open mindedness while scoffing at those not willing to concede the point after examining the same evidence. But this is where I feel the Holy Spirit convicts each man's heart. It's circular reasoning to an extent but I've found no better argument for or against my position. For example, although my argument is circular, so is the argument that the evidence is lacking. Lacking to whom? Of course, the skeptic would say, to the open minded.
This may seem like the skeptic and the believer have hit an impasse but I disagree. It's easy to demonstrate that an open minded individual thinks "there may or may not be a God" while the close minded is the one who limits the choice to "there is no God."
Of course, the man who calls Steve's show (Chris from Portland, I think) is more agnostic from what I gather. He's one who feels the evidence lacking. I'd say either he hasn't examined all the evidence or his preference is to believe something else. Our general disposition colors how we view evidence (the pure in heart shall see God).
Steve, or another caller, brought up a good point relating to Chris' objection. If God pulled open the heavens and said "Hey, it's me... God! Check me out!" then only those of this generation would consider that evidence. So it would seem God would have to do this act every generation and even then, how does one prove it's not mass delusion? You can never satisfy a skeptic who has not been persuaded by the Holy Spirit.
So what accounts for my belief? I believe the Holy Spirit draws open minded people to be persuaded by the same evidence that's available to anyone willing to look at it. This includes the accuracy and detail contained in the OT prophets (particularly Isaiah and Daniel) and using deductive reasoning which simply means going from the general (does God exist?) to the specific (has God revealed himself?).
Of course it's difficult to argue this way because it sounds rather arrogant to point to oneself as a case for open mindedness while scoffing at those not willing to concede the point after examining the same evidence. But this is where I feel the Holy Spirit convicts each man's heart. It's circular reasoning to an extent but I've found no better argument for or against my position. For example, although my argument is circular, so is the argument that the evidence is lacking. Lacking to whom? Of course, the skeptic would say, to the open minded.
This may seem like the skeptic and the believer have hit an impasse but I disagree. It's easy to demonstrate that an open minded individual thinks "there may or may not be a God" while the close minded is the one who limits the choice to "there is no God."
Of course, the man who calls Steve's show (Chris from Portland, I think) is more agnostic from what I gather. He's one who feels the evidence lacking. I'd say either he hasn't examined all the evidence or his preference is to believe something else. Our general disposition colors how we view evidence (the pure in heart shall see God).
Steve, or another caller, brought up a good point relating to Chris' objection. If God pulled open the heavens and said "Hey, it's me... God! Check me out!" then only those of this generation would consider that evidence. So it would seem God would have to do this act every generation and even then, how does one prove it's not mass delusion? You can never satisfy a skeptic who has not been persuaded by the Holy Spirit.
Re: The Hiddeness Of God
I genearlly agree Jason, but if God spoke tenderly to all men, through each generation, would not more be saved? Yes many would still discount that on going revelation, but many or most may not. I can't but assume that the number of saved would increase greatly... Given the the assumption of libertarian free will, and the assumption that God desires all men to be saved.
Thanks to the human heart by which we live, thanks to its tenderness, its joys, and fears, To me the meanest flower that blows can give thoughts that do often lie too deep for tears. Wordsworth
Re: The Hiddeness Of God
Hi Jim,
Another case of a Calvinist underestimating the depravity of man. :-)
Another case of a Calvinist underestimating the depravity of man. :-)
Re: The Hiddeness Of God
I guess it was the arminan coming out in me... Old habits are hard to break...steve wrote:Hi Jim,
Another case of a Calvinist underestimating the depravity of man.
Thanks to the human heart by which we live, thanks to its tenderness, its joys, and fears, To me the meanest flower that blows can give thoughts that do often lie too deep for tears. Wordsworth
-
darinhouston
- Posts: 3114
- Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am
Re: The Hiddeness Of God
I agree with you as to the need for the HS persuasion, but I think the article actually proposed that a non-hidden God would provide a miracle of the sort that would "transcend" generations such as moving a mountain or something like David Copperfield might pretend to do.Jason wrote:Steve, or another caller, brought up a good point relating to Chris' objection. If God pulled open the heavens and said "Hey, it's me... God! Check me out!" then only those of this generation would consider that evidence. So it would seem God would have to do this act every generation and even then, how does one prove it's not mass delusion? You can never satisfy a skeptic who has not been persuaded by the Holy Spirit.
-
darinhouston
- Posts: 3114
- Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am
Re: The Hiddeness Of God
Especially since I brought the article into this discussion, I feel compelled to present one thing. On the radio yesterday, Steve and a caller discussed the earthly ministry of Jesus. The topic of miracles or God's "hidden-ness" didn't come up exactly, but it was relevant, I think. The point discussed was to suggest that the disciples at various times of His ministry may have responded to the Lord in light of or even in spite of the present circumstances. Peter and others that had already pronounced their belief in Him as Messiah were asked "who do you say that I am." Steve points out that there is an implied "now" to distinguish their belief in those "leaner" times of the ministry when people had appeared to have left Jesus etc. from those earlier times when all seemed to follow Him and His miracles, so belief would have come much easier.
The broader point Steve made, which bears (I think) on this subject is that the Lord does want our Faith in Him to be more than an intellectual deduction from the miracles in the tangible world around us, and so He does withhold some degree of His revelation in that regard. The article suggests that this would be understandable if God were, indeed, always hidden; but, it points out further that God surely has not been hidden throughout the ages, instead revealing Himself in varying degrees of miraculous display. This doesn't bother me anymore as I consider that God's goals at different times were different, and that the intellectual state of people at various times were different and thus the effect of direct personal miraculous revelation would differ throughout time. The fact that God needed to display Himself visibly in a pillar of fire to the no doubt illiterate Israelites to direct them through the dessert and prove that He was their God to maintain His Word and further His purposes until the time of Christ's own revelation and through that of the Apostles and the fact that He now seems to deal differently with people at a present age where He seems to focus not so much on nations at large but instead the hearts of individuals no longer bothers me.
It does come down in some sense to "God's ways being mysterious," but God does provide enough light today to give us a rational reason for our Faith without our being able to rely solely on such an intellectual approach. Perhaps, those parameters just change when dealing with peoples of varying degrees of intellectual capacity or varying reliance on deduction (witness the apparently inexplicable supernatural miracles still occurring in remote missionary tribes).
Another potential response might be that God is not wasteful, and the honest fact is that even in the face of a mountain being moved from one continent to another overnight there would remain people who refused to acknowledge the miracle as being from God or that they needed to submit to such a god.
The broader point Steve made, which bears (I think) on this subject is that the Lord does want our Faith in Him to be more than an intellectual deduction from the miracles in the tangible world around us, and so He does withhold some degree of His revelation in that regard. The article suggests that this would be understandable if God were, indeed, always hidden; but, it points out further that God surely has not been hidden throughout the ages, instead revealing Himself in varying degrees of miraculous display. This doesn't bother me anymore as I consider that God's goals at different times were different, and that the intellectual state of people at various times were different and thus the effect of direct personal miraculous revelation would differ throughout time. The fact that God needed to display Himself visibly in a pillar of fire to the no doubt illiterate Israelites to direct them through the dessert and prove that He was their God to maintain His Word and further His purposes until the time of Christ's own revelation and through that of the Apostles and the fact that He now seems to deal differently with people at a present age where He seems to focus not so much on nations at large but instead the hearts of individuals no longer bothers me.
It does come down in some sense to "God's ways being mysterious," but God does provide enough light today to give us a rational reason for our Faith without our being able to rely solely on such an intellectual approach. Perhaps, those parameters just change when dealing with peoples of varying degrees of intellectual capacity or varying reliance on deduction (witness the apparently inexplicable supernatural miracles still occurring in remote missionary tribes).
Another potential response might be that God is not wasteful, and the honest fact is that even in the face of a mountain being moved from one continent to another overnight there would remain people who refused to acknowledge the miracle as being from God or that they needed to submit to such a god.
Re: The Hiddeness Of God
Darin,
I do have a problem with the amputee thing. Why doesn't God heal amputees? Is healing for today? Some would say no. But if it is, why not amputees?
I do have a problem with the amputee thing. Why doesn't God heal amputees? Is healing for today? Some would say no. But if it is, why not amputees?
Thanks to the human heart by which we live, thanks to its tenderness, its joys, and fears, To me the meanest flower that blows can give thoughts that do often lie too deep for tears. Wordsworth