…Continued

<<I believe in God, the God.>>

This sidesteps my question. Unless, of course, you’re referring to the classic Christian omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent god, in which case, I’d take that as a ‘yes’.

<<As for prayer it doesn't need reconciliation because it has been observed.>>

Yes, it does need to be reconciled. An omniscient god would know what was going to happen in the future, therefore, He could not stray from what He already knew was going to happen without creating a paradox. Therefore, prayer cannot change anything. Unless you’re conceding that the prayer part is redundant, your father-children analogy doesn’t get around this paradox, either.

This paradox is a legitimate problem for Christianity. So much so, in fact, that Christian apologists have started referring to God as “maximally powerful”. Which, in this instance, would mean that God would not know what was going to happen in the future.

Oh AJ Phillips, what would it take? You say God would know what it would take to convince you He is real, but do you know? I have told you a small diverse experiences. They are not alone, but these experiences are enough for me to know. I've been rescued from death and coma, felt God's love in prayer, and felt sadness from prayers. I've prayed for both myself and others and even without fireworks attached God answered. I've found a God to be real and so AI searched for Him by His teachings. Hoping to find something from Him in some religion because I know I've found Him in prayer. And guess what? Reading the bible I felt God's presence simular to when I prayed in my young downer times. It was like God was reading it with me, helping me read it. Both the old Testiment which confirmed my views that at least Jewish faith was real and New Testiment to confirm Jesus's gospels are right as well.

I understand that I've moved on from the search of "if God exists" to "What God wants, and how to follow Him." It is not a question for me to fathom if God exists. It's more of a wonder of how His existance isn't as obvious to everyone else. What would it take to convince you? What would it take to show you? Do you even know? You say what I have is not enough. HA! If only you really knew! You don't need my experiences, and by how you're approaching them I'd assume your own experiences wouldn't be enough. What it seems like you need is for someone to convince you. Battle your philosophy that you think is reasonable, with something undeniable. But would you still deny it? Is there something that is enough? Something that can cut through the muck?

...continued...

...continued...

I'll give you another theory. Consider I ask you. At one time Jesus and His disciples went across water in a boat. And when they arrived on the other side religious leader waited on the other side saying for Jesus to prove Himself. Then in their greed they said Moses provided Mana from Heaven, what would Jesus offer to convince them. Make note that Jesus had just come providing a miracle, and everywhere he went people came to be healed and they were healed. So proof was already there. What they wanted was more. More more and then even more. Jesus left them calling them for what they were. Greedy and selfish, not actually caring about Jesus or finding out the truth.

I hope your motives are not like this, but I feel you should be warned. What are you looking for? The truth of God existing? An all powerful genie to grant your entertainment or your whims or you will disbelieve Him again? Or do you only want to be right? And care not for finding anything more. Indeed if you found it you would discard it, because "it was not enough." Take my works and heed their critism AJ Phillips. Search your motivations and discern within yourself. What should it take, and would it ever be enough?

Enough philosophy and cares about paradoxes. Those can be fathomed and wondered about things that we see and find in front of us. Philosophers and comedians can make common things complex paradoxes, yet they still exist. Us swayed by wit or clever sight. So what value are they if they do not reveal the truth? If I answer your question on God answering prayers would that be enough? Do you even know if anything will be enough?

No, I don’t know what it would take to convince me, Not_Now.Soon.

<<You say God would know what it would take to convince you He is real, but do you know?>>

I think it would be arrogant of me to assume that I knew. Even if a god presented themselves to me visually, and then performed a miracle, how do I know that I wasn’t hallucinating? How do I know that I’m not just seeing some advanced alien technology? Again, sufficiently advanced technology would be indistinguishable from magic.

All I know is that anything that could qualify as a god WOULD know what it would take to convince me.

<<I have told you a small diverse experiences. They are not alone …>>

For so long as there are more rational explanations, I don’t think it matters how numerous the experiences are.

<<Reading the bible I felt God's presence simular to when I prayed in my young downer times.>>

Yes, such feelings are quite understandable, especially if one is looking for a god or some guidance. But how can you verify that it’s the presence of a god when we have no other gods to compare it to?

Prayer can help people to feel much better. In a situation where one was, say, trapped in a mine shaft, it may even help them to survive long enough to be rescued if it slows their breathing rate down. No god is required for prayer to work in such a situation. There is a perfectly rational explanation for the increased chance of survival.

<<Both the old Testiment which confirmed my views that at least Jewish faith was real and New Testiment to confirm Jesus's gospels are right as well.>>

And if you lived in the Middle-East, you’d probably be saying the same about the Qur’an.

<<You say what I have is not enough. HA! If only you really knew!>>

Going by what you’ve told me, yes. It might be enough for you, but it’s not enough for me, because there is no way to rule out more rational explanations.

Continued…

…Continued

Even if you could rule out all the other more rational explanations, though, all that leaves you with is a mystery. There is no way to rationally conclude that any of it was the work of a god.

<<… [going] by how you're approaching them I'd assume your own experiences wouldn't be enough.>>

Correct. My experiences were much the same as what you described: stuff that can be explained by co-incidence and the psychological effects of prayer.

<<Then in their greed they said Moses provided Mana from Heaven, what would Jesus offer to convince them.>>

Yes, John 6. No, that is in no way analogous to my situation or any other sceptic that I am aware of.

My belief started to wane when I realised that evolution was a fact and that the Bible got it all so wrong, not because I didn't get what I wanted. My atheism snowballed from there. What kind of a deceitful god makes everything in a way such that he appears to not have been needed at all, and then recounts the events so woefully wrong in his own book?!

Now, had Jesus provided us with scientific information that no-one could have possibly known back then, instead of performing gimmicky miracles that we have no way of verifying actually happened, then THAT would be something! Perhaps some useful information such as: a bath at least once a week will help reduce disease. But, no, instead, he perpetuated myths about demonic possession which resulted in hundred of years of deadly superstition.

<<Philosophers and comedians can make common things complex paradoxes, yet they still exist.>>

Really? Do you have an example?

<<If I answer your question on God answering prayers would that be enough?>>

I don’t think you could, to be honest. One cannot resolve a paradox. The best you could do would be to downgrade God to ‘maximally powerful’. Which makes him a little impotent, in my opinion.

Evolutional? Really AJ Phillips? You've said you've had all the simular experiences that I've had, and evolution cornered it out of you? I'm doubting your words AJ Phillips. This sounds like an argument for creating credibility where it's not really there. But regardless of my doubts, your untold experiences are your own just as mine are my own. Hearing about mine won't convince you. Your unwilling to hear them. If what you say is true though, and you've had accounts in your life that God reached out to you, or you thought He did, but later you deny their being real. Then let me assure you, your experiences were not like mine. And hearing mine apparently won't replace those weak feeling. So I'll move on.

Evolution. What part of evolution had you lose faith? Was it micro evolution where we see changes in a species from one family to another. Was it macro evolution that has one species turn into another. A split of a species into two other kinds long long ago? Or is it the pervasive use of evolution that convinced you? Instead of changing times it's that times are evolving. Instead of growth it's how we evolved as individuals. Instead of being a biological term evolution even is quoted as a topic of social and socitial growth and change. The term has become so loose that quoting it as a means to disregard your faith becomes a swampland where the ever growing talk of evolution takes place of other real sciences. Replaces them and takes credit for their discoveries. Then spin off theories of evolution are swamped in as if part of the same theory (if there's only one) to lay claim from observations of simular characteristics between species to the origins of life on earth.

I give you this swath of a discription so you can order stand how deceptive it has become. Things don't have to hold merrit or be observed and scrunitinized scientifically if it is under the paradigm of evolution.