Why doesn't God make himself obvious to us all?

[frigidweirdo]

Yes, you can. But you can't learn what is outside the box.

You won't be able to conclude that until you have made an earnest attempt at studying it.

I have and disagree with your uniformed opinion.

How can I study what's outside the box?

Indirectly through the study of what's in the box. The same way you can learn about a painter by studying the painting.

Let's try another analogy.

I like to play the card game Spades. I hate playing Hearts.

Each of them have different rules.

Now, imagine the inside of the box has one set of rules, and the outside of the box has a completely different set of rules.

How are you going to know what's outside the box by studying what's inside the box?

Doesn't matter. The rules for inside the box existed before the box. And it is those rules which informs us that rather than mind being a late outgrowth, mind has always existed as the source or matrix of physical stuff.

How do you know the rules inside the box existed before the box?

Yes, the rules inside the box are the rules which inform us about what is inside the box.

However you're trying to make out these same rules rule the outside of the box. But you don't know.

This is a rather large problem for you, seeing as you're trying to tell me that you can see what's outside the box by studying what's inside the box when you clearly can't.

 

[BreezeWood]

.
physiology is a metaphysical substance that is not native to planet Earth and will exist in whatever form the conditions thought the universe warrant for its existence. humanity is no different than any other life form and is destined no differently including its own possible tragic demise through extinction by the whims of its most ardent antagonists. among them the desert religionists.

the metaphysical undoubtedly has a composition and hierarchy of independent spirits that together rule or are guided by an Almighty that is available to any individual that can sustain themselves through the gift of life in the pursuit for Admission to the Everlasting. or simply perish if so desired.

 

[there4eyeM]

There is nothing more presumptuous than attempting to impose assumptions.
Religions historically have devolved to intolerance and imposition. This is mimicked in ideologies. Those convinced they are right have a habit of insisting others agree. This may be part of human 'hard wiring', but if we do not find a way of surmounting this absurd tendency, it is likely to kill us.

 

[onefour1]

Jude 1:6
6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

Abraham 3:26
26 And they who  keep their first  estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second  estate shall have  glory added upon their heads for ever and ever.

Your first estate was the pre-mortal existence. Those of us who are here on this earth who have bodies were faithful in the pre-mortal world of spirits. There we lived in the presence of God and did not go against him. There were those however, who chose to rebel against God and did not keep their first estate.

Revelation 12:7-11
7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.

Their fate is spoken of in Jude 1:6 above.

Those who have come to this earth and received bodies have entered into their second estate. This earth life is a not the same as our first estate when we lived in the presence of God and knew of a surety of his existence. This earth life is our second estate. We are here to be tested to see if we will follow after truth by hearing the word of God and having faith in his word. A veil has been placed over our minds so as to not remember the pre-mortal existence. God wanted us to learn to walk by faith and to choose good over evil on more of our own volition. He has given us knowledge of his existence and of the path we should follow. He has provided a way whereby we can repent of misdeeds and turn unto him and find forgiveness. He wants us to succeed but has left it up to our own free will. We are free to choose good over evil. Those of us who choose to be evil will receive the reward of those who do evil. Those who choose good will receive their reward for choosing goodness. All mankind will have the opportunity to hear the gospel whether it be in this life or in the world of spirits to come before they stand before God to be judged.

1 Peter 4:6
6 For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.

If we are faithful in our second estate we will have glory added upon our heads forever and ever as stated in Abraham 3:26 above.

Romans 12:21
21 Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

 

[ding]

You won't be able to conclude that until you have made an earnest attempt at studying it.

I have and disagree with your uniformed opinion.

How can I study what's outside the box?

Indirectly through the study of what's in the box. The same way you can learn about a painter by studying the painting.

Let's try another analogy.

I like to play the card game Spades. I hate playing Hearts.

Each of them have different rules.

Now, imagine the inside of the box has one set of rules, and the outside of the box has a completely different set of rules.

How are you going to know what's outside the box by studying what's inside the box?

Doesn't matter. The rules for inside the box existed before the box. And it is those rules which informs us that rather than mind being a late outgrowth, mind has always existed as the source or matrix of physical stuff.

How do you know the rules inside the box existed before the box?

Yes, the rules inside the box are the rules which inform us about what is inside the box.

However you're trying to make out these same rules rule the outside of the box. But you don't know.

This is a rather large problem for you, seeing as you're trying to tell me that you can see what's outside the box by studying what's inside the box when you clearly can't.

Because the box (i.e. space and time) was created under rules (i.e. quantum mechanics and conservation).

Everything which exists or is capable of existing was literally a potentiality before space and time were created because the rules existed before space and time were created.

Outside of the box all we can say is that rules were in place and the only solution to the first cause is something which is eternal and unchanging. This I know as God.

So how can I know about things outside of the box by studying things inside of the box? Reason and experience. We can use our experiences as creators as a proxy and our reasoning ability to evaluate the indirect evidence of the Creator (i.e. what he created) to learn about him.

 

[ding]

There is nothing more presumptuous than attempting to impose assumptions.
Religions historically have devolved to intolerance and imposition. This is mimicked in ideologies. Those convinced they are right have a habit of insisting others agree. This may be part of human 'hard wiring', but if we do not find a way of surmounting this absurd tendency, it is likely to kill us.

Objective truth is discovered through a conflict and confusion process. Don't knock the process. It's how nature works.

 

[frigidweirdo]

How can I study what's outside the box?

Indirectly through the study of what's in the box. The same way you can learn about a painter by studying the painting.

Let's try another analogy.

I like to play the card game Spades. I hate playing Hearts.

Each of them have different rules.

Now, imagine the inside of the box has one set of rules, and the outside of the box has a completely different set of rules.

How are you going to know what's outside the box by studying what's inside the box?

Doesn't matter. The rules for inside the box existed before the box. And it is those rules which informs us that rather than mind being a late outgrowth, mind has always existed as the source or matrix of physical stuff.

How do you know the rules inside the box existed before the box?

Yes, the rules inside the box are the rules which inform us about what is inside the box.

However you're trying to make out these same rules rule the outside of the box. But you don't know.

This is a rather large problem for you, seeing as you're trying to tell me that you can see what's outside the box by studying what's inside the box when you clearly can't.

Because the box (i.e. space and time) was created under rules (i.e. quantum mechanics and conservation).

Everything which exists or is capable of existing was literally a potentiality before space and time were created because the rules existed before space and time were created.

Outside of the box all we can say is that rules were in place and the only solution to the first cause is something which is eternal and unchanging. This I know as God.

So how can I know about things outside of the box by studying things inside of the box? Reason and experience. We can use our experiences as creators as a proxy and our reasoning ability to evaluate the indirect evidence of the Creator (i.e. what he created) to learn about him.

So you're basically telling me that you believe that the rules outside the box are the same as inside the box.

Key word being "believe" because you cannot possibly know.

Your logic for this is "Reason and experience"

So, I'm going to ask what your experience of outside the box is.

Your whole logic is that somehow you know something that you can't possibly know. Which makes me think that everything you're saying is just "belief", or "make belief" as it should be called.

 

[there4eyeM]

Inference from reason and experience is not a foundation for trying to convince other than oneself.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

When I say "obvious" I mean he is in plain site every day. Is it because he wants us to live our lives without knowing for sure that he exists? It would seem so, but why?

God Cannot Exist; We Must Take That Away From Pushy Theists

I look like Brad Pitt. But I'm not going to show you any pictures of me, because I want to test your faith. Your faith will decide your fate, so it would be wise for you not to doubt me..

Who do you believe in when you pull onto a bridge with the faith it won't fall before you get across ? When Hymie Goldenscheister says the kid needs 18 vaccines immediately ! You blindly agree ?

Superstitionists Beg the Question by Assuming Animated Agents

It's not a "who" (actually "whom" but I don't expect theists to believe in grammar) that I trust. It's the laws of physics that hold the bridge up. Therefore, the Creator, if necessary, would more likely be a physical force like gravity rather than a personal one. So you cheat from the very beginning.

Your Hymie sounds like a preacher trying to sell a bad idea so he can make a tax-exempt living.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Perhaps God is bashful.

The Whore Claiming to Be a Virgin Is Snow White

If you want to name Him after one of the Seven Dwarfs, a better pick would be Dopey.

 

[Likkmee]

When I say "obvious" I mean he is in plain site every day. Is it because he wants us to live our lives without knowing for sure that he exists? It would seem so, but why?

God Cannot Exist; We Must Take That Away From Pushy Theists

I look like Brad Pitt. But I'm not going to show you any pictures of me, because I want to test your faith. Your faith will decide your fate, so it would be wise for you not to doubt me..

Who do you believe in when you pull onto a bridge with the faith it won't fall before you get across ? When Hymie Goldenscheister says the kid needs 18 vaccines immediately ! You blindly agree ?

Superstitionists Beg the Question by Assuming Animated Agents

It's not a "who" (actually "whom" but I don't expect theists to believe in grammar) that I trust. It's the laws of physics that hold the bridge up. Therefore, the Creator, if necessary, would more likely be a physical force like gravity rather than a personal one. So you cheat from the very beginning.

Your Hymie sounds like a preacher trying to sell a bad idea so he can make a tax-exempt living.

Lo siento maestro. Ingles es mi segundo idioma.

 

[BreezeWood]

Inference from reason and experience is not a foundation for trying to convince other than oneself.

conviction the same as faith are meaningless without the resultant conclusion which alleviates whatever misconceptions that exist - The Triumph of Good vs Evil when concluded is the answer to faith only those that accomplish the feat know for certain their conviction to be true.

 

[Taz]

God is the king of hide and seek. But with a twist, the dumber you are, the easier is it to find him.

Maybe there is no reason for god to reveal himself to us. Maybe there are just natural laws in place and when you figure that our mortal bodies have to die one day anyway, why is it God's job to make our lives perfect. If Eternity really is forever and this life is just a drop of water in the ocean of time, could it be that the lessons learned, and character built in this life are more important? and maybe some how important going into the next life. If God really did create the universe, isnt asking why god doesnt do this or that to prove himself to us, somwhat like a 2 year old sobbing over the fact that his mommy and daddy wont let him eat icecream every meal? In the limited mind of a two year old it may be very logical to assume there is no good reason he cant eat ice cream for every meal

So god doing nothing proves himself to you.

 

[ding]

Indirectly through the study of what's in the box. The same way you can learn about a painter by studying the painting.

Let's try another analogy.

I like to play the card game Spades. I hate playing Hearts.

Each of them have different rules.

Now, imagine the inside of the box has one set of rules, and the outside of the box has a completely different set of rules.

How are you going to know what's outside the box by studying what's inside the box?

Doesn't matter. The rules for inside the box existed before the box. And it is those rules which informs us that rather than mind being a late outgrowth, mind has always existed as the source or matrix of physical stuff.

How do you know the rules inside the box existed before the box?

Yes, the rules inside the box are the rules which inform us about what is inside the box.

However you're trying to make out these same rules rule the outside of the box. But you don't know.

This is a rather large problem for you, seeing as you're trying to tell me that you can see what's outside the box by studying what's inside the box when you clearly can't.

Because the box (i.e. space and time) was created under rules (i.e. quantum mechanics and conservation).

Everything which exists or is capable of existing was literally a potentiality before space and time were created because the rules existed before space and time were created.

Outside of the box all we can say is that rules were in place and the only solution to the first cause is something which is eternal and unchanging. This I know as God.

So how can I know about things outside of the box by studying things inside of the box? Reason and experience. We can use our experiences as creators as a proxy and our reasoning ability to evaluate the indirect evidence of the Creator (i.e. what he created) to learn about him.

So you're basically telling me that you believe that the rules outside the box are the same as inside the box.

Key word being "believe" because you cannot possibly know.

Your logic for this is "Reason and experience"

So, I'm going to ask what your experience of outside the box is.

Your whole logic is that somehow you know something that you can't possibly know. Which makes me think that everything you're saying is just "belief", or "make belief" as it should be called.

I don't believe you understood what I wrote. If you did you would not have asked what my experience was outside of the box. In fact, in the post you responded to exactly what we can know of outside the box.

1. The laws were already in place. (through science)
2. The only solution to the first cause is something which is eternal and unchanging. (through logic)

We can use our experiences as creators as a proxy and our reasoning ability to evaluate the indirect evidence of the Creator (i.e. what he created) to learn about him.

Science routinely uses proxies. In fact, many measurements in science are indirect measurements using proxies. So what I am describing to you is not only logical but uses our own experiences as proxies. Something we have excellent knowledge of.

I certainly "know" more than you do because you make no effort to know, right?

 

[ding]

Perhaps God is bashful.

The Whore Claiming to Be a Virgin Is Snow White

If you want to name Him after one of the Seven Dwarfs, a better pick would be Dopey.

Is this the extent of your intellectual capabilities?

Please tell me there is more.

 

[Skull Pilot]

When I say "obvious" I mean he is in plain site every day. Is it because he wants us to live our lives without knowing for sure that he exists? It would seem so, but why?

Because he would put every priest and church out of business and he doesn't want to do that because their the ones that collect all the money

 

[ding]

Inference from reason and experience is not a foundation for trying to convince other than oneself.

What better basis of knowledge is there than reason and experience.

Reason by itself, while helpful, cannot confirm itself.

Experience by itself, doesn't explain why things are that way or why they happened that way.

In fact, is reason and experience not the foundation of science?

Science is the study of order within nature (experience) to understand nature (reason) and to make predictions of nature (reason).

So it seems that not only is reason and experience a foundation for knowing things but it is a foundation for convincing others other than oneself.

Anyone who scoffed at reason and experience would have to go through life knowing next to nothing. Which probably explains a lot about some of the people here.

 

[there4eyeM]

Reason and experience were not put into question.

 

[ding]

Reason and experience were not put into question.

Sure they were when you wrote.

Inference from reason and experience is not a foundation for trying to convince other than oneself.

Reason and experience is the foundation for everything especially inference. What good is reason and experience if you don't infer things from reason and experience?

 

[Votto]

When I say "obvious" I mean he is in plain site every day. Is it because he wants us to live our lives without knowing for sure that he exists? It would seem so, but why?

Let's be honest here.

Now if you were God, wouldn't you hide from you?