Replies

There is no way anyone can believe in a deity unless he or she has heard of it from another human (with the exception of direct divine intervention, perhaps). So, why is this flaw in the design of "salvation" present, that faith in God can only come after faith in mere men? It would have been so much simpler for a deity to merely telepathically communicate with all humanity the way it supposedly did with certain "prophets" and such a mode wouldn't have lead humanity to rely on other humans and scraps of ancient writings, for its "salvation".... They [the named folks on the ping list] can take as much time as they want, but I do not expect an answer for any of the above, because they don't really have any.

Thank you so very much, James C. Bennett, for so helpfully laying out the problem of God as you see it.

For all that I'm a name on the ping list of persons who couldn't possibly have anything to say in response to the points you raise, I'll be very happy to take up your points one by one.

For openers: "There is no way anyone can believe in a deity unless he or she has heard of it from another human (with the exception of direct divine intervention, perhaps)." But I do not believe, on the basis of observation, evidence, and experience, that God is known only by means of human testimony. Indeed, even you left a "back door" escape hatch for that supposition, "divine intervention."

But what do you mean by "divine intervention?" Just asking, because that has indeed been part of my own direct experience of God. God gives visions to some. To others He gives the sense of His abiding Presence. In my case, I have been blessed along both these lines.... So for me, God is NOT an "hypothesis." He is REAL; He is THERE. And in some sense is in every where and every when.

So naturally, I entirely dispute your finding that knowledge of God is transmitted only man to man, as captured in ancient writings. And that somehow this constitutes a "flaw" in God's plan of salvation.

Which serves the purpose of delegitimating God; for how could God's plan of salvation be "flawed?" If it is, the flaw must be willed by God. And what sort of just and good Supreme Being would will such a flawed situation?

But the flaw isn't in the situation. It's in the way human minds grasp and analyze the situation.

God's self-revelation to us is not a human testimony. Also it is not fully captured in ancient writings. For God gave us four revelations: The ancient writings (the Holy Scriptures, His Word to us in human language); the "Book of Nature," or the Creation itself (which manifests His creative order); the Incarnation of His Holy Word, Jesus Christ (the most world-transforming event in human history); and the Grace of His Holy Spirit abiding with us.

That is, abiding with persons whose souls are open to God. Those who close their souls to God will not, of course, be in any position to evaluate the truth of any of the four divine revelations.

Or so it seems to me. JMHO FWIW.

Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts and concerns, James C. Bennett!

You're welcome, Betty Boop! You said:

"But what do you mean by "divine intervention?" Just asking, because that has indeed been part of my own direct experience of God. God gives visions to some. To others He gives the sense of His abiding Presence. In my case, I have been blessed along both these lines.... So for me, God is NOT an "hypothesis." He is REAL; He is THERE. And in some sense is in every where and every when.

So naturally, I entirely dispute your finding that knowledge of God is transmitted only man to man, as captured in ancient writings. And that somehow this constitutes a "flaw" in God's plan of salvation.

Which serves the purpose of delegitimating God; for how could God's plan of salvation be "flawed?" If it is, the flaw must be willed by God. And what sort of just and good Supreme Being would will such a flawed situation?

But the flaw isn't in the situation. It's in the way human minds grasp and analyze the situation."

How do you apply this to parasitic twins? Some of them are merely arms hanging out of another person, while others have functioning brains and mouths.

snip: There is no way anyone can believe in a deity unless he or she has heard of it from another human...

Spirited: This argument rests on the assumption that man has it within his power to imagine (create) that which he has never before experienced in any way. If this claim is true, then all readers of this post should find it a simple exercise to immediately imagine a never-before-seen 4th primary color. Given that we already have experience of the other three, this feat should be easy.

All who try however, will immediately discover that though they can speculate on the existence of a 4th primary color, they cannot in any way “see” it.

As CS Lewis correctly noted, before man can imagine something he must have prior knowledge of it from a source (or sources) external to himself.

This being the case, before ancient men could imagine a god or gods, spirits and demons (and even a hellish underworld) and then hand this knowledge down through generations, someone had to “experience them” first hand.

The answer to James argument was supplied by him as well: (with the exception of direct divine intervention, perhaps).

There is no flaw in God’s design for salvation James. The fatal error is-—as always-—misplaced “faith” in mankind...”Ye can be as God.”