LittleLion said:
Edial ...
Neither do you?!
And yet you speak of God?...
LittleLion, the text that I presented (
RO 3:11 there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God) is addressed to people that do not know God, that is to all the people at one time or another.
Once they become believers they no longer seek him, since he lives in them.
EPH 1:13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession--to the praise of his glory.
LittleLion said:
Why? Why would anyone seek Jesus, if they, per definition per you, do not seek God?..
Why are people told not to sin when all sin?
LittleLion said:
Have you any idea what a hopeless situation you put in an outsider by telling him that?!
"You must have God do a miracle for you, or you won't believe" -- you've said this much.?
You are correct. The situation is hopeless.
That is why God revealed himself through the appearance of Jesus Christ.
God is so grand that we cannot comprehend him, so the only way to comprehend him is when he reveals himslf to us on our level.
... and concerning the miracles as a necessity for believing, some need it ...
JN 4:48 "Unless you people see miraculous signs and wonders," Jesus told him, "you will never believe."
... and some do not.
JN 20:29 Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."
LittleLion said:
I don't mean to argue. But I do have a problem with your apologetics. You present faith in God to be cognitively of the same kind as any belief that science purports.
Not at all.
The problem with many that argue against God has many folds. One of them is that since their Natural side cannot see the "Natural" God it argues into the submission their Supernatural soul that cries out to God (who is Supernatural) in desperation.
The Natural side of a "man" needs Natural evidence, otherwise it develops "blinders". The Natural man has no faith.
That is why God revealed Himself as a Natural man to a Natural man.
One of the purposes of "my apologetics" as you put it, is to remove the Natural blocks that a Natural man develops over the time (knowingly or un-knowingly, willingly or unwillingly).
I present these as Natural evidences that will satisfy a reasonable demands of a Natural mind.
Then the Natural will no longer block the cries of the Supernatural within him (her soul).
However, if the Natural man is not telling the truth concerning the reasons it supresses his own Supernatural soul; if the Natural man is only pretending that he has Natural objection and actually simply does not want God in his life through Jesus Christ, then it is considered to be a "kidnapping of a soul" (not a Biblical term

).
In such a case another measure is taken.
That is why I asked you at least twice in our conversations how important is truth to you.
* Both times you were not clear.*
But currently I am still presuming that your Natural man is seeking evidence to satisfy his questioning urges.
I have accummulated however, more reasons to suggest that you do not need evidence in order to satisfy your questions of the Natural man regardless of what you state.
LittleLion said:
"First there is evidence, and then based on this evidence, you can build your faith. Of course, you have to trust the evidence."
No, Ed, it doesn't work that way. You are missing the point, or at least you are misrepresenting it.
As I was telling you before (on more than an occasion) is that I answer your questions.
Since you were asking for evidences - I gave them to you.
I also gave you opprtunities to examine the data supporting these evidences for what they are.
(Also, you just made an observation and a conclusion in the same "breath").
LittleLion said:
No evidence is ever enough; all evidence is always ultimately arbitrary.
If one (thinks one) believes in X because of evidence of X, then one doesn't believe in X but in the reasonability of the arguments for X.
Anyone who believes in God and Jesus because they believe the historical evidence for them, is believing in the evidence, not in God and Jesus.
Since I already answered to this above, also note this - Chtistianity is the ONLY "religion" whose faith is based on evidence, which is overwhelmingly supported as far as the scriptural/historical references are concerned.
LittleLion said:
The point of faith is devotion, commitment. And one can commit to God without having "enough compelling evidence of God's existence and works".
God is the only one one can commit to this way.
Faith is trust.
(And I realize that I am giving you yet another "opportunity" to argue it down, since I know that you are used to trusting no one).
This is how faith comes -
RO 10:14 How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? 15 And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!"
Yet, the LittleLion, you appear to reject the preaching by "arguing it" into the evidence "realm".
Then whenever the "faith" factor is introduced, be it in a form of preaching or Scripture verses, you bounce it back into the Natural realm of evidences and it just "dies" in there in the midst of your confusion.
However, your Supernatural soul is still screaming for the Supernatural God.
It is called pride, the LittleLion.
(Also, I still did not hear any comments on the verses that I sent you, although I asked for it).
LittleLion said:
You, on the other hand, present believing in God as something that could be done as an experiment, as something one can "give it a try", and that, somewhere along the line, God jumps in as an extra and grants the person some faith and mercy. This is like setting out for a tour of hocus-pocus.
No, I do not present that. You might conclude that, but your conclusion is probably based on the posts of others also.
The salvation is never to be taken as an "experiment", since you cannot go back.
Salvation is when you decide to give your entire self (together with ALL the problems) to Jesus Christ (God) and trust Him to do whatever he wishes to and to know that he will be loving while doing that.
LittleLion said:
You present believing in God as much, much more complicated and difficult than I believe it is.
You see, we went the whole cycle and we're back at the square one again.
Tell me, what is so complicated about this?
RO 10:9 That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.
And do you remember what you said in another thread when I told you to GET UP, CALL OR SEE A BORN-AGAIN BELIEVER, ASK HOW TO BE SAVED.
Now, how complicated is it?
However, if that is still not the way that you wish to be saved, then there is no other way, according to Jesus Christ.
JN 14:6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7 If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him."
LittleLion said:
I see now that the greatest part of my troubles with God have to do with man's "wisdom" about God, not with knowing and obeying God per se..
LittleLion, you once again made an observation and a conclusion in one "breath".
There are 2 wisdoms that the Bible is telking about, the wisdom of this world and the wisdom from heaven.
Here is a portion of a chapter -
1CO 2:6 We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. 7 No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 However, as it is written:
"No eye has seen,
no ear has heard,
no mind has conceived
what God has prepared for those who love him" --
1CO 2:10 but God has revealed it to us by his Spirit.
The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. 11 For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man's spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12 We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us. 13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. 14 The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment:
1CO 2:16 "For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him?" But we have the mind of Christ.
LittleLion said:
I know, I am in a strange situation where I am guiding believers in what they will tell me, and have them somehow steer away from the hermeneutic and general cognitive falsehoods they are (unwittingly) spreading.
LittleLion, once again

you are observing and concluding in one breath.
1. The reason that the believers are relating to you is because they know significantly more concerning the spiritual matters than you do and they care about you. They are Supernaturally told that you have a Supernatural need. They have no alterior motive.
2. I told you once that you have a great mind. But what I did not tell you (and there was no need to at the time) is that you do not have and do not know what the "wisdom from heaven" is.
Wisdom from heaven is when a Supernaturally "born-again" uneducated old lady can understand the Bible better than a Natural PhD.
To change the conversation on a bit more personal level, this last paragraph kind of stunned me, to tell you the truth. I do not know how to address your conclusion.
Woul you please support your statement that I am spreading the hermeneutic and general cognitice falsehoods.
Thanks,
Ed