@ Kazigblu i think you have a problem with understanding.
I disagree. I would say that after reading your post thoroughly several times to be sure of your wording and meaning, that I understand what you have said to the best extent possible. Any failure of mine to understand is not due to a fault of mine, but your inability to substantiate your claims or explain them in clear terms. A good answer, at least for me, is not going to beg any questions, as it will have sufficiently explained what is going on.
i answered every question you have and yet you have another same questions.
While you may have provided a response, that does not necessarily qualify as having answered my questions. For example, I still do not know how I am able to know that you are accurately conveying God's message. I think it is pretty important to know, since you are here to tell us "God's side", and we first need to establish that you qualified to deliver this message. I wouldn't want someone doing brain surgery on my son if they could not provide any credentials or authority for doing so. I understand that you are not a prophet, however this does not necessarily lend credibility to your specific understanding of God. If you were able to demonstrate that you were able to:
Mk.16:17-18 "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."
Lk.10:19 "Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you."
If you are capable of, and can demonstrate your capability to do so, then I am prepared to accept you as a True Believer. I get the feeling I might be waiting a while for this to happen. The incredibly awesome Steve Irwin once set out to catch Africa's deadliest snakes, and he did, without getting killed. Does that mean he was a true believer? One way to demonstrate this would be to follow in the Steve's footsteps, and go out into the African wilderness to catch the deadliest snakes on the continent. When you have caught, unaided, a boomslang, green mamba, black mamba, puff adder, twig snake, gaboon viper, carpet viper, African beaked snake, and Egyptian Cobra, without harm, could we then be assured that YOU are a true believer?
I said you cannot NO to you cannot have faith in prayer if you do NOT have faith. What i did was very simple first i had a desire for the truth, God see's this and gave me revelation, then (i haven't had faith yet)
Hold on a minute. You, as an Atheist without faith, prayed that the "truth" might be revealed to you. You then state that God gave you a revelation (thus, your prayers were indeed answered). However, your question to answer 5 is that prayers are not answered unless one has faith. Therefore, at least one of the answers (question 2 or question 5) is wrong. They are mutually exclusive. You can't say that one has to have faith for prayer to work, and have a prayer answered in spite of a lack of faith. I'd say this presents a fairly big problem for you, especially as one who is to show us God's side. You cannot even demonstrate consistency in your belief about the conditions necessary for the efficacy of prayer. I don't think I'm misunderstanding anything here.
I went and bought the Bible and only then did i attain faith.
Again, then how was it that your prayer to be shown the "truth" was answered?
I read the bible and the bible showed me the rest on how to achieve faith in God which i did.
Have you moved a mountain with that faith, as Jesus clearly says, without strings attached, that you will be able to do? If not, then I cannot believe that you have even the faith of grain of a mustard seed. IF you did, anything would be possible to you, as promised in Matthew 17:20. Furthermore, since there is no record in the Bible of Jesus having moved a mountain, I think it is entirely reasonable to suggest that Jesus himself was a little short on faith. Clearly, someone who would be capable of moving a mountain would also be capable to prevent himself from being crucified.
A more modern example of faith not working is when Rick Perry had the whole faithful state of Texas pray for rain when they were experiencing severe drought. Yet no rain came, and the drought and ensuing wildfires reached devastating levels hardly ever seen in Texas. What went wrong? Is Rick Perry (and all the other Texans who prayed for rain) not of the right denomination? Did they not have enough faith (i.e. that of a grain of a mustard seed)? Does God not like them, and so decided to punish them further with fire and parched land? Did God simply decide that he wanted to demonstrate Hell on Earth, and figure Texas was the perfect place to do it?
All I am asking is for the world to operate the way the Bible (and, by extension, you) says it should operate. It fails the test. When Pope John Paul II become seriously ill, it is entirely reasonable to suggest that the 1.166 billion Catholics worldwide(http://www.zenit.org/article-28425?l=english
) prayed for his return to health and continued longevity. He died anyways. I also think that it is reasonable to assume that the collective faith of 1.166 billion people is greater than that of a grain of a mustard seed. How is it that the prayers of over a billion faithful were not answered, yet your prayer for truth as to the existence of a God as a faithless Atheist was answered?
I also have to wonder, when you prayed for the truth of the existence of God, how is it that, of all the possible gods, you landed on the Christian one?
While one might suggest that I am exploiting the fallacy "Argument by Question", I would offer that my follow up questions are there because they are begged to be there. If you don't want me asking follow up questions, then please offer more explanation as to how you arrive at your answers, so as not to leave yourself wide open. An argument should serve to solidify your case, and not bring your own claims into scrutiny. Make sure that those answers are consistent with one another (i.e question 2 and 5). Also, isn't it fair to suggest that the person asking the question is best able to determine if the question was actually meaningfully answered?
You seem loathe to admit that your answers to questions 2 and 5 are contradictory. Though the actual "Yes or no" answers are consistent, the explanation provided for reaching those conclusions (as presented by your example of how you attained faith) does NOT support the conclusions.