Evidence for a deity - How do I tell?

[bertatberts]

No he is not talking about your god. He has no concept of god.

Yes, we are, and yes he does. We're talking about the God of the bible, and because Anfauglir has read the bible, or lots of it, he has a concept of it.

Note I said your god (I've highlighted it.)Yes he has knowledge of gods in the bible, for instant. (In Psalm 136:2 god is referred to as the god of gods, just like Zeus in Psalm 82:1-2: god takes his place in the divine council in the midst of the gods. Apart from gods like Baal and the Egyptian gods of which god will execute judgment, exodus 12:12).

No christians have a proper concept of their god (There are after all 38.000 denominations) including you. This is why Hal is asking the question in the OP.

And so, in demanding the God of the bible to do things a certain way he is doing so knowing the God of the bible is unimaginably great, and has no obligation to us at all. You can't demand God only be real if He isn't who He says He is.

But he doesn't know this, that is your belief, he has no belief in the bible, thus you can't claim Anfauglir believes that, he is after all an atheist.

Does that make sense?

No.

[Samuelxcs]

The bible says 'Knock and the door shall be opened, seek and you shall find', however it also clearly teaches that God first loved us and that we cannot find God apart from Him making Himself known.

Knock on which door? God's door? If we could find god's door (assuming there is one) quite a few people would do so. Maybe God is playing hide and seek with us. We would certainly find something if we knock on random doors of people's homes. Maybe  afew strangely angry people? If they become a threat, just tell them "I was trying to find Jesus!"

[kaziglu bey]

Seems like a few hedged bets there KB..."it would be helpful"

Is helpful going to be good enough? or do you need the same as Anfauglir, God to come and knock physically on your door. You sure you wouldn't find a way to explain that away as well?

Well, typically one does not believe in something based on a single piece of evidence. I think that it is only reasonable to have at least the same burden of proof for God as for any other phenomena. Gravity is a phenomena that is really difficult not to notice. Yet no one is claiming that gravity is all powerful, all knowing, all loving, etc etc. Anything that possessed such qualities and frequently interacted with the universe (as I think most theists would posit that God does) would necessarily be even more noticeable than gravity.

As far as explaining away, well I just don't see it that way. Why is it that the same types of questions and level of certainty that you would expect of ANYTHING else is suddenly not fair to apply to God the almighty?

Furthermore, I don't see how you can imply that I am "explaining away" anything. Theists have been "explaining away" the mistakes and errors and inconsistency of their religion for a really long time. It's called apologetics. Because naturally an all powerful being needs his minions to make excuses for his mistakes. 

I say "it would be helpful" because it would. It would in fact be helpful if the evidence that should be present if the Bible is true actually was present. It is not. The only reason we know about mass extinctions is because they left a lot of evidence. Considering that the great flood would have happened much more recently than the Chicxulub impact, the amount of evidence should be that much more significant. There should be countless fossils of all forms of life present in the corresponding geological layer. There is not. There should be evidence of a massive fern spike, as is seen with other extinction events and catastrophes, and in fact it would necessarily be the largest fern spike ever. This is not the case.

Given the number of failures for religion to produce even a single shred of evidence for any of its magical claims, taking the position of "I need some substantial proof for that" is the most sensible course to take, as opposed to "There's no evidence at all, even where it should be abundant, so I will definitely believe!". One position has the benefit of intellectual honesty. Hint: it's not yours.

Perhaps I should remind you that the task of finding evidence of 10 good deeds of God vs 1 evil deed of God was cut short, because apparently it was too time consuming for you to do so. If the book allegedly inspired by a benevolent being is so sorely lacking of evidence that said being actually is benevolent, it is safe to conclude that either the being that inspired the Bible wasn't a benevolent god, or wasn't god at all. If God was as good as people say (and boy, do they ever say this!) the Bible should be overflowing with examples of God's generosity, kindness, selflessness, tolerance, acceptance, and unconditional love. God should be displaying these behaviors constantly. Yet, you gave up after, what, the first round? You said that it was too time consuming. If the Bible was rife with examples of these things, it would take no time at all. Instead, we see God being jealous, angry, wrathful, pitiless, mocking, arrogant, and deceitful. These are not things that we would consider good or loving. One could easily do the reverse, and find 10 verses of violence, intolerance and hate, with almost no effort at all. If people want to say that God is Good, then he should be doing things that we would actually consider to be good. "By their fruits shall ye know them." The fruit of God is death, destruction, violence and hate.

So, given the evidence for the case of "The God in the Bible is real", we must conclude that is not true, and furthermore, if the God of the Bible were real, he would be the manifestation of humanity's worst qualities. The Bible shows us enough to say that with certainty.

[HAL]

What would cut it for you, Joe?

I thought you were tiptoeing away, yet here you are. Now you're back babbling in my thread again.

You don't understand the problem, and neither does Jstweb (still waiting on his reply). Suppose you asked be what evidence it would take for me to believe in a god called Zoetocks. I would say, well what kind of evidence can Zoetocks provide? How do I know what evidence to accept from Zoetocks if I don't know what it can do - what evidence it can provide? When can it provide it?

Now, the next problem - how do I know an advanced alien technology is doing what Zoetocks can do, if the evidence appears. Remember any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. How do I, a mere human, distinguish between the two? In fact, how do I know that Zoetocks isn't the aliens? Maybe they are one and the same?

I now send it back to any theists that can answer, especially Jstweb, who suggested I start this thread.

For reference -

No this is actually intriguing and I have lightly thought about this before.  Are you asking if we took God out and replace him with an alien pretending to be God how could we tell the difference?

[magicmiles]

I thought you were tiptoeing away, yet here you are. Now you're back babbling in my thread again.

Crazy, right? Almost like I sometimes change my mind on the fly based on an unfolding discussion.

More from me tomorrow (probably)

[HAL]

Crazy, right? Almost like I sometimes change my mind on the fly based on an unfolding discussion.

Yea except you returned to the thread without addressing the OP (my question). Why, I've no idea.

More from me tomorrow (probably)

I can't wait.

[Anfauglir]

.....do you need the same as Anfauglir, God to come and knock physically on your door.

Just to add to my last post, since you've referenced me here.  You seem to have forgotten that I am trying to make the first move here.  In fact, since my last post and this one, I tried again.  I sat quietly, tried to empty my mind, and said "is there a god there?".  And I listened, very hard, for some time.  But answer again came there none.  I am knocking on your god's door, MM - and nobody is answering.

Remember, "we're talking about God, who spoke the universe into being".  A being with infinite resource who is everywhere at all times, and who could - if he chose - simultaneously knock on the door of each and every person on earth and come in and talk to them at length and answer their questions. 

And actually, if he did that, then the implied "you wouldn't believe" in your question would become moot: if everyone I speak to tells me the exact same thing - and, BTW, I DO mean "everyone", all faiths and atheists all saying the exact same thing, not some saying this and some saying that - then belief would no longer be a concern.  Your god would become as real to me as anything...... 

For a limitless being like your god, it would be the merest trifle to answer the questions of every being in the world, a piece of cake to eliminate all sectarian and inter-religion strife, to quell all the doubts of his existence, and allow us to move on to the next, and more important question.

It rather presumptious of you, as well, to assign so many petty emotions to your god - to confidently assert that for some reason he is too proud, or bored, or disinterested, to answer my call.  Or, come to that, to imply that he is spending his time on something more important.  This is GOD, MM, he can do everything and anything all at once and have infinite time and energy remaining.  So there is no question of me taking him away from his other duties and annoying him with my impertinent questions. 

I'm regularly assured that your god is like a father, and a father - a good and loving father - will ALWAYS take the time to answer the honest questions of his children, so how much more reasonable is it to assume that your god will do the same?  An earthly father may sometimes be too tired, or busy, to answer his children in detail, but once again I remind you that this is GOD, the all-loving, all-powerful creator of all.  He will never be too busy or too tired, so to be honest I'm baffled at your suggestion that your god doesn't want to answer me when I call. 

Because its certainly not the actions of the all-powerful, viceless, omnipresent, and supremely loving Father of all that most Christians assure me he is. 

Or is that description somehow incorrect?



<<edit - fixed quotes>>

[Maggie the Opinionated]

Jstweb suggested I create a new thread for this, so here it is.

You asked me once what evidence I would require to believe in your god, and I asked you to help me out. I asked you how I could differentiate between a god and a highly advanced alien.

Why not deal with the question of God first? If you can clear that up, it would be possible to discuss how to distinguish God from a superior alien. What evidence would you expect there to be if God exists? Well, I can suggest some.

We would expect to find that the universe had a beginning point. That's what Christianity has always taught and believed. Interestingly, before the Big Bang theory was accepted, the dominant scientific view was the "steady state" theory which said that the universe had no beginning. "Big Bang" was a term of derision coined by Hoyle who saw painfully clearly the implications of BB. However, Lemaître's, oops, make that Father Lemaître's, science was sound and prevailed.

Why does the universe behave in a law-like manner that it's describable in the language of mathematics and is accessible to human rationality? What scientific evidence do you think should have been found, if God is real? Of course, this is a trick question. Supposing that science can answer all questions is scientism and very poor philosophy, indeed.

 

[Anfauglir]

You asked me once what evidence I would require to believe in your god, and I asked you to help me out. I asked you how I could differentiate between a god and a highly advanced alien.

What evidence would you expect there to be if God exists? Well, I can suggest some.

We would expect to find that the universe had a beginning point. That's what Christianity has always taught and believed..... Why does the universe behave in a law-like manner that it's describable in the language of mathematics and is accessible to human rationality?

Problem is, what you've said here still won't help Hal out.

1) The universe WAS created by a god - but a different god to Yahweh.
2) The universe WAS created by Yahweh - but he has since departed for another universe, or ceased to exist.
3) Whether and god or gods existed is moot, because THIS universe was indeed created by incredibly advanced aliens.
4) Plus of course, the fact that "Christianity has always taught and believed" that the universe had a starting point is hardly conclusive: there really aren't that many options for the universe, either it wasn't and then was, or it always has been.  Only two choices for someone trying to make sense of the world back in the year 3000BCE: and since pretty much everything ELSE they saw - trees, people, animals, rain - "wasn't, and then was", it would hardly be surprising if that was the creation story they decided to settle on.

So Hal is still pretty stuck.  As indeed am I, since there is nothing you've said here that specifically points to your particular god being the one who is actually the one that really exists - should any god really exist at all.

[Hatter23]

and he's also trying to use this argument against me.

I'm not trying to use any arguments against anyone. I just give my perspective and challenge others.

I can hardly believe that you would think someone would ignore God if he made himself known to them beyond the shadow of a doubt.

There are many examples in the bible of just that, all the same.

Which completely and utterly invalidates the usual Christian argument of "Were God made himself known that would invalidate freewill/faith." when asked WWGHA?

[joebbowers]

If the question is what would we consider evidence of God's existence, I would again say that it should be pretty damn easy for a supreme being to prove it's existence. He could appear in a puff of smoke and say "Hey, I'm God." That would be good enough for me. I could make an endless list of stuff he could do to prove it, but to put it simply, it must be unambiguous and not easily explained by any other explanation.

If the question is how could we tell God from any sufficiently advanced alien, we couldn't. First, the very meaning of the word sufficient makes that a moving goalpost. A theoretical alien of infinite power could do anything God could do.

Second, God himself is an alien. He is an advanced intelligence and he isn't from Earth. So the question is flawed.

[gonegolfing]

Jstweb suggested I create a new thread for this, so here it is.

You asked me once what evidence I would require to believe in your god, and I asked you to help me out. I asked you how I could differentiate between a god and a highly advanced alien. I truthfully don't know how I could do that, so I need your assistance. I need to be able to tell the difference if something astounding should happen that I can't explain. I need to be able to tell if what I might be seeing a god do is really happening because of this god, or an advanced alien technology is doing it, or causing my mind to "believe" something that isn't real. This is not a joke question, it's very serious.

Can you help me out?

Hal: As a matter of fact this is something that I've been hashing out in my mind lately as well.

If we're going to stick with the original question: Evidence for a deity - How do I tell?...Then I think that both theists and atheists have a serious problem on our hands.

"god" is still very much in the idea stage--and cannot be considered existentially due to the absence of direct or supportive evidence.

Therefore, going by the standard human definition of what a "god" is, we quickly see that this idea becomes abstract, incoherent, and in contradiction of our understanding of the natural order.

Your question then becomes: Evidence for a deity - How do I find it, when the very idea of such an entity is abstract, incoherent, and contradictory to human understanding ?

Would it not be absurd to try find evidence for the truth of an idea that is by definition incomprehensible, beyond human understanding and scientifically untestable ?

In "god", we have an abstract idea, and not a physical object with a concrete existence. Abstract thoughts cannot be hard evidence for real physical things. It's the things themselves that affirm their existence.

We err badly I now believe to expect an "event"-->the providing of evidence for deities--to come somehow, when all we're dealing with, with regards to deities, is an abstract and contradictory idea. The human mind, out of its emotionally driven imaginations, created a bizarre and incomprehensible idea that is, and will always be, out of reach for its own understanding.

I'm in the process of changing my whole approach to this argument.

I'm not looking for evidence of "deities" anymore, as there could never be evidence for such an absurd figment of the imagination.

It's not my responsibility, nor to I feel compelled, to side with irrationality and search for things that by definition, and the facts of reality, are shown to not exist and that they cannot exist.

[HAL]

Why not deal with the question of God first? If you can clear that up, it would be possible to discuss how to distinguish God from a superior alien. What evidence would you expect there to be if God exists? Well, I can suggest some. We would expect to find that the universe had a beginning point. ...

The universe might go through cycles over a time period we can't investigate yet, so it doesn't nesessarily have one starting point. It might collapse again, have another Bang, and keep going through cycles. We don't have a conclusive answer. Even if it did have one Bang, there are other theories that attempt to explain the Big Bang, such as the collision of "branes" that constantly create universes. These are not proven, but your assertion that the Big Bang was a once time event caused by a deity is not proven either, and it certainly isn't the only possible explanation.

Why does the universe behave in a law-like manner that it's describable in the language of mathematics and is accessible to human rationality?

I don't know.

What scientific evidence do you think should have been found, if God is real? ...

You're asking me? I'm asking you.

Now we're back to square one. Should I repeat the question Jane? Guess I'll have to since neither you nor the other theists haven't yet tried to answer it. One of them - ILOVEYOU - enters the thread and commences to preaching, the other, Magic, does little more than make hunt and peck answers barely making any sense of what I'm asking for.

Tell me what this deity can do to provide evidence for itself, and then tell me how I can tell that the evidence is not from a (non-god)alien technology billions of years advanced, perhaps one so advanced that they can even create universes, or cause my mind to think they are the deity I'm looking for. I didn't think this would be so hard for your side but apparently it is.

[HAL]

Would it not be absurd to try find evidence for the truth of an idea that is by definition incomprehensible, beyond human understanding and scientifically untestable ?

Maybe that's what I'm trying to get the theists to understand. 

[Alzael]

What would cut it for you, Joe?

As I always try to point out to theists, before you can begin to prove anything you need to actually have a definition of it.

So the first step in trying to prove your god would actually be bein able to define your god so that we can tell him about from other gods or an advanced alien. If you can't even define what a god is, then you can't find evidence that points to its existence. Which is why religious claims fail from the start. You can't even begin to define your terms, so your claims are useless.

[joebbowers]

I don't get your line of questioning Hal. If an alien were advanced enough to mimic God, we couldn't tell the difference. So what? Any being with the power of God would still be essentially a god by our standards. Why split hairs over a purely hypothetical argument?

A more practical line of questioning is just what evidence would we accept to believe in God? That's what I thought you were asking when I saw the thread's title. They accuse us of being just as unwilling to face facts as they are, and often claim that we would still deny God even if evidence were right in front of us.

[HAL]

I don't get your line of questioning Hal.

Joe, I understand what kind of responses atheists have to the OP, that's not what I'm interested in. I'm interested in what theists have to say about what evidence their deity can provide and how I can make sure it's a deity and not an advanced (non god) alien. They are the ones who ask me what evidence I would accept, and I'm asking theists what the deity they believe in can provide, and I'm asking theists how I can tell the difference between their deity and an advanced (non god) alien. Let's allow them to answer the question, if they can.

[Tinyal]

So what you're saying here is that you demand God meet you on your terms, and your terms only?

Totally wrong, at least in my view (and, I suspect, in the view of many other atheists here) - all he was asking for is the same terms as for anyone else we meet in life - I mean, come on!  I know my boss exists, even though I don't actually see him but twice a year.

Twice a year is fine to convince me he exists.  I have emails from him - even regular mail with his signature.  I've heard his voice in person, then matched that voice with his phone calls.  All this mundane stuff is sufficient to convince me another human being exists whom I can have a relationship with.

So this god of yours - the most powerful being ever, who knows my head intimately - indeed, who knows my every thought and bowel movement from infant to grave, knows what I'm going to do from second to second - who, coincidentially, apparantly cares who I sleep with at night and whether or not I'm working on Sundays - this being can't get it up enough to walk up to me and say howdy pardner twice a year, as my boss does?

You (and every other xian) mean to actually tell me this crap collection of stupid (provably wrong, in many cases) stories called the bible is the best he can do?  It's the best he can do when 6 billion souls are on the line for eternity?  The best he can do when 300,000 people die at nearly the same instant due to a tidal wave?  The best he can do when children never reach age 4 without knowing what a real meal is, and they die that way in their mothers arms (and this happens at least 30K times each and every month!)....

And this bible - and speakers like you magicmiles - is the best he can do??

I can't even properly say how unlikely and idiotic that sounds - I can't even grasp, after all these years as an atheist (and 15 years as a believer) how people can believe this stuff, I just can't.

Words (and gif icons) simply fail

[Alzael]

So what you're saying here is that you demand God meet you on your terms, and your terms only?

You've tried to make this kind of failed point before, Miles. The implication that we're somehow being unreasonable or unfair in asking god to do the exact types of things that he himself says that he does.

God had no problem showing up in person to convince people that he exists before. He says that he wants to speak to us and know us and he certainly had no problem yammering off before when it suited him. He says he will perform miracles for us, and he certainly did before.

All we are asking is why he only seems to do that sort of thing in works in fiction, not reality. I think it's hardly unreasonable to expect a god to actually do the things that he says he will do. Do you?

[joebbowers]

So what you're saying here is that you demand God meet you on your terms, and your terms only?

Totally wrong, at least in my view...

Magicmiles, you're also forgetting that many have knocked, and the door hasn't opened, many have sought, and not found. In other words, they tried to find God on his terms, and couldn't.

You can pull out the No True Scotsman fallacy here and claim they weren't looking hard enough or didn't really believe, which of course is bullshit. Or you can point out the millions of people who did knock and did seek and found God, to which I will respond that not a single one of them found God based on a shred of evidence. They simply convinced themselves to believe what made them feel better.

[Hatter23]

I will respond that not a single one of them found God based on a shred of evidence. They simply convinced themselves to believe what made them feel better.

OR, more likely, just went along with what their parents and neighbors said was good and true.

[velkyn]

if we mistook an advanced alien (be they extraplanetary, extradimensional, etc) for this god of the Christians, then we would, at best be just be putting back the creator problem one step and/or pissing off this god for worshipping something wrong (aka the problem with Pascal's Wager). I believe Hal is trying to avoid those two scenarios and thus his OP.

If there is no way to tell, then the Christian god isn't what its bible claims that this being is something unique and omni-everything. 

If one claims that there are no aliens that could be seen as this god, *and* claim that this god is real, then there needs to be evidence that would support this and only this god.  Not excuses that one ignored this god, because this god shuold have no problem in being noticed.  It would only be by *its* choice that one could ignore its message.

[Maggie the Opinionated]

Why not deal with the question of God first? If you can clear that up, it would be possible to discuss how to distinguish God from a superior alien. What evidence would you expect there to be if God exists? Well, I can suggest some. We would expect to find that the universe had a beginning point. ...

Bang was a once time event caused by a deity is not proven either, and it certainly isn't the only possible explanation.

I made no such claims. I certainly didn't say that BB was a one time event. You are jumping to conclusions that are not justified by anything I wrote. You don't understand, however, that change of any kind, one time or repeated, requires an agent of change. You can't get to BB in any form without one. This is where a little knowledge of Aristotle would help.

Why does the universe behave in a law-like manner that it's describable in the language of mathematics and is accessible to human rationality?

I don't know.

What scientific evidence do you think should have been found, if God is real? ...

You're asking me? I'm asking you.

If you don't have any idea what evidence you think you should be able to find, how will you recognize it when  it appears?

Tell me what this deity can do to provide evidence for itself, and then tell me how I can tell that the evidence is not from a (non-god)alien technology billions of years advanced, perhaps one so advanced that they can even create universes, or cause my mind to think they are the deity I'm looking for. I didn't think this would be so hard for your side but apparently it is.

It is an absurd question. You don't know whether or not there is such an alien out there. Why is that more likely than God? In fact, you are simply multiplying hypotheses and creating a big old mess.  If that is what you want to do, go for it. But why expect anyone to make sense of your question when you can't?

[Maggie the Opinionated]

Would it not be absurd to try find evidence for the truth of an idea that is by definition incomprehensible, beyond human understanding and scientifically untestable ?

Maybe that's what I'm trying to get the theists to understand. 

You are failing, because you are wrong. There are a number of lines of logical reasoning that can get you to "God". However, that is not the same thing (yet) as the God of the Bible. Little steps, then big ones.

[HAL]

If you don't have any idea what evidence you think you should be able to find, how will you recognize it when  it appears?

Beats the hell out of me Jane. Theists come here and say we can find their deity. Is that what I should be able to find? I have no idea what I should be able to find in this regard, or what evidence for itself it can offer. I'm not claiming anything - theists are. I have no idea what's "out there" but if a god is out there and you theists are the experts, then tell me how to recognize it. Since I don't know what's out there, perhaps advanced aliens are too, and so I need to know what your deity could theoretically do that technology billions of years advanced from what we know couldn't do.

Tell me what I should be able to find and what evidence is there for it, or what it can offer me. Your ramblings don't answer my question.

[ILOVEYOU]

Hal... or anyone....

Why would anyone be offended by my response. Especially when it was in line with the topic and question being asked.

OK.. this seems a litte off the beaten path but here it goes anyway....

So you want to be able to know the difference  just in case "maybe" you may find yourself in a similar situation...?

Does anyone..... I mean anyone see the irony in this...?

Here we are at WWGHA Forum in which many of you reject Jesus Christ, The Gospel. Yet how on Earth could anyone be qualified to answer this question...? Seriously, you would accept the answer of someone else but refuse the "Only One" qualified to answer the question. Doesn't make any sense folks. Especially when your question deals about how to differentiate between GOD or ?..........

You don't even believe in GOD so if you encountered intelligent extraterrestrial life or some unusual suprnatural event, how "could" you know...?

The question remains, who are you going to trust...? Who do you put your fatih in...?

Here a question.... on what would you use or whom would you listen to, to base your assumption from...?

What qualifications would suffice to satisfy you...?

I would think that a question such as this would need to be met by a very specific set of qualifications.

I believe Jesus Christ has the answer to this question, for those who want the truth. The "Only One" qualified to answer this question.

[HAL]

You don't even believe in GOD so if you encountered intelligent extraterrestrial life or some unusual suprnatural event, how "could" you know...?

Bingo.

[kaziglu bey]

Wow, two pages in, and we have yet to see from a theist "You could tell Yahweh from a super advanced alien because...". All we have seen is excuses to avoid addressing the question. It's not even a difficult question to understand. No, just dodging the question, and questioning of the validity and motive behind Hal's inquiry. Such as this gem just posted by ILOVEYOU

Here we are at WWGHA Forum in which many of you reject Jesus Christ, The Gospel. Yet how on Earth could anyone be qualified to answer this question...? Seriously, you would accept the answer of someone else but refuse the "Only One" qualified to answer the question. Doesn't make any sense folks. Especially when your question deals about how to differentiate between GOD or ?..........

So, in spite of the fact that ILY apparently has no better means than HAL does to determine the difference between God and highly advanced aliens, ILY accepts without question the Bible and it's teachings. If God is the only one qualified to answer this question, then why are there priests? Why are there churches? Why do theists come here with their apologetics for questions that they admit only God could know the answer to? That is really rather contradictory.

Also, ILY says

You don't even believe in GOD so if you encountered intelligent extraterrestrial life or some unusual suprnatural event, how "could" you know...?

Which HAL points out is the entire point of the thread to begin with. So, ILY, know that you have posited the question in your own terms, care to answer it? Oh wait, you just said that only God knows, so even you as a believer have no actual advantage in such matters as a non believer. One has to wonder then, why bother believing in this nonsense anyway, if it produces no discernible difference, and can't be understood.

[ILOVEYOU]

The question was pretty straight forward as was my answer. I put my faith and trust in Jesus Christ. I am a Believer. I am a Christian.

I believe these questions are satisfied through the knowledge of Jesus Christ and have already been addressed through His Word. Which is The Lord Jesus Christ.

Based upon the personal evidence in my own life, in accordance to His Word and what things I know to be true in my heart and bare witness to His truth. I believe that He is the truth and really is whom He says He is by faith.