Hi burnish, I know these replies were addressed for other members, but I have a few questions.
I assume there is one God just the same as I assume there is one answer to 2 + 2 and many wrong answers.
Don’t you mean you assume there is only one god the same way you assume there is only one equation that gives you 4? This would seem to make more sense, given the fact there are many religions that claim their path to god is the correct one.
I believe God can reach anyone regardless of where or how they were raised.
If God can reach them, then why doesn’t he? Human beings are dying right now which have never heard of your god. So given the fact he isn’t intervening must mean: 1) he doesn’t have the power to save everyone, 2) he doesn’t want to save everyone, or 3) he isn’t around any longer. So which is it?
I don't assume it without evidence. To me it has been reasonably confirmed.
That’s funny, my Muslim friend says the same thing and you both have the same amount of evidence.
What I would say first of all is that there is no route to unbelief for a Christian.
What you've just committed was the No True Scotsman
fallacy. No doubt others will call you out on this type of argument.Here is the standard No True Scotsman setup
1) All Scotsmen put sugar on their porridge.
2) Angus is a Scotsman and he puts sugar on his porridge.
3) Well no true
Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.
4) Therefore, Angus is not a true
Moderate Muslims use this same argument when trying to distance themselves from their fundamentalist counterparts. "Well no true
Muslim would commit such an atrocity!" Tough noogies. They followed Islam, shared belief in the same god, and taught from the same dogmatic holy book; they were Muslim.You're essentially doing the same thing to poor ol' screwtape here
1) For all Christians there is no route to unbelief.
2) screwtape was a Christian, and he took the route to unbelief.
3) Well no true
Christian can take the route to unbelief.
4) Therefore, screwtape wasn't a true
Do you see why this argument is fallacious?
I am sure you have read in scripture how God tested Job. He took away everything he had to see if his faith was genuine. Whether Job would, as Satan confidently asserted, curse God for his sufferings. Have you ever compared yourself to Job?
Ah, Job. It’s funny because you hold this story in such high moral regard while I believe this is a contender for one of the most evil stories in the Bible. Please don’t insult Job’s family by calling this a test. They were murdered. His wife, his children, his farm hands, his livestock: all murdered over a celestial gambling game; both God and Satan treated them like nothing more than chips on a poker table.
Seriously, burnish, this story is morally appalling. God pokes Satan by bragging, saying, “Ha! Look at Job, he loves me and fears me more than he fears you.” Satan scoffs, “Of course Job does, you gave him a good life. If you destroyed his life he wouldn’t worship you.” God doesn’t bat an eyelash and retorts, “Fine, burn everything he loves, just don’t touch Job himself.” Tell me burnish, what kind of loving God stands idly by as he gives the order to have a man's family murdered on a bet? Here’s a hint: it’s a god that has no respect for morality. The story of Job is a story about a man’s obedience to an unjust god. It is not a moral story.
It is saying very clearly that God provides everyone with sufficient evidence to come to know Him, and to know what is to come after death, but that men suppress the truth, and that they have no excuse.
I’ve got bad news for you: God doesn’t provide everyone with sufficient evidence. As I mentioned earlier, there are people that still go through their entire lives without ever hearing about your ancient Middle Eastern god. So what gives?