The God that has performed the works described in my episodes is the God of the Bible. I cannot dismiss what he has done nor can I attribute those works to another non biblical God.
You've consistently failed to provide evidence to show that this is the case, or even that a god was involved at all. All you have is your emotional belief that it is true, but emotions are easily fooled. That's why the topic is about validating your belief in your god, rather than (say) making an emotional appeal for your god.
the one thing you are not allowing into your reasoning is that there is one true God that performs the kinds of works that I have described. You are the one locked in an endless loop, not me. My God is capable of proving himself to me and all you can say is that my parents lied to me and that is the only place I could be getting my information. I don't just mine it form my past indoctrination, I have a personal experience that completely reinforces it
No, actually, he's not accepting any god as an explanation. The reason is simple - nobody has been able to show evidence for the existence of any god. All they can do is point to coincidences which they interpret as the work of their god, but are better explained by coincidence and chance. You are hardly unique in your insistence that it must be the god you believe in who's doing these things, and you are hardly unique in your inability to demonstrate that your belief is true.
You need to read four or five of the accounts of intervention by god and ask me questions with regard to those examples of proof I have because all your questioning along the same lines will not persuade me that the supernatural events I report didn't occur. There is apossibility that you have read none of them and are only talking to me from what you have read here, If that's the case, we are both wasting time. Please tell me what of mine you have read so I can determine whether to continue this discussion with you.
What we're questioning is your insistence that those events are 'supernatural' in the first place. Right now, it seems to be the case that if you can't explain what happened, it must be supernatural. That logic does not fly, however. Long-shot coincidences happen; indeed, they're actually fairly common
. And, ultimately, all of your personal events boil down to long-shot coincidences combined with subjective experiences.
The Spirit prompted me to do an unusual thing. While getting ready to leave my house for church I stopped at the door and my attention fixed upon a rock my daughter picked up on a hike. I put it in my sport jacket side pocket, and I had no idea why. During the first meeting at church someone tapped me on the shoulder and asked if I wouldn't mind sitting in for an absent teacher and team teach a class. I had never been asked to do anything like it and I agreed. The other teachaer had prepared the lesson but in the middle of the lesson came to a part that required a rock, and confess that he had failed to bring one. I took the rock out of my pocket and tossed to him and I knew that the spirit prompted me to pick the rock up because the spirit knew the lesson plan and I didn't. I didn't even know I'd be in the class. I was amazed when that happened, but not surprised because I had many encouters of the Spirit leading and that was just another example. So, you may want to abstain from accusing me of simply being credulous. It may apply to people worshipping false gods, it does in no way apply to those worshipping the God of the Bible in Spirit and in truth.
The reason people are accusing you of being credulous is because you take a coincidence like this (you pick up a rock, and end up needing a rock later on) and attribute it to the hand of your god. That's what credulousness means - too great a readiness to believe something. In your case, it's the god you believe in, and you end up attributing anything that is the slightest bit unusual to your god (or, I suppose, to your devil, if it's sufficiently bad).
I'd ask you to explain how I knew to take a rock without the supernatural guidance, but I'm afraid that you will parrot everyone else here and say I have super intuition, or I just got lucky, or that statistics allowed it, but I'm hoping you don't because it's embarrassing to see people make fools of themselves. There is one very simple explanation. God was blessing me and that teacher with proof of his favor and guidance. Please don't try to explain it away.... It's just how it is. And don't tell me I can't prove to you that I took the rock to church, or that I imagined it, or I forgot the account. It's gettin tiring. Oh, and by the way I'm totally qualified to report exactly what happened to me, I don't need a theology degree or a doctorate in statistics, or psychology, or critical thinking. Read the stories and you will know that God intervenes.
You didn't know to take the rock. You were struck by it and decided, on impulse, to pick it up, and it just so happened that it came in handy later. The problem with your 'simple' explanation is that it really isn't simple at all. It requires a number of unwarranted assumptions that are conveniently packaged within the 'simple' explanation. For example, that your daughter brought the rock home at your god's urging, that he made sure your daughter would put it down right where you could see it, that he directed you to notice it, that he directed you to pick it up, that he made the other teacher forget the rock he intended to bring (or at least allowed him to forget it)... I'll bet I'm just scratching the surface here.
You seem to be expecting a bunch of skeptics to read about your experiences and take them at face value (credulously, in other words). Like it or not, Wayne, "please don't try to explain it away" doesn't fly here. If it did, we wouldn't be skeptics. We need more than just coincidences that you've assumed are supernatural. We need more than just a pile of anecdotes that you dump on us. We're extremely non-credulous people, Wayne, so we need factual evidence that we can check and verify.
God demonstrates to me, I don't demonstrate anything.
If you can't (or won't) demonstrate these things to us, why are you here? We aren't credulous, so we aren't going to take your word for it.
God might be hiding something from you but I have no intention of hiding anything from critical thinking.
Oh, I don't doubt that you're telling the truth as you believe it is. I simply don't accept that the truth is what you believe it is.
You say I have beliefs, I say they aren't just imaginations that have no basis in fact and experience, what I know about God is supported by solid examples of intervention so they are anything but the result of being irrational arguments, credulity, gullibility, and uncritical examination. You may as well give up on those charges, they may work in other cases they are useless in discussing my case.
Nobody's saying these are things you just dreamed up, you know. The credulousness, irrationality and gullibility come from your unwillingness to consider any cause but the supernatural for these events.
God is forbidding you to have the evidence you demand.
So, your god wants you to fail abjectly at convincing atheists and skeptics? That's certainly how it seems from this end; if (and bear in mind that this is a mighty big if) your god is real, then he sent you here completely unprepared to deal with atheists and skeptics, meaning he wanted you to fail, and fail repeatedly. Success would have required that evidence that you say your god 'forbade' us to have.
I wouldn't bother if I was you. This is not a court of law, you must weigh, in my case whether my testimony is accurate, and make your decision. You either call me a liar, or you accept the testimony.
False dichotomy. There are other options; you could be mistaken, you could be delusional, you could have been misled...
Your demand for the kind of evidence that God is denying you is not proof that my testimony is false, it's that an all powerful God can keep anything he wants from you, he doesn't care how much you demand it.
More likely, this is your attempt to rationalize away the fact that you cannot provide any such evidence, and to blame your god for it.
You are so wrong! You must know it. God has proved Himself to me, it is ridiculous for you to declare that he hasn't proven himself to me just because it's not proof to you. That is arrogant. Now in time, as you would get to know me and as others have observed that are close to me, you would begin to see that I have exceptionally frequent demonstrations of supernatural occurrences, like that rock in the pocket thing, and you would after a while realise that something abnormal to nature is occurring and too frequently. I know it must be hard to grasp. I can tell you one thing, I personally have nothing to do with it. I have never called up a incident at will, they just happen to me. It's true. You will never be able to crack this case with your critical thinking, it is meant to confound.
Why must he be wrong? It's very simple; if your god proved himself to you, then it would have been child's play for him, an all-powerful god, to provide you with the evidence you needed to prove yourself to us. The fact that you cannot provide such evidence contradicts your assertions. And, as I stated before, long-shot coincidences happen frequently (once every few minutes, somewhere in the world). You've given us barely a dozen examples of so-called supernatural occurrences through your entire life. Given that you, yourself, could have had over a hundred long-shot coincidences just in the past decade, you will have to excuse me for not being willing to accept your assertion that they are "exceptionally frequent".
You'd like to think that I'm not but you are the one blinded by confirmation bias. I'm going to predict that you are going to dismiss the guidance I got to take the rock to church as confirmation bias and you will be demonstrating confirmation bias of your own that has blinded you from the reality you have decided never to face, and that is that there is a true God and he is the one men describe in the Bible.
There's no reason that you couldn't also be blinded by confirmation bias. There are, in fact, four possibilities; neither of you are, both of you are, he is but you aren't, or you are but he isn't. Confirmation bias is when someone favors information or interpretations that confirm what they already believe (while disregarding alternate interpretations). You believe that there is a god, described in the Bible, and you are favoring interpretations of events that confirm this belief of yours (and disregarding alternate interpretations). Certainly seems like confirmation bias to me.