Why knocking is so important.

[Tonus]

Drich, you're presupposing that a god exists.
We (and I hope I speak for this thread's atheist repliers) refuse to presuppose that, as we acknowledge it as a fallible method to discover anything.

And there are many of us who did presuppose it, and convinced ourselves that we had found god, but eventually realized that we had not. I know that the response to this is that I did not do it correctly (or something similar to that). But that reminds me of the explanations when people want to believe that god always answers prayers.

I think that it relies on the idea that god is not inclined to reveal himself to us. And I never found that to be a satisfying concept. It works against what the bible says he did (revealing himself to people frequently, sometimes with amazing displays of power) and what the bible says he wants (for each of us to find him and be saved). It does not seem sensible to me.

[RobbyPants]

Then I say A/S/K (ask seek knock) as out lined in luke 11. And you will be given a measure of the Holy Spirit.

You say: bla bla bla, "I did when i; bla bla bla, and got nothing in response. So now I am an atheist."

Then me: if you're not currently seeking you have not A/S/K'ed as outlined in luke 11. Because again the persistent neighbor did not stop knocking till he got what he was looking for..
So if you stopped before you got what you were looking for, you did not follow the outline Christ Gave.

I asked for two years and got nothing, when I couldn't make myself believe anymore. So, you're saying I have to ask for some undetermined number of years until I get the answer you think I should get, and that this somehow counts as proof?

Sounds like an ad hoc assertion to let you move the goal posts around as long as you'd like. I think I'll pass.


Drich, have you ever wondered why your god isn't obvious, and why he must be continually seeked for an unspecified number of years before he can be "found"? Does it ever trouble you when other people find different gods?

[Natachan]

You didn't answer my question. I said I knocked, got a response, but that I don't find the response credible due to lack of corroborating evidence. My own personal experiences are subjective and faulty.

What other evidence so you have to indicate that a God does exist? Why should I trust that the answer I got was reliable?

[Bibliofagus]

I got that from you. You are the guy saying that if I try reaching god he will reveal himself to me right?

Can you provide a link to where I said that and a post number?

Well... It appears to be the point of this thread and what you are saying in basically every post you made in it. But you are probably trying to communicate that you meant something else. All the time.

Which is of course totally okay.

Now to figure out what you did mean...

The thread is titled 'why knocking is important'.

Why is it? What does it accomplish?

[FallentoReason]

Let's say you did have a humble and contrite heart when you asked God to help you find Him or when you genuinely asked for proof of Him. But let's also say you had a really messed up idea of who God is and what He wants from you.

Now if God gave you confirmation that He does indeed exist, it would cement your version of God (flaws mistakes and all) in your mind.

Why can't God confirm He exists *and* teach us about his true self? I mean, c'mon.. the atheist made it this far already by choosing to humble themselves and sincerely search for God. Is God really going to be that tight and still refuse the atheist a chance at being saved based on a technicality?

It makes more sense for God to not exist, than for this benevolent being with a will to be in relationship with us to continually deny us the knowledge of his existence unless the planets align, and we are in this perfect state of mind while knowing precisely the nature of God such that our view of Him isn't flawed.

We're only human, after all.

[Mystical]

I can't seem to find the post where we all were recently speaking of knocking so I am starting this new thread rather than hijack someone else's.

I know many of us have had this discussion before. Where you say bla bla bla bla, no proof of God Bla bla bla..

---

Then I say if you want proof, what better proof of God, is their than God Himself?

Then you say: bla bla bla how can God be proof, of God? (insert insult) bla bla! Ha, Ha , Ha

Then I say A/S/K (ask seek knock) as out lined in luke 11. And you will be given a measure of the Holy Spirit.

You say: bla bla bla, "I did when i; bla bla bla, and got nothing in response. So now I am an atheist."

Then me: if you're not currently seeking you have not A/S/K'ed as outlined in luke 11. Because again the persistent neighbor did not stop knocking till he got what he was looking for..
So if you stopped before you got what you were looking for, you did not follow the outline Christ Gave.

Then the conversation generally turns to all the different reasons knocking does not apply to you..

Before we go down another bla bla bla road, let's try going down the other fork in this conversation.

Let's say you did have a humble and contrite heart when you asked God to help you find Him or when you genuinely asked for proof of Him. But let's also say you had a really messed up idea of who God is and what He wants from you.

Now if God gave you confirmation that He does indeed exist, it would cement your version of God (flaws mistakes and all) in your mind.

I assume most of you are familiar with the parable of the wise and foolish builders/the man who built his house on the sand and the man who built his house upon the rock.
If not it starts at verse 24: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...rsion=NASB

Both men had the same objective here and that was to build his own house. In the story our house is our legacy or our effort to build a relationship with God. (Empty Religion or religious effort for short)
Meaning a wise man (man who truly knows God) and a foolish man (a man who does not know God) can live a life and do the exact same things as the wise man does.(which result in a house/religion) for both. However according to Christ one house will stand and one house will fall when tested.

When you ask for God to send 'proof.' Or to strengthen your relationship with Him he sends the rains to test/proof your house. Meaning if the picture of God you have/your religious views are based on the biblical portrayal of God you will see God as your foundation. (You will be able to see the proof He sends in the Holy Spirit.) However if you have built your understanding of God on the empty religions of your fathers then it is more likely that your house will have been washed away.

This is why it is so important to continue knocking. Because in your prayer you asked to see God, and rather than God allow you to continue to build a 'house' on a corrupt foundation, He will simply stop supporting your house/religious beliefs, allowing your house to collapse under its own fatal flaws.

This is where many of you are at. You sought God and rather than re enforce your ideas of what God is, He has taken those imperfect images from you, by giving you the proof you need to disqualify those pictures of Him as being 'God.'

You all have done the hard part, and that is cast off the empty traditional beliefs, God has help you in wiping your slate clean. The question then becomes, what do you want to build on your slate now? Do any of you still have the desire to seek God? (Most of you are more than 1/2 way there.) or do you assume just because you disqualified the idea of God you had as a child means no other version of God can possibly exist.

How much pride does it take to assume that the picture/understanding of God you had as a child, can even be close to the creator of everything?

---

[Nine]

---

God traits are defined by Him. He is the alpha and Omega the beginning and end to all things. In short this puts the Omni max definition to shame, it means God is and has the authority to be who ever He wants to be. Can He create a rock too big for Him to lift? If He wanted to Yes. If not then No. Is He obligated to be Omni benevolent as the Omni max God is bound to be? No. In this freedom God says He is loving and jealous, he gives and He takes from those who are not faithful to what they have, He punishes the wicked and offers redemption those who seek it.

---

* Nine sighs

I'm really not sure what to say, I feel like either you have intentionally skipped the point I was making twice or we are on completely different wavelengths.

The points are these:
That the starting point of your 'knocking' idea is flawed just by the fact with people like myself their can be no sincere starting point. Although my parents were slightly religious it was not a thing I was ever brought up around so has never crossed my mind. Actually being a believer in your god is as alien to me as being a Scientologist probably is to you.

2nd Even if there was a starting point, it is clear that the idea is circular in that if it fails you try again until it works. Knowing the way in which humans work, trying to force an ideology in that way could work for anything regardless of wither it is correct or not. I challenge you to the same technique but for Allah, you can't tell me it doesn't work because in that case you just clearly haven't done it correctly.

God is not the God of man's religions but of the Bible. If you want to know more the answers of who God is, starts there.

I've read the bible, I actually did religious studies as one of my choices in school and college. Both times I studied Judaism and Christianity. If I learned anything it is that the bible is vague enough that it can mean just about anything you need it too.

Have you ever seen the book of Eli?





Its funny I have no idea if that film was meant to be for or against religion. Perhaps both.

[Drich]

Again that is not my question to answer. God answers all of those who will simply meet Him on His terms. That is like asking a British subject to provide you with proof of the authority of the queen, when you had the ability and access to speak with her directly.

If the British queen was 100% sequestered from all other humans and never directly communicated with the outside world or anybody in it, and the only evidence of her existence came from hearsay and books that made no testable claims, and you were told that you could only hear the queen in your head, and only if you asked her in just the right way, would you accept as absolute truth that there is a queen reigning over Britain?

I honestly do not care who is ruling over Britain. I used the queen as a possiable example for a specific delima that I do not think anyone has addressed yet.

[Anomalocaris]

If the British queen was 100% sequestered from all other humans and never directly communicated with the outside world or anybody in it, and the only evidence of her existence came from hearsay and books that made no testable claims, and you were told that you could only hear the queen in your head, and only if you asked her in just the right way, would you accept as absolute truth that there is a queen reigning over Britain?

I honestly do not care who is ruling over Britain. I used the queen as a possiable example for a specific delima that I do not think anyone has addressed yet.

You should realize you think your god exists only because, as you repeatedly demonstrated, your intellect is too small to encompass the proper spelling, much less the concept, of possible.

Tell you what, you focus on spelling it right, and we will focus on dumbing down the concept further so we can give it to you again in a package closer to your level of comprehension.

[ShaMan]

Hey Drich... Think of how many souls aren't being won by you because you spend your time bashing your head against a wall on AF!

How about you stop casting your version of god's pearls at we swine here online? WWJD? He'd have left long ago, and advises you to do so as well.

6 “Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw your pearls before swine, or they will trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces."

You're wasting resources bro....