1984 & A/S/K revisited

[FallentoReason]

I'm sorry but that is just ridiculous, man needs faith to search out God, that is unless God was to appear in front of you as you desire. Salvation comes through faith for us, so if God were to appear in front of you...well were would that leave you? Your the one trying to make circles out of this, I've given you a straight line to follow with F/B/K. Check out what I said to Ryan, replacing faith with the seed in Matthew 13.

If God were to appear right in front of me, that would change absolutely nothing in terms of my free will to believe in him. How many times has the Bible said God appeared to such and such (even the fallen angels) and yet they chose not to have faith in him? Knowledge of God does not eliminate our choice to have faith in him.

It would change everything, you would have no choice but to believe He exists, or question your ability to reason things you see.... well maybe not yourself considering the way you've been responding.

The Bible is proof that knowledge of God's existence doesn't negate your free will. Demons are aware of his existence according to the narrative, yet they rebel.

You are jumping from belief to faith and trying to make them the same thing to justify your unreasonable reasoning.

Please elaborate by giving an explicit example.

The last sentence is impossible, faith comes before knowledge,

Agreed, and such a method of attaining knowledge is also the same method of attaining falsehoods by cult leaders. Faith -> knowledge =/= attaining truth.

I know what you're try to say, you should use the word trust instead of faith in your above statement. I know I said trust and faith can be the same and I stand by that, but they do not mean the same all the time, by definition and necessity.

Yes, you're right, I should have explicitly said "trust" instead of leave the reader to assume that's what I meant.

The rest of what you wrote was the same old mish mash and not worth responding to, example the chair because the assumption was one chair and one builder, but yes I've seen chairs in stores I would not sit in.

"Same old mish mash"? I've never heard of an argument relating to "unjustified faith". It's my original work so I don't see how this is "the same old mish mash".

You've seen chairs you wouldn't sit in (presumably because they will break)? You would go this far to reject my reasoning that you would assert there's chair designs in stores that, by some miracle, got ticks across the board and are now being sold, even though they're actually faulty, and you can clearly see its faultiness without even having to try it out??