RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 11, 2015 at 4:52 pm
(This post was last modified: July 11, 2015 at 4:52 pm by Longhorn.)
(July 11, 2015 at 9:56 am)Randy Carson Wrote:(July 10, 2015 at 6:22 pm)Neimenovic Wrote: My questions are, why is god silent (compared to the OT at least) and why don't OT revelations interfere with human free will like you claim they would?
And to answer your question, there is no difference. They are all unsupported claims, events that have natural explanations and are all equally invalid as evidence for god; however, for the sake of argument, let's pretend that god exists. Why doesn't he interfere like he used to? how did his interferences not violate free will?
if you're saying that ndes are the way god reveals himself now, how does that not violate our free will?
N-
Are you actually saying on the one hand that God needs to reveal himself or you won't believe but on the other hand if he does reveal himself he's violating your free will?
Dude. You were the one to say that. Don't put words in my mouth.
I'm asking, if god revealing himself would be a violation of free will, why did he do that in the past?