The Big Leap: From God to YHWH/Jesus

[TheOneAndOnly]

Let's imagine that I am convinced with arguments for the existence of a supreme moral agent - a god if you will. I am also convinced this god is all powerful, all knowing and unique.
How then would a Christian convince me that his god, Jesus, is the real deal?
I've been thinking about this and I can't think of any reasonable arguments to get from a supreme omnibeing to the Christian God.

[KingDavid8]

Let's imagine that I am convinced with arguments for the existence of a supreme moral agent - a god if you will. I am also convinced this god is all powerful, all knowing and unique.
How then would a Christian convince me that his god, Jesus, is the real deal?
I've been thinking about this and I can't think of any reasonable arguments to get from a supreme omnibeing to the Christian God.

Start here - If there is an omnipotent, omniscient God, then it's possible that Jesus was resurrected (in fact, if it's even POSSIBLE that God exists, then it's possible that Jesus was resurrected). Now read the Gospels again, ask yourself if the writings appear to be honest or fabricated, look at the historical data and the arguments for and against the resurrection. Ask yourself if all of these people would likely have become so convinced of the resurrection had there not been a resurrection. Be open to all possibilities, don't discount things for illogical reasons, and pray for God to point you in the right direction. It may take time. It took me about seven years to go from Deism to Christianity.

David

[SlipSlidin'Away]

Start here - If there is an omnipotent, omniscient God, then it's possible that Jesus was resurrected (in fact, if it's even POSSIBLE that God exists, then it's possible that Jesus was resurrected). Now read the Gospels again, ask yourself if the writings appear to be honest or fabricated, look at the historical data and the arguments for and against the resurrection. Ask yourself if all of these people would likely have become so convinced of the resurrection had there not been a resurrection. Be open to all possibilities, don't discount things for illogical reasons, and pray for God to point you in the right direction. It may take time. It took me about seven years to go from Deism to Christianity.

David

Did you do this with all the sacred texts? Why or why not?

Slipster

[KingDavid8]

Did you do this with all the sacred texts? Why or why not?

Slipster

Are there other sacred texts which give evidence for or against the resurrection? The resurrection was the subject that I was talking about, not the texts themselves. I only mentioned the texts as they relate to the resurrection.

David

[SlipSlidin'Away]

Are there other sacred texts which give evidence for or against the resurrection? The resurrection was the subject that I was talking about, not the texts themselves. I only mentioned the texts as they relate to the resurrection.

David

According to the OP, you started with a belief in God, then why would you then jump to Christianity as the true religion?

If you become convinced that there was a resurrection, then Christianity is the true religion. But why were you convinced that there was a resurrection before you checked out other faith claims?

Slipster

[KingDavid8]

According to the OP, you started with a belief in God, then why would you then jump to Christianity as the true religion?

If you become convinced that there was a resurrection, then Christianity is the true religion. But why were you convinced that there was a resurrection before you checked out other faith claims?

Slipster

Because I haven't seen any other faith claims that have both stood the test of time and compare to the resurrection claim, that is a claim which appears to be backed up by multiple eyewitnesses, is a historical event, is a claim on which the entire religion stands or falls (if Jesus was resurrected, Christianity is true - if He wasn't, it's false), and which, as far as I can tell, stands up to scrutiny. The faith claims of other religions seem soft by comparison (except perhaps for the Mormon claim, but I don't feel that one stands up to scrutiny). That's not to say they can't be true, but there's no single point on which those religions stand or fall which isn't a matter of complete faith. If someone who believes in God wants to check out multiple religions before settling with a single one, that's their choice. But I'm the kind of person who needs to have something make sense in my head before it can make sense in my heart.

David

[Richbee]

Let's imagine that I am convinced with arguments for the existence of a supreme moral agent - a god if you will. I am also convinced this god is all powerful, all knowing and unique.

How then would a Christian convince me that his god, Jesus, is the real deal?

I've been thinking about this and I can't think of any reasonable arguments to get from a supreme omnibeing to the Christian God.

To me, the miracle of the Virgin birth says it all. along with the OT Messianic prophesies.

Jesus is the Jewish Messiah, and the Son of God, God of God..

Not the "Christian God".

God.

The God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Kind David, Daniel, Jonah, etc.

God is One, in three persons or in the Greek: persona.

Consider the Triune nature of God, in the Old Testament, or in Judaism:

The Use of the Compound One

The fourth line of evidence for unity of the Godhead in the Old Testament is in Deuteronomy 6:4; a very famous verse for Jewish people. Deuteronomy 6:4 is called the sh’ma, and it is considered the essence of all forms of Judaism. That verse reads: Hear, 0 Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah:…This verse, more than any other, emphasizes the concept of a unity. In the field of Jewish evangelism, Deuteronomy 6:4 is often used by Jewish people to teach against the plurality of the Godhead. But, if this verse is studied very carefully, it is evident that it is not teaching an absolute unity, but a compound unity. Rather than arguing against a plurality of the Godhead, Deuteronomy 6:4 actually supports the concept of plurality in the Godhead. To begin with, it should be pointed out that where it reads Jehovah our God the Hebrew word for God is plural, and literally reads, "our Gods." But, the key word to focus attention on is the word one.

Echad

The Hebrew word for one is echad. By comparing the usage of echad elsewhere in the Old Testament, it is clear that this word refers to a compound one, not an absolute one. For example, Genesis 1:5 states: And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day. The combination of evening and morning comprised the unity of echad, or one day. Another key passage is Genesis 2:24: Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. A man and a woman who come together in marriage are said to become one [echad] flesh. There are two personalities, a man and a woman, coming together in marriage, and the two become one. Obviously, they do not become an absolute one, for they retain their separate personalities; however, there is definitely a unity there. Another example is Ezra 3:1, where the whole assembly of Israel was as one [echad]. Although it was comprised of numerous individuals, they were all looked upon as one; obviously a united one. Another example is Ezekiel 37:17, where Ezekiel is told to put two sticks together, and they are combined to become one [echad] stick. These examples of the usage of the word echad in the Hebrew text, which is the very same word used in Deuteronomy 6:4, show that it speaks of a compound unity, not an absolute unity.

Yachid

There is another Hebrew word which does mean an absolute one: yachid. It is used in Genesis 22:2, where it emphasizes Isaac as Abraham's only, unique son. So, if Moses had wanted to emphasize absolute oneness of God, he would have used the term yachid. But he did not use that term for the oneness of God. Deuteronomy 6:4 is, therefore, an argument in favor of the plurality of the Godhead and, at the same time, it teaches the unity of this plurality of the one God."

Source::More - Click Here

[Orion]

The Use of the Compound One

The fourth line of evidence for unity of the Godhead in the Old Testament is in Deuteronomy 6:4; a very famous verse for Jewish people. Deuteronomy 6:4 is called the sh?ma, and it is considered the essence of all forms of Judaism. That verse reads: Hear, 0 Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah:?This verse, more than any other, emphasizes the concept of a unity. In the field of Jewish evangelism, Deuteronomy 6:4 is often used by Jewish people to teach against the plurality of the Godhead. But, if this verse is studied very carefully, it is evident that it is not teaching an absolute unity, but a compound unity.

Translation: If you wish to understand Hebrew, you should visit a Christian fundamentalist website. In this case...

http://www.ariel.org/

The Hebrew word for one is 'echad'. By comparing the usage of echad elsewhere in the Old Testament, it is clear that this word refers to a compound one, not an absolute one.

...wherein this individual attempts to redefine both the Hebrew language as well as one of the most bedrock concepts of Judaism.

[Richbee]

Translation: If you wish to understand Hebrew, you should visit a Christian fundamentalist website. In this case...

http://www.ariel.org/



...wherein this individual attempts to redefine both the Hebrew language as well as one of the most bedrock concepts of Judaism.

Still blind to the truth, and reality of Messianic Jews?

Psalm 3:8 From the Lord comes deliverance....

You can be delivered from your bigotry!

Yes, many Jews have discovered the Jewish Messiah - Y'Shua or Jesus.

Once again, you have provided abundent evidence that you have no clue what the vague word meaning is for: fundamentalist.

You, yourself, appear to be a FUNNYMENTALIST!



Deal with it!

[SlipSlidin'Away]

The faith claims of other religions seem soft by comparison (except perhaps for the Mormon claim, but I don't feel that one stands up to scrutiny).

But how could you know this without spending time with each one and critically examining all its parts. Maybe you weren't understanding something about the texts of the other religions and that's why you didn't become a true believer of them. You seem to think that if non-believers knew more about Christianity, then they would convert. But I'm sure believer of other faiths believe that about non-believers of their faith as well.

That's not to say they can't be true, but there's no single point on which those religions stand or fall which isn't a matter of complete faith.

There are a lot of negatives in that statement which makes it hard to follow. Could you rephrase that please?

I think it's the big leap that the OP is referring to, but as it's written, I can't be sure.

If someone who believes in God wants to check out multiple religions before settling with a single one, that's their choice. But I'm the kind of person who needs to have something make sense in my head before it can make sense in my heart.

David

And for many people, in fact more people than believe in Christianity, I think, it makes sense in their head to believe in another religion.

Slipster

[Seasanctuary]

Start here - If there is an omnipotent, omniscient God, then it's possible that Jesus was resurrected (in fact, if it's even POSSIBLE that God exists, then it's possible that Jesus was resurrected). Now read the Gospels again, ask yourself if the writings appear to be honest or fabricated, look at the historical data and the arguments for and against the resurrection. Ask yourself if all of these people would likely have become so convinced of the resurrection had there not been a resurrection. Be open to all possibilities, don't discount things for illogical reasons, and pray for God to point you in the right direction. It may take time. It took me about seven years to go from Deism to Christianity.

Any benefit of the doubt I might give to the New Testament writers is trumped by their unfaithfulness to the Torah.

[Solly]

Let's imagine that I am convinced with arguments for the existence of a supreme moral agent - a god if you will. I am also convinced this god is all powerful, all knowing and unique.

That's asuming too much already OaO. Billyuns and billyuns of people believe this, even philosophers believe this. But this is something we have come to a conclusion about, it's a man made idea, so that...

How then would a Christian convince me that his god, Jesus, is the real deal?

You can't necesarily get to there from here. The Bible doesn't ask you to believe in the kind of god you have mentioned above, and then says, btw, this is his Son. The revelation of the Son grows out of the revelation of YHWH through Jewish history and texts. He is who he is because of 2000 years of history and dealings. To accept that there is a god as you have specified requires you to narrow it down as to where that god is revealed. For Christians the rest follows naturally. Jesus gives the human face to the god revealed in the Bible. So...

I've been thinking about this and I can't think of any reasonable arguments to get from a supreme omnibeing to the Christian God.

There aren't any, because the two arguments are different. One is philosophical, the other revelatory. The one we can come up with using TAG, etc - which I don't see as 'proofs' as such, just helpful supports - the other is revealed from God himself. This is why the main avenue of converting people is preaching, not philosophical argument which will get you about as far as Antony Flew, but not likely to get you further.

[HRG_new]

Start here - If there is an omnipotent, omniscient God, then it's possible that Jesus was resurrected (in fact, if it's even POSSIBLE that God exists, then it's possible that Jesus was resurrected).

In this case it is also possible that all the resurrection business was a gigantic hoax by Loki.

Now read the Gospels again, ask yourself if the writings appear to be honest or fabricated, look at the historical data and the arguments for and against the resurrection. Ask yourself if all of these people would likely have become so convinced of the resurrection had there not been a resurrection.

No mortals can distinguish Loki's fabrications from the real thing

Be open to all possibilities,

... to all possibilities, as long as they agree with the Christian version. Don't be open to Loki, Coyote, Kali etc.

Etc.

Morale: even if we accept supernatural intervention as an explanation for data, we can never tell what actually happened. We lack all standards about the supernatural and cannot say that a specific supernatural explanation is more "plausible" than another one.

[Orion]

Still blind to the truth, and reality of Messianic Jews?

Psalm 3:8 From the Lord comes deliverance....

You can be delivered from your bigotry!

Yes, many Jews have discovered the Jewish Messiah - Y'Shua or Jesus.

Once again, you have provided abundent evidence that you have no clue what the vague word meaning is for: fundamentalist.

You, yourself, appear to be a FUNNYMENTALIST!



Deal with it!

Richbee, after five years, I've come to realize that you're...special. That's one of the reasons why I don't come down hard on you in these fora, in that I fear the consequences of doing so. It's why I let a lot of your cut&paste posts slide without comment.

No, Richbee, I'm not a 'bigot'. From anyone else, I'd take that as an insult. But from you, I let it slide, for obvious reasons.

I'd encourage you to learn to discuss, to put forth your own ideas, as opposed to simply spamming these fora with cut&paste. Cut&paste is a cheap and lazy alternative to discussion, Richbee. As others have advised you, you'd be much better off expressing your own opinions. Give it a try.

[SlipSlidin'Away]

I'd encourage you to learn to discuss, to put forth your own ideas, as opposed to simply spamming these fora with cut&paste. Cut&paste is a cheap and lazy alternative to discussion, Richbee. As others have advised you, you'd be much better off expressing your own opinions. Give it a try.

Richbee,

Or at least could you make your posts shorter so I can scroll by them faster.

Thanks.

Slipster