Is God determined to allow no proof or evidence of his existence?

I think there are clearly two parts to this. IMHO there is much evidence for GOD and we discover more of it everyday. Part of the problem when discussing stuff like this is most folk look in the wrong place. For example, they look to the Bible which is nothing more than an anthology of anthologies and useless as far as evidence or proof is concerned.Another big problem is our own limitations. We are talking about the possiblitity of knowing or understanding something that's bigger, more complex, more inclusive than the whole universe. If we're struggling to understand abiogenesis and cosmology, how can we expect to understand taht which created both of them?If we continue to look forward, to try to read what GOD has left us, to understand what She's writing right now, day by day we will learn a little more.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

No,I think that's one of the silliest ideas out there. GOD hides himself>Why?Just look at the answers given.

• so man can grow to love him through faith.
• to separate humans into two groups, those that believe in him (and are saved) and those that don't.
• to hide his glory (an oldie but goody)
  

I'm sorry, but those reasons require a GOD that is about as narcissistic as they come. Folk looking for such a god will most likely find him pretty easily. The flash from the gold necklaces and diamond rings as well as the engraved and inlaid teeth give him away. He propably has "I'm God" shaved into his 'do'.I think the evidence is here, in love and beauty, in the rules we are just beginning to discover on how this universe works, in the complete ingenuity of Evolution, in green and blue and a child's smile.The problem is not, IMHO with a lack of evidence but rather in the overabundance of evidence that makes it ubiquitous. When it's everything it's hard to comprehend. It overwhelms any attempt to categorize.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Sorry, but as a Christian, I have to tell you the above is not quite accurate. There is also the record that GOD himself left, the universe.Scripture is one thing but it can never be evidence for the existence of GOD.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Sorry, but if GOD exists He is GOD.Christianity is a religion where we try to learn what GOD wants us to do. But it is only a religion.If GOD exists, GOD exists whether the Christian beliefs are correct or wrong, whether the Bible is accurate or not.Christianity is a belief, not a fact.GOD is fact, not a belief.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Please read back a few messages. As you know I have always included "If GOD exists" and the concept that you can neither prove or disprove the existance of GOD.I was speaking of the relationship between GOD and religion. The distinction I was trying to make is that GOD (IGE) exists regardless of what any religion might say or believe. GOD (IGE) is a fact as opposed to religion which can never be more than a theory.Hope that is clearer.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Once again, while that is the belief of some Christians it is not the belief of ALL Christians. Again, religion is a construct of man. If GOD exists, She exists regardless of what some religion says.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I'll try.GOD is the creator of the universe. In fact, the universe may well reside within GOD.Paradoxically, GOD also resides within the universe and within each of us.GOD is each individual part and the sum of all those parts.GOD is!Now the Biblical God.The Biblical God is an image, a reflection of the real thing. It is a construct of humans in our attempt to understand and comprehend the actuality.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You might, but you'd be wrong.I do believe in the Biblical God, but I also realize that what we can comprehend is but a caricature, a sub-set of the real thing.Please remember, the Bible is but a poorly drawn map, much faded and many times copied, and the Map is not the Territory.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

If I am correctly understanding what your saying (remember I'm old and slow so if I'm wrong, just bear with me and I'll try again) that not it exactly.Let me try a different tack and see if this makes any more sense.Let's define green.There are several paths I could take. I could start with white light and then selectively filter out wavelengths until I got what I wanted.Or I could start with pigments and combine the pigments until I got what I wanted.Using either method I could get something that could be projected onto a wall or painted onto a canvas. You could then compare the two, one the result of subtracting colors, one the result of adding colors and we couold even get a large percentage of people to agree that they were the same color.Others might wander out into the fields and find leaves that when held up against the two samples were recognizably the same.But have we defined GREEN?Not exactly. What we find is that some people look at the leaves they found and they are not exactly the same as the samples. But they are GREEN. One observer notes that yet another observer is wearing pants that are GREEN, yet a far different hue. Someone brushes against the table holding the projector and the GREEN changes slightly, still GREEN but no longer the same as the painted green.Then people notice that the feel of each sample changes based on the underlying substructure, the same green on canvass looks subtly different than when painted on boardstock or plaster.Even a child quickly learns that terms like GREEN can be a specific, "Point at the Green Grass?" or but a subset of a much larger set, things that are green.How many different greens are there? Are they all GREEN?You said: We cannot limit the properties of GOD. We are though limited by language, knowledge and capabilities from being able to define GOD. We just don't know enough, have a language suited for the task or have the capabilitites to even recognize all the attributes of GOD.Right now the best we can do when we reach such limits is to say, "I just don't know the answer yet." Perhaps someday we will be able to do so but not at our current level of understanding, capabilities or within the constraints of any known language (including math).

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Then yes, I pretty much agree with that statement.It is we who are limited.That does not mean we will always be so limited, just as one day we will understand the relationship between gravity and the other forces, and branes and abiogenesis and many things we have not even considered yet.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I don't know if I can separate the chaff from the wheat although that is certainly what we need to do. I have thought long and hard about religion, GOD and mankind though. Okay. IMHO if GOD exists, all he would want either of us to do is to keep looking, keep searching, keep learning. You and I are both looking for the same things. In fact, it's likely that the only differences might be you saying "Oh, that's what happened!" while I would say, "Oh, that's how GOD did it."

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

That is correct. The territory does not depend on the map. However the map does depend on the Territory and will be more or less accurate. Some parts it may well depict correctly while others may be incorrect, missing or misleading. But that is also why I disagree with the statement above. The condition of the map says nothing about the territory. The Bible may well be a poor map, but that does not imply anything about GOD. It is but a reflection of the capabilities and limitations of the men who wrote the Bible.In addition, as I believe I've said here more than once, I disagree with your statement related to "then a loving God who wants us all to be saved by accepting his Son as our saviour". I don't think that is an accurate statement at all.Christianity is not the only path to GOD, perhaps not even the best path. It is but one path, one I happen to be on. But there could well be many others.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You seem to know an awful lot about what I must believe. Too bad it's usually incorrect.I do not accept the Genesis myth as fact.I do not believe the Exodus happened as described in the Bible.I know the Flood never happened.And I know that Paul could be a pompous asshole and was wrong about quite a few things.That does not mean I do not believe in the Biblical God. But I don't make those assumptions. I know that GOD loves us and everything else. Please note that His love is not limited to humans.GOD does not define good and evil.And Christianity is but one way to find GOD.IMHO all the evidence needed to show GOD's existence is available. Like many things though, we are still too limited to grasp, understand and comprehend GOD. Perhaps someday we will.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

The Biblical God is a subset of the superset GOD.Legend, you cannot say what I believe. Sorry, but only I can say what I believe. You can say you don't understand my beliefs, and I would readily grant that. But frankly, you don't have a clue what you're talking about when you try to tell me what I believe.The Bible does not define God or GOD. I can and do reject much of what is in the Bible as being only literary or instructional. It is an anthology of anthologies and something written by men, for an audience of their time, in the idiom and within the knowledgebase and understanding of that audience.Rejecting some of Paul's teaching has nothing to do with believing in the Christian God of the Bible. All it says is that IMHO, Paul was wrong and in many cases concerned with building the franchise.You are free to continue this but when it comes to you telling me what I believe, you'll be talking to yourself.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

But if you read your quotes, time and time again Jesus says you should believe what he is teaching. That is quite different from saying you should worship him.It ain't what you believe, it's what you do that speaks for you.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion