The foolishness of, "If God would just…"
by Jason Wisdom
I would like to argue that one of the most common complaints of the skeptic might also be one of the most foolish — "If God wanted to get me to believe, then He could do so very easily by just doing…’X’."
The problem with this statement is that it is impossible to know whether or not the occurrence of "X" would ACTUALLY cause the skeptic to believe. For instance, let us substitute 3 different scenarios in for "X".
"If God wanted to get me to believe then he could do so very easily by just…."
1. "Bringing my brother back from the dead."
2. "Appearing physically in Time Square."
3. "Causing 40 days of darkness upon my request."
I want to go through these one by one and argue why I think it would be foolish to ASSUME that the occurrence of any these miracles would ACTUALLY guarantee the skeptic coming to belief in God.
1. The skeptic is visited by his resurrected brother. His first thought will almost certainly be "How is this possible?" At this point, he will search for any way of explaining the phenomenon without accepting the miraculous. He will find multiple possible (although improbable) explanations. For example, it is possible that his brother elaborately faked his own death. It is also possible that his brother had a secret identical twin. Even more improbable, but still possible, is that someone could have gotten extensive plastic surgery, learned to impersonate his brother and studied important minutia about his life to seem convincing…
FOLLOW THE LINK BELOW TO CONTINUE READING >>>