Why Doesn't God Just Show Himself? | Cliffe Knechtle | Ask Cliffe 🙏🏼📖

Why Doesn't God Just Show Himself? | Cliffe Knechtle | Ask Cliffe 🙏🏼📖

📽: @Godofages ✝️
________
#askcliffe #cliffeknechtle #stuartknechtle #christiantiktok #holy #church #religion #Christianity #fyp #foryourpage #foryou #christiantiktube #truthofgod #godofages #Atheist #atheism
#Hinduism #Islam #Muslim #Buddhism

[mikevandvmedia]

He already showed himself in the form of christ, and we crucified him😢

[KimberlyOneLove]

Had a revelation today that even with proof, some ppl still go their own way. First point Adam & Eve. Literally talk to God still didn’t trust him. Cain also speaks directly to God, still killed his brother. Jonah, heard from God, still tried to go his own way. Moses doubted many times even after God literally touching him.

[alittax]

I disagree, but he made his point very well. First, he challenged the statement by pointing out why the request for God to show himself is unnecessary. Then, he compared the attitude of someone asking this question to a person whose behavior people find repulsive. Finally, he gave scriptural evidence, as well as explained how his personal experiences reflect the scriptural evidence.

[jimmyjohhn]

He already showed himself. People had miracles happening right in front of them and STILL didnt believe!
Its just proves that no matter how much evidence God provides, people will still be stubborn

[nickjuzzajety]

(...) “He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment. Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them. No, father Abraham, ’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent. He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’” Luke 16, 27-31

[MattsScaleModels]

This video comes across to this Aussie as classic American Christian preaching, and is a real ‘Gish Gallop’. It crams a lot into a very short period of time, yet a reasonable response will of necessity take more time and effort. There are many problems with this video, I’ll briefly give several responses, which are by no-means exhaustive.

* “First point. God has given more than enough evidence for any thinking person to believe in Him. The proof is that 93% of all human beings believe in some type of God, 93%!”

This is a sneaky bait-and-switch by Cliffe, equating his Christian God referred to as “Him” (proper noun) with a generic “some type of god” (common noun) to bump up the numbers from 32% of the world’s population being Christian to ride the coat–tails of the 93% of the world’s population who claim to be theists.

Cliffe asserts that the reason for so many people believing in “some type of god”, is solely because a god exists and has caused those people to believe through providing “more than enough evidence” to justify belief. It suggests that there is no other reason for 93% of all humans having a god belief, and is thus a single cause fallacy. There are many reasons to account for people believing in a god, not limited to ‘God giving more than enough evidence’. The primary reason for belief is cultural/societal/familial. Most children are taught from a young age that a certain set of religious or spiritual beliefs are true. These beliefs are wildly varied, yet Cliffe argues that his God has caused them all. If one Christian God exists and is providing an excess of sufficient evidence to “believe in Him”, then the fact that only 32% of the world’s population is Christian shows that this God isn’t doing a very good job of it. If 68% of the world’s population do not “believe in Him” then, Cliffe’s God isn’t doing a very good job.

Cliffe is a Christian, so let’s revise his first point. “The Christian God has given more than enough evidence for any thinking person to believe in Him. The proof is that 32% of all human beings believe in the Christian God. 32%!” Not so impressive now, is it?

* “Second point…’Why doesn’t he give me more physical evidence that he exists?’ That’s a very dangerous path to go down because what that’s saying is ‘God you got to do it my way…’”

This is diverting the issue back to the questioner, asserting that if one doesn’t simply accept Christian claims and questions further, then there’s a problem. In reality, the person is not saying “you got to do it my way”, the person is saying “I remain unconvinced that your claims are true and I’m asking for reasonable evidence to justify the truth of your claims.

* “If a young woman says to a young man ‘I really love you’…’I don’t believe you’…’unless you have sex with me I don’t think you love me’. That’s manipulative, that’s not being open, vulnerable, honest.”

Cliffe’s line of argument is itself manipulative. It is inferring that the rational process behind evaluating the evidence for a claim, which is rigorous by nature, may be suspended or superficial when it comes to the claim of the existence of the Christian God. For any other topic, sufficient evidence is required to warrant belief, yet a superficial review of the ‘evidence’ and submission of intellect and will is an appropriate approach to the question of the existence of the Christian God.

* “I think it’s rather clear, don’t manipulate people and don’t try and manipulate God, it ain’t going to work.”

This is unjustly comparing 1. interpersonal relationships, back-and-forth conversations with other people, and 2. responses to third-party claims about the existence of the Christian God, delivered by other people.

There are many arguments for the existence of the supernatural, fewer arguments for the existence of the Christian God. These arguments do not of themselves stand up completely to critical review; there are valid criticisms of them all, which lead to further arguments, which lead to further valid criticisms, and in the end, none of the arguments can escape valid criticism. “Look at the beautiful trees, order, morality, complexity! Look at what the apostles went through! Cause, necessity, degree, perfection! What else could it be?” There are problems with them all which cannot be resolved without a level of acceptance on faith.

* “The final point is this. In Romans, chapter one, Paul writes…”

We can stop there. This point asserts that what is written in the bible is an accurate account of history and reality. In fact, the bible is the claim, not the evidence. One must clearly and verifiably demonstrate that the Christian God exists and this God has acted through human history precisely in the way recorded in the bible, for belief in the bible to be warranted. “God did it” has no explanatory power unless one can demonstrate that the God in question exists.

* “Just look at your motives!…Be honest with yourself, be honest with God and seek to be as objective and open-minded as you possibly could.”

Again, this assumes bad will or close-mindedness on the part of the questioner. It poisons the argument and thus can be rejected. Cliffe needs to do better.

[carloscisneros]

God cannot show himself because he doesn't exist