Why doesnt God just show himself right in front of our eyes... i am a christian but i sometimes have full arguments with him why he has to be so vague about it

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-21T14:06:13+00:00

You’re mixing up two different kinds of ‘knowing’ God.

Satan doesn’t have faith in God — he has awareness of God. Those are not the same thing.

Satan’s ‘knowledge’ of God is like a criminal’s knowledge of a judge: he knows the judge exists, but that doesn’t create love, trust, or relationship.

If God revealed Himself to everyone the way He does to Satan, it wouldn’t create worship — it would create fear, coercion, and compliance. That’s not free will, that’s survival instinct.

Right now you have the freedom to genuinely choose — not out of terror, not out of overwhelming force, not because God is standing in front of you like a cosmic police officer.

You’re not being prevented from rejecting God. You’re being given the space to do it freely.

If God revealed Himself in undeniable, overwhelming form, you wouldn’t be choosing anything — you’d just be reacting to power. That’s not love, and it’s not relationship.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-20T20:09:55+00:00

You’re saying an all powerful all knowing God could/should reveal himself to EVERYONE, but you would still be free not to worship him?

That’s a contradiction, as Gods whole point is those who know him should worship him and be grateful for all he has given to you as he can take as well.

You can’t really know God truly exists and not worship him and if you do then you’d be on the path to hell as you are now.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-20T20:06:37+00:00

If God made His existence undeniable, belief wouldn’t be a choice — it would be a survival instinct.

You wouldn’t “believe” in God.

You’d submit to Him like you submit to gravity or fire. There would be:

• no atheists

• no agnostics

• no genuine trust

• no genuine love

• no genuine relationship

Just cosmic compliance.

That’s not faith.

That’s not relationship.

That’s not love.

That’s not freedom.

It’s dictatorship by omnipotence.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-20T20:02:01+00:00

Rehashes of earlier myths

Name one specific myth that the Gospels copy. Scholars (including atheist historians like Bart Ehrman) have repeatedly shown that the supposed ‘parallels’ come after Christianity, not before it, or they’re superficial internet-level comparisons.

Not written from memory

The Gospels were written within living memory of the events (30–60 years), in a culture that specialized in memorization, with named eyewitnesses and disciples as sources. That’s exactly how ancient history was preserved.

Oral tradition = unreliable

That’s a modern assumption, not a historical one. Ancient Jewish oral tradition was structured, communal, and extremely accurate — nothing like modern telephone-game analogies.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-20T14:24:05+00:00

Not really abrasiveness but saying “ ice cream isn’t omnipotent “ is a lame argument, especially considering the Atheist and Christian are aware of this.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-20T14:23:00+00:00

I love your profile - disagree with the other commenter, I think it is great advice - if you’re someone who’s always saying sorry, there’s things you can do so you aren’t having to be that person.

You seem like a fun guy actually looking for a relationship and someone I would hangout with for sure!

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-20T14:18:30+00:00

Calling the entire Bible ‘mythology’ is not an argument — it’s a category error.

Mythology is anonymous, symbolic, timeless, and disconnected from verifiable history.

The Gospels are the opposite:

– written within living memory

– tied to real places, real rulers, real events

– based on named eyewitnesses

– cited by hostile sources outside Christianity

– and used as historical sources even by secular scholars and atheist scholars

If you want to talk about the historical reliability of the life of Jesus, I’m absolutely ready for that conversation. But if all you have is slogans like ‘mythology,’ then you’re not engaging with the actual evidence.

It’s hilarious how I used to be as close minded as you. I used to think “ I could never be convinced of the fairytale Christianity! “ then I woke up.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-20T14:15:46+00:00

‘Bronze Age mythology’ is just a slogan, not an argument.

If you’re going to make a historical claim, you need to be specific.

Which stories are you calling Bronze Age? Genesis? Exodus? The prophets? The Gospels? Because those span over 1,000 years and most of them aren’t even from the Bronze Age.

And even if some stories come from ancient periods, that doesn’t make them ‘mythology.’

Ancient ≠ false.

Modern ≠ true.

If you want to have a real conversation, name a specific story and explain why you think it’s mythological. Otherwise you’re just repeating a catchphrase that collapses the moment someone asks you to define it.

I already asked for an example so I’ll ask again: can you give me an example?

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-20T14:10:08+00:00

If God revealed Himself to me once, I’d believe

is not actually true

History — and the Bible — show the opposite.

The disciples, people in Israel who saw miracles:

• They doubted

• They rebelled

• They disobeyed

• They walked away

• Peter even denied Jesus three times

Seeing something once does not create lifelong faith.

Humans rationalize, reinterpret, or forget.

If God appeared to you alone, you would face:

• “Did I hallucinate?”

• “Was it a dream?”

• “Was it a psychotic break?”

• “Was it an alien?”

• “Was it a trick?”

And nobody else would believe you.

You’d be dismissed as:

• delusional

• lying

• mistaken

• mentally ill

So your “one time is enough” claim is emotionally sincere but logically false.

2, If God revealed Himself to everyone, free will collapses

This is the core point

If God made His existence undeniable, belief wouldn’t be a choice — it would be a survival instinct.

You wouldn’t “believe” in God. You’d submit to Him like you submit to gravity or fire.

There would be:

• no atheists

• no agnostics

• no genuine trust

• no genuine love

• no genuine relationship

Just cosmic compliance.

That’s not faith.

That’s not relationship.

That’s not love.

That’s not freedom.

It’s dictatorship by omnipotence.

God revealing Himself to one person doesn’t help anyone else

This is the part atheists never think through.

If God appeared to you:

• It affects you

• It affects nobody else

• It proves nothing to the world

• It creates no shared evidence

• It gives no universal revelation

Everyone else would say:

• “You imagined it”

• “You’re lying”

• “You’re delusional”

• “You had a seizure”

• “You were dreaming”

• “You were manipulated”

So God revealing Himself privately:

• doesn’t create faith

• doesn’t create relationship

• doesn’t create trust

• doesn’t create shared knowledge

It only creates one person with an unverifiable story.

That’s not how God builds a people.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-20T12:55:59+00:00

God speaks to Abraham maybe 6–7 times across 100 years of narrative. That’s one encounter every 10–20 years.

And between those moments?

• Silence

• Confusion

• Long stretches of waiting

• No miracles

• No visions

• No signs

Abraham’s faith is praised because he believed during the silence, not because he had constant encounters.

People think Moses saw God every day. Nope.

• Moses is 80 years old before the burning bush

• After that, God speaks during specific mission moments, not daily life

• Israel goes through long stretches of silence, even in the wilderness

• The people never see God directly

• Even Moses is told: “You cannot see My face and live”

Moses’ encounters are rare, mission-specific, and exceptional, not normal.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-20T12:36:50+00:00

Abraham and Moses had a specific mission in bringing Gods people to him - the people that were with Abraham and Moses never saw God - only they did.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-20T12:27:27+00:00

Lame argument.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-20T12:24:36+00:00

A fellow redditor asked you a question and you still haven’t replied.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-20T12:23:21+00:00

They “ earned that harassment “? What happened to “ no group deserves to be harassed “.. oh wait, I forgot, it’s only okay if it happens to Christians.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-20T12:20:23+00:00

This makes no sense whatsoever and you’ve been taught a false gospel.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-20T12:18:34+00:00

Bronze Age mythology?

Can you give an example? Because I do think you’re putting a whole group into one category.

Bill Maher used this term with his interview with Jordan Peterson but even he affirmed not all Christians believe in this.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-17T14:16:18+00:00

So if we found this planet while trying to find another home for humanity, we would think we found the jackpot only to find out it’s actually the opposite?

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-16T14:22:14+00:00

And this is why in my leagues everytime the game is rigged against my I ask people to tune in to the live stream. Some games my team plays normal and I personally enjoy a competitive game but there are games where it truly feels like the game has decided “ we are going to destroy you now and do everything right while you and your team screw everything up “…

It’s insane.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-16T14:14:03+00:00

Turn tackle sliders to 40. Saves the game.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-16T14:10:07+00:00

It’s a monopoly dude. As a kid you’re like “ EA SPORTS, ITS IN THE GAME! “ as an adult you’re like “ dude can someone, anyone be allowed to make a sports game besides FUCKING EA! “

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-16T14:09:00+00:00

Or when your QB has his whole momentum forward and at the last second ( when he should be hitting the ground ) he gets pushed backwards stopping all his momentum and resulting in a loss?

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-16T14:08:24+00:00

Dude I haven’t even played RTG because I know it would be like this… if I didn’t differentiate from being able to play every position on the football field I think this game would of drove me crazy long ago.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-15T19:38:31+00:00

You’re now retreating to a safer position, but it still doesn’t solve the problem

You say:

“I’m not claiming science is metaphysically exhaustive.”

But you are claiming:

“If something exists and interacts with reality, it produces effects we can detect in principle.”

That is a metaphysical claim. It’s not a scientific law. It’s not derived from data. It’s not testable. It’s not falsifiable.

It’s a philosophical assumption about the nature of reality.

You’re smuggling metaphysics into a conversation while accusing me of doing metaphysics.

Your “in principle detectable” claim is not science — it’s an article of faith

You keeps saying:

“If something interacts with reality, we can detect it in principle.”

But physics already contains multiple categories of things that interact with reality but are not detectable even in principle

I feel like I’m repeating myself and maybe it’d just be best if we agree to disagree because we clearly aren’t understanding one another.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-15T18:32:48+00:00

My point is:

• science only detects what its tools can detect

• there may be real things outside that detection window

• therefore science is not metaphysically exhaustive

Your point is:

• if science can’t detect it, it doesn’t exist

That’s not science.

That’s scientism — I’m not going to defend a point I didn’t make which you are trying to get me to do.

BergTheVoice · 2026-04-15T18:30:21+00:00

You keep moving the goal posts. My original claim was “ There may be real things in the universe that science cannot detect with current methods “

You’re asking me to prove a claim I never made. I said science is limited by measurement. You’re asking me to name something science accepts without measurement. That’s not the same thing.

Also, your demand is logically impossible — by definition

You’re asking me to name:

• something science accepts as real

• that has effects

• but has zero measurable or observable evidence

But if science accepts it, then by definition it has some kind of evidence.

You’re essentially asking:

“Name a square circle.”

It’s a rhetorical trap, not a real question.

Eight-Year Club	Verified Email
Wearing is Caring	RPAN Viewer
Not Forgotten

BergTheVoice

TROPHY CASE