A Practical Guide to the Logic, Philosophy and Thoughts of Christianity

Section 1 - Article 6

For the scientifically inclined, I will scientifically prove that your pizza recipe is bad because I repeatedly did not follow the recipe down to the letter. Therefore, ten out of ten times (scientifically reproducible), the pizza I makes tastes bad. There you go, scientific proof that your recipe makes bad pizza.

Now the atheist may claim that proving that religions are not all bad, does not mean that there is a basis to believe in one. Very true. The purpose of a religion, is to worship the Creator and Almighty.

"Why then does God not show Himself to me?"

Well, Christians say He did do that as Jesus Christ on Earth, but here we enter an area that is inconvincible to people who simply do not want to believe. To illustrate this impossibility, I will need to take the point of an unbeliever who disbeliefs (as foolish as it is) that the Queen of Britain exists.

1) Why doesn't the Queen show herself to me to prove she exists?

Well, who the heck am I? That the Queen must bother to prove to ME that she exists?

Well, then assuming she does SHOW herself to me, I'm going to make some adaptations of what some atheists say regarding the belief of God. I'll mark what atheists say starting with A), and what I say with M)

A) That's just a man (Jesus), not God!

M) That's just a woman, not the Queen.

Assuming you show me written testimonial and accounts of the Queen (similar to biblical accounts of Jesus i.e. the 4 gospels and all of the New Testament (more accurately, the whole Bible).

A) It's made up. They needed a political movement to go against the Romans in the early century.

M) Yeah, the British Government made up the existence of the Queen to justify their rule back in ages, and they just continue to do so.

You show me video tapes; stories of what the Queen did (non-biblical accounts of Jesus, stories of miracles.) Sure I concede that stories are hardly proven accurate all the time and objectively, they are prone to modifications, but it's the same for stories that a war veteran would have, is it not?

A) It's inaccurate, not true. It is mis-interpreted.

M) Oh, the video tapes are digitally engineered; I'm not going to believe dinosaurs still walk the planet if you show me Jurassic Park. I'm not going to believe there are aliens just because you show me you show me some half credible documentary! Besides, they are just stories, not to be taken literally, just as much as the Queen's video speeches were made up to justify her existence by getting a dressed up woman on a throne talking! There is no proof that the Queen exists!

Next, you show me what the Queen has done - e.g. participated in the war, governed, led armies, gave instructions. (The Holy Scriptures says the world was created by God and that things were all created and reflect His glory.)

A) It happened by itself, evolution, big bang theory. Nothing shows the presence of a God!

M) The army/soldiers won the war, the government implemented the policies, and the police enforced the law. I don't see the Queen holding a gun to enforce the law, I don't see the Queen actively implementing policies, there is the lack of evidence of a Queen!

Whatever argument atheists have against the presence of a God, I can do it likewise to the existence of anyone can I not? But everyone would laugh at the denial of the British Queen because the Queen is a well-known person and her reign is a fact (at the point of writing; God save the Queen)! Yet people seriously question the presence and existence of a God even though for true followers of God, the proof is everywhere.