At the beginning of this Fall sememster (2003), the students at LCC and TAMIU wrote questions they would ask God if He appeared to them. The questions are the basis for our Luncheon talks. Here are the questions and some of the studies we've had about them. Eventually, we will include here all the handouts given during the Luncheons.

Questions about God:
Who are you, or what?
If there is so much evidence that we evolved from monkeys, then why should I still believe in God?
What is God’s name and what does it mean?
Can you give me any comprehension as to what it’s like to be God?
Is there anything we should not pray for either too small or too big?
What kind of music would God listen to?

Questions about sin:
Why is hell so severe?
Sometimes I burn with desire. How do you know who God has to be your spouse? I know sex outside of marriage is not God’s will, but all I find is young women who seem godly, but don’t know for sure.
Why do you allow horrible things to happen to your children?
Why does it all hurt?
Are people born gay?
Is the world some day going to end?
How long am I going to live?
If he knows past ,present, and future, and he told Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree of knowledge, why did he placed it in the Garden of Eden, and not anywhere else??
Why does committing adultery feels so good?
Why does the devil temp you?

Questions about Judgement:
Why did there have to be so many who didn’t know about the Messiah in the 4000 years before Christ’s birth, when mostly the Israelites knew the truth?
How come there are areas where people are not allowed to accept Christ and there is no legal way to hear the gospel?
Could people in other parts of the world be saved without explicitly knowing about the promised Messiah? Did they know from nature that a good God existed?

Questions about Pain:
Why does God let Laredo politicians get away with crimes?
Where were you when I got my face bashed in with a rock!!!
God, why my childhood got messed up?
Dios Padre, ¿porqué hay terror todos los días, secuestros, muertos?
Why does poverty exist?
Why are there so many poor children in the world?
Why is there violence in this world?
Why do innocent people die?
Why is there so much poverty, hate and disease in the world? Why isn’t there peace in the world?
Why does God send nice people more tragic happenings than evil people?

Questions about Purpose:
What is the meaning of life?
Am I doing studying and living what you want me to? Why is your people so concerned about material stuff?
When will you come?
Does fate play a role in the future of mankind or are we going on blindly in our everyday lives?
What is my reason of existence?
Does the sovereignty of God mean man has no free will?
What is the purpose of my life?

Questions about God:

Who are you, or what?
If there is so much evidence that we evolved from monkeys, then why should I still believe in God?
What is God’s name and what does it mean?
Can you give me any comprehension as to what it’s like to be God?
Is there anything we should not pray for either too small or too big?
What kind of music would God listen to?

I think these questions express a deep desire to know:
1. Does God exist? – September 15 and 17
2. Evolution or Creation? - September 22 and 24, September 29 and October 1
3. If He exists, what kind of God is He? – October 6 and 8
4. Does God reveal Himself to us? - October 13 and 15
5. Can we relate to Him? – October 20 and 22

1. Does God exist?
There are many arguments for the existence of God, most of them valid and quite powerful. However, although these many arguments for the existence of God are substantial, because we are sinners and cut off from immediate communion with God we need something more than good arguments. What we need is for God to reveal Himself to the world. This is exactly what He has done. First through prophets in the Bible, and then fully and concretely in Jesus Christ, God has spoken to the world, told us about Himself, shown us what He is like, and called us to be reconciled to Him through the death of His Son, giving proof to the world by raising Jesus from the dead and through Him fulfilling numerous Old Testament prophecies. And that is how we know that God exists.

In the area of religion, Pascal is best known for his "wager." Pascal, a Christian believer and apologist, argued that while God's existence cannot be known with rational certainty, it is nevertheless prudent to believe in God. In his book Pensées, Pascal argued that either God exists -- or He does not exist. However, our present life, and possibly our future destiny, rests upon the alternative which we choose. Pascal reasoned that by believing in God (Christian theism) you have everything to win (in fact you have eternal life to win), and nothing to lose. However, by not believing, you have nothing to win, and everything to lose (in fact you could lose your eternal soul). He therefore reasoned that if you consider what's at stake, your best (or safer) wager is to believe in God. To wit -- "Pascal's wager."
What shall we make of Pascal's wager? It certainly is not a proof of God's existence in the traditional sense. But it does appeal to our practical, common sense approach to decision making. Without doubt, unbelievers are taking an enormous risk.
It should also be noted that the evidence for God' existence, if examined with a truly open mind, is extremely compelling. In fact, let me say that anyone looking at the evidence without bias, would conclude that a belief in God is the only rational alternative. If you are seeking for God -- He can be found! He has made Himself known by the light of Creation (Rom. 1); the light of conscience (Rom. 2) and the light of Christ (John 1). Remember what God says: I love those who love Me, and those who diligently seek Me will indeed find Me.

2. Evolution vs. Creation:
This article first appeared in the Winter 1994 issue of the Christian Research Journal:

There is more to discussing evolution than debating the age of the earth or the wing breadth of the archaeopteryx. There is value, for example, in examining how evolutionists make their defense. Looking beyond the argument to the arguer's techniques can expose fallacious reasoning which keep many from considering the God of Creation.If Christians plan to argue from the Genesis account of creation, they must first support biblical authenticity. Although the Bible can be supported, that may be the long way around. When Scripture is introduced, evolutionists launch into one of their "best" fallacies: false distinction — the banning of "religion" from scientific debate.A shortcut is to point out how evolutionists engage in logical fallacies such as the "straw man," "bias ad hominem," "false distinction," and "non sequitur" fallacies. The first three are used in attempts to invalidate the creationists' stance; the fourth endeavors to validate macroevolution (the change from one species into another) as legitimate science.The Argument You So Eloquently Refuted Was Not Mine! A strawman fallacy involves the misrepresentation of an opponent's argument to refute him or her easily. Stephen Jay Gould, in his article, "Evolution as Fact and Theory" in the May 1981 issue of Discover Magazine, attempted to refute creationism by saying, "We have abundant, direct, observational evidence of evolution in action, from both the field and the laboratory." His point: evolution is an irrefutable fact, and creationists ignore this certainty.Yet, the evidence he cited supported microevolution, involving changes that take place within separate species. Creationists have no contention with the concept of microevolution.In fact, A. E. Wilder-Smith, in his book The Natural Sciences Know Nothing of Evolution (T.W.F.T. Publishers), makes a case for both negative and positive mutations (microevolution) working against macroevolution. Negative mutations weaken the creature, a tendency that does not support survival of the fittest; positive mutations make it a stronger creature, helping to preserve its own class. In the latter case, the variations are the means that allow the species to survive distinct from other species.The fact that many evolutionists use microevolution to refute creationism shows the seriousness of this fallacy. Pointing this out can dispel the misconception that Christians do not accept scientific fact.Religious Bias Disqualifies. A bias ad hominem fallacy has to do with disqualifying someone's argument simply because the arguer has a special bias in the issue. For example, someone with a religious experience or belief is disqualified from having a valid opinion about his or her own religion. It is fitting to check the soundness of a biased person's argument, but it is wrong to reject the argument solely because of the arguer's bias.In the 1982 trial of McLean vs. Arkansas, which centered around teaching both theories of origins in public schools, questions were raised concerning the religious beliefs of the creation experts. Objections by the defense (creationists) were consistently overruled. Yet, what the proponents believe is beside the point.Of course, there are those who combat evolution who are not religious, but even that is beside the point. Religious belief is not necessarily based on fact, but neither is it necessarily founded in falsehood. A "religious" view might actually be true. If we don't allow it to be heard, how can we claim to uphold free inquiry?...Because Creationism Is Religion. The "false distinction" fallacy relegates creationism to a different category, thereby falsely nullifying it. To evolutionists, religion often disregards science (illustrated in the church-motivated condemnation of Galileo). Science is described as what is observable, repeatable, and falsifiable. With that definition, creationism is not science. Yet, neither is macroevolution.The false distinction is between evolution and creationism as "science versus religion" instead of evidence for evolution versus evidence for creationism. If the argument never gets to that level, again free inquiry is stifled.To Believe in the Miracle of Evolution. Suppose evolutionists abandoned the above three problem areas and debated creationists on equal terms. Would their position then prove reliable? Not really, because the fallacy known as non sequitur — Latin for "it does not follow" — becomes an immediate issue. Microevolution leading to macroevolution, discussed earlier, is one example.The celebrated "missing links" as concrete evidence is another. The role of fossils as transitional forms is speculative at best in comparison with documented, trackable microevolution. Yet, evolutionists often use these "proofs" interchangeably as though the reliability of the one naturally follows the credibility of the other.Also problematic is concluding from molecular biology that there is a common ancestry for all organisms. It does not follow that because all life shares a common biochemical basis, that relationship was brought about through evolution. In engineering this type of creative diversity from the same basic building blocks is good design, the result of a designer.Finally, it does not follow that because religion was wrong about Galileo, it is in error about creationism. The same evolutionists who insist that their own past mistakes should not be held against their position (e.g., promoting false "missing links" such as the Piltdown man) are often unwilling to allow their intellectual opponents to have human failings as well.Because the above fallacies are common, many people cannot "hear" the scientific evidence for creation, they cannot accept the Genesis account, they cannot listen unbiased to what they consider a biased view. If we can expose these flaws, we may earn the privilege of leading them beyond God as Creator to God as Savior.Rachel D. Ramer is a freelance writer who lives in Olathe, Kansas.

3. If He exists, what kind of God is He?

I. God as a Person: Major objections and reactions
A. Idealistic Pantheism – no real metaphysical distinction between God and the universe. God or the Absolute does not stand beyond human history, nor does the Absolute change the laws of history.
B. Process Philosophy – Greek idealism where man is cocreator , partakes of divinity, and thereby attains to a general immortality.
C. God as Personal – if personhood comes from some form of chance, then personality is no more than an illusion. “Only some form of mystical jump will allow us to accept that personality comes from impersonality.

II. God as Present:
A. General Presence of God:
Psalm 139:7-10: Whither shall I go from thy Spirit? Or whither shall I flee from thy presence? If I ascend to heaven, thou art there! If I make my bed in Sheol, thou art there! If I take the wings of the morning and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there thy hand shall lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me.
1. Personhood of God revealed as Jesus – Matthew 1:23: and his name shall be called Emmanuel, which means “God with us.”
2. Particular presence of God in the earth – Colossians 1:19: for in Him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell.

B. Alternatives:
1. God is everywhere: Pantheism;
2. God does not reveal himself to us; we can have a mystical experience as we seek God.

III. God with Personality
A. Attributes:
Natural – self-existence, immutability, omnipresence, omniscience, omnipotence, eternity, immensity
Moral – holiness, righteousness, love, truth
Mystery -
Overwhelmingness
Dynamism
Holiness
B. Discussion:

1. Is God a person?

2. What personality would you assign to God?

3. What kind of God could you accept?


C. Next discussion question:

If God exists, how does He reveal Himself to us?