Atheist Objection

Since God is able to do exceedingly more than what we can conceive, it should be easy enough to acknowledge that we can only base the pleasure we perceive in a light of limited knowledge.

In other words, we wouldn't think that any given "pleasure" is better than pleasures we have never experienced.

That would simply be unreasonable.

Thus, in order to make this a true statement, we have to establish ourselves as the judge of what pleasure is, then conclude that there is no greater pleasure available to men.

Right?

Originally Posted by Anonymous Poster
"The Bible is wrong. God is NOT able to do exceeding abundantly above all that I ask or think."

If one hasn't conceived of something, what is the point of negating that God can provide something better?

You won't ask because it has not entered your mind.

Originally Posted by Anonymous Poster
"How on earth am I to trust in a God whom I never seen?"
It begins first with trusting His Word.

And millions of Christians can attest that what is written is truth, because we can see those things fulfilled in our lives.

He will help individuals with that, but if one takes a position of opposition, then ne cannot expect to see fulfillment of that which is written.

For example, those embracing the philosophy stated in these statements might present what they see as pleasurable as the highest form of pleasure available...until they lose pleasure in that source and seek out something new, thus cancelling out the premise that they had attained to the highest form of pleasure.

But, the fatal flaw in this philosophy is that because men cannot conceive of the good things God has for them, they do not consider that they mistake pleasure and happiness with joy. One can have peace and joy with God and not have to be happy. Countless Martyrs testify of this basic principle, which...pleasure seekers have never contemplated, thus have never understood.

Originally Posted by Anonymous Poster
"I think I can have both my sinful pleasures and God's pleasures at the same time. I don't have to cut anything off. There is no such thing as hell."

Most that are saved will be honest that fear of Hell was an element of their salvation. And that is what the Lord stated the Comforter would achieve: He would convict of sin, righteousness, and judgment.

When one yields to that ministry, the inevitable result is understanding that Hell is indeed real, and this thrusts that individual into understanding of his condition. That results in turning to the One that died in their place, and in genuine conversion, it is believed without controversy that Christ can save them from the impending judgment they recognize as a reality in their existence.

The God of the Bible does not promise eternal pleasure...that is the god of the Muslim.

Rather, He promises Eternal Life through Christ.

Pleasure seems to be the focal point of this philosophy, and while men can deceive themselves that the pleasures they enjoy are in fact pleasurable, the Christian can identify pleasure as a slippery slope, and see it is not something that is fulfilling nor enduring. A good analogy, I think, would be observation of a drug addict: the addict has deceived himself that an altered state is pleasurable, but seldom does he see it from the perspective of those not embroiled in his "pleasure." He does not view the fact that his money is spent on his pleasure, rather than on necessities of life, such as food, clothing, and shelter. He does not see his deteriorating health as those on the outside see it.

So too, in regards to that which God bestows on the believer, we learn that what we once saw as pleasure was in fact more of a prison. We recognize the bondage we were once held to, and for those that define happiness as engaging in "pleasurable" activities, that which we could not conceive in our natural state is revealed for what it is, which is not pleasure, but a fruitless path of bondage to which we were blind to.

What happens to pleasure when sexual sin results in disease, or death? When pleasure ravages the body and mind, and increasingly deceives the victim in mistaking his pleasure as making them happy.

How can those who have not experienced joy, but only pleasure, happiness...reasonably declare their philosophy and deny the very Word of God?

It is not reasonable to assume one can conclude a matter when they have only their personal experience to base their conclusions on.

Philosophers such as these cannot even establish that they have enjoyed the most "pleasurable" of sins, much less deny that God can provide for them something they have never so much as caught a glimpse of.

Is that pleasure they place above that which they do not know making them happy? Can they properly negate the possibility that there is something else the world can offer that will not be more pleasurable? Can they reasonably deny that which they have never experienced?

Only the individual can answer those questions.


God bless.