Debate: God Exists

[Cyberman]

Which God are you talking about ?

Zeus or Thor ?

FSM.  The only true god.
It should have been obvious.

Ceiling Cat would like a word.

[ignoramus]

Odin here.
I just wiped my bum with ceiling cat.... It was nice and soft...

[Nay_Sayer]

FSM.  The only true god.
It should have been obvious.

Ceiling Cat would like a word.

 I rebuke Ceiling cat and all it's followers as nothing more than agents of the Antipasta.
HUMBAHUMBAPOYAPOYANEEE
REBUKE!

[Drich]

what an empty foolish statement. have you not even been apart of this discussion to this point? What 'objective evidence' can one hope for when trying to vet a set of instructions?

Some demonstration that following them gets the claimed result would suffice.

Ta-Da!

I and roughly 2000 year church history are such an demonstration!

[TubbyTubby]

Some demonstration that following them gets the claimed result would suffice.

Ta-Da!

I and roughly 2000 year church history are such an demonstration!

No wonder it's fucked then with folk like you as a spokesperson.

[Drich]

what an empty foolish statement. have you not even been apart of this discussion to this point? What 'objective evidence' can one hope for when trying to vet a set of instructions? What don't yu understand that God only offers evidence in the way of the Holy Spirit and only if you follow the path He has laid out.

It's real simple, either one follows said directions or one does not. how do you annalize or rationalize a simple set of instructions?

If God says look here for me this way, and you look there your way, then by your actions are you not wanting to find nothing? Who are you to expect God to meet you on your terms?

That is the big problem. It is equivalent to the "invisible dragon in my garage" problem. You point out that God only speaks to those that accept his existence, no logic or reasoning to provide, which means you can't expect a critical thinker to accept it (at least on that way of looking at it).

That's not true either. Most Like me have quite a miraculous interactions between ourselves and God. Now understand these interactions are not to convince others, as they are directed at a specific individual Spiritual needs. however these interactions are indeed evidence that God is willing to interact with anyone who simply follows His instructions. Unlike you failed dragon analogy God does indeed evidence one in the way of testimony so the God claim is not just being announced from a complete void/dark, and more importantly the claims (for the last 2000 years) are being supported to individuals by God Himself. Otherwise why follow a given religion if it does not deliver what it promises.

[Mister Agenda]

They all seem to deliver what they promise. Funny, that.

[SuperSentient]

That is the big problem. It is equivalent to the "invisible dragon in my garage" problem. You point out that God only speaks to those that accept his existence, no logic or reasoning to provide, which means you can't expect a critical thinker to accept it (at least on that way of looking at it).

That's not true either. Most Like me have quite a miraculous interactions between ourselves and God. Now understand these interactions are not to convince others, as they are directed at a specific individual Spiritual needs. however these interactions are indeed evidence that God is willing to interact with anyone who simply follows His instructions. Unlike you failed dragon analogy God does indeed evidence one in the way of testimony so the God claim is not just being announced from a complete void/dark, and more importantly the claims (for the last 2000 years) are being supported to individuals by God Himself. Otherwise why follow a given religion if it does not deliver what it promises.

Again, same problem. Every religion claims to be directed towards spiritual needs. They all claim that they have interactions with deities (worship). None of it is evidence of the truth of it. If you expect a person to accept a religion, there must be rational grounds for accepting it.

[vorlon13]

2000 years of relentless schisming doesn't inspire in me the confidence Drich seems to garner from it . . . .

[Drich]

That's not true either. Most Like me have quite a miraculous interactions between ourselves and God. Now understand these interactions are not to convince others, as they are directed at a specific individual Spiritual needs. however these interactions are indeed evidence that God is willing to interact with anyone who simply follows His instructions. Unlike you failed dragon analogy God does indeed evidence one in the way of testimony so the God claim is not just being announced from a complete void/dark, and more importantly the claims (for the last 2000 years) are being supported to individuals by God Himself. Otherwise why follow a given religion if it does not deliver what it promises.

Again, same problem. Every religion claims to be directed towards spiritual needs. They all claim that they have interactions with deities (worship). None of it is evidence of the truth of it. If you expect a person to accept a religion, there must be rational grounds for accepting it.

Really?!?!?

Have you actually studied religion?

Of the top 10 I've actively studied 6, of those Only Christianity claims to put the average person in direct contact with God.

That is not to say other religions 'gods' don't contact people, but when they do there is something special about them which makes them prophets or emissaries, or whatever, or they are used as pawns. Christianity is the only religion that gives you one on one time with it's God. Other religions offer rewards for alliance/obedience. for those followers those 'spiritual rewards' are the reason for their obedience. Christianity offers audience with God, eternally.

If this is appealing or at the very least you want to know if what I said is true then simply A/S/K as outlined in Luke 11 and Allow Him to work with you.

---

2000 years of relentless schisming doesn't inspire in me the confidence Drich seems to garner from it . . . .

So what, are you saying as we collectively understand God on a greater level, or as some of us fall back we are not allowed to seperate from each other and worship God to the best of our abilities?

The fact that we are all mostly pointed in the same direction speaks to a singular unifying point that keep us all worshiping towards the same point. How we do it was meant from the beginning as different as we are different on an individual level