Do religions represent God?

[Little Rik]

Explain why it doesn't make sense please.

I and a lot of other people have evidence that God exist but there is a but.
The but is that God is felt within and is not transferable to other.
You conquer God and God belong to you.
Is like when you are in love with someone.
Would you want any third party in the middle?
But as I already said to other in this forum even if you would want someone else between
you and God that wouldn't be possible.
God reward only those who try.
So this way to give evidence that God exist is not on even if by looking at the pineal gland purity
it would be possible to understand someone closeness to God.
In the past the saints were represented with an aureola on top of the head around the pineal gland
but the personal experiences with God are just personal so let them be personal.
Today thanks to easy communications we can see hundreds of people who had an NDE experience.
Not that in the past people did not have these experiences.
They also had in the past but because there was not easy communication and because there was
the thread to be taken as mad people their experiences stay hidden.
Now coming to your question why it does not make sense what you say.
You reckon that................An NDE would be evidence for god if all other contending ideas/explanations could be ruled out and that would be the only explanation remaining, so far that isn't the case. So claiming it as a clear evidence of god is quite dishonest.......

Why there would be the need to rule out all other explanations to see that the NDEs are real?
As I already said in the previous post the ways to God are infinite.
I have evidence that God exist because I feel him within.
There are infinite ways to realize that God exist not just one.
There are infinite ways to get to Rome.
Why there should be only one way?
That is why your idea that we should rule out ............ all other contending ideas/explanations.......is faulty.  

---

No mistakes Ton.

Which is exactly what inspector Clouseau would say.  Didn't you even read my post before deciding to act it out?

I can twist the parodies around and around until your head can't cope anymore and if you try to understand is even worse.

This is an apt description of pretty much all of your posts, Rik.

When someone tell a lie he-she need to build up a story that support that lie.
And when that story is knocked down the liar need to build up a bigger story to save the face.
In doing this the building that the liar has created  may well collapse and the more that building is big the more the damage will cause if collapse.

Atheists although they do not create a story out of a lie they still face a possible disaster when the truth that God exist will be apparent to them.
And it will sooner or later.
And that building that atheists build in order to deny that God exist may well knock them down when it will collapse.

My parodies are just a way to show how foolish is to believe that nobody create the universe and that the universe run by itself.
After this is up to you to demonstrate that I am wrong if you can.
If you can not do so then you are still stuck with a building full of fantasies.