Trying to Apply the Ontological Argument in Real Life

[Alex K]

That sounds much less insane.

Bahaha

[GrandizerII]

It's more like this:

Christian:  God has revealed himself to me.

Atheist:  How do you know it's God who revealed himself to you?

Christian:  I just know it's God.

Atheist:  Can you prove it?

Christian:  No.  You weren't there to experience it with me.

Atheist:  Well, I don't believe it.  If he comes to me and convinces me personally, or if you come up with concrete scientific evidence, then I might believe he exists.  I still might not follow him though.  Your God isn't even nice.

Christian:  All I can say is that when God reveals himself to you then you know it's God.

This looked like satire to me, until I realized this was written by Lek.

[Simon Moon]

It's more like this:

Christian:  God has revealed himself to me.

Atheist:  How do you know it's God who revealed himself to you?

Christian:  I just know it's God.

Atheist:  Can you prove it?

Christian:  No.  You weren't there to experience it with me.

Atheist:  Well, I don't believe it.  If he comes to me and convinces me personally, or if you come up with concrete scientific evidence, then I might believe he exists.  I still might not follow him though.  Your God isn't even nice.

Christian:  All I can say is that when God reveals himself to you then you know it's God.

I have some questions about this.

Do you believe that every Christians that claims that the Christian god has revealed himself to them, is being accurate in their claim? I'm not saying they are lying, only that they may be mistaking about a natural (not god created) brain state.

What about people of other religions that claim their god has revealed himself to them, who are equally as convinced as you are? How do I go about differentiating their 'mistaken' (according to you) assessment of their god's revelation to them, from your 'accurate' assessment of your god's revelation to you?

Atheist: Well, I don't believe it. If he comes to me and convinces me personally, or if you come up with concrete scientific evidence, then I might believe he exists. I still might not follow him though. Your God isn't even nice.

Not sure why you have a problem with this? How many other existential claims, besides your god claims, do you think your method would lead to accurate results?

How do I go about differentiating your method, from gullibility?

[Amarok]

It's more like this:

Christian:  I proclaim that god revealed himself to me.

Atheist:  How do you know it's God who revealed himself to you?

Christian:  I Know it was god by some unmentioned metric .And i expect you to accept this for no reason because I say so.

Atheist:  Can you provide evidence that demonstrates your claim ?

Christian:  No.  You just have to blindly accept this claim  because say so .

Atheist:  Well, It  would be irrational to accept your claim. If you come up with concrete scientific evidence, then I might believe he exists.  I still might not follow him though. I have no reason too anymore then I have a reason to follow things I know exist.

Christian:  All I can say is you should accept my baseless claim that I somehow know that it's god because...

There fixed that

[Lek]

Do you believe that every Christians that claims that the Christian god has revealed himself to them, is being accurate in their claim? I'm not saying they are lying, only that they may be mistaking about a natural (not god created) brain state.  

If the person is a really a believer, then yes because in order for one to believe God must reveal himself to him. Someone could have had some kind of an experience which they felt was God, but it wasn't.  Some people may interpret an experience as God because they want it to be so.  In my case, God answered me very directly through another person.  

What about people of other religions that claim their god has revealed himself to them, who are equally as convinced as you are? How do I go about differentiating their 'mistaken' (according to you) assessment of their god's revelation to them, from your 'accurate' assessment of your god's revelation to you?

I don't believe there is my God and their God.  There is only one God who is the God of all.  I don't think that anybody is fully aware of everything about him.  Anyone seeking God is on a journey toward Jesus, who is the incarnation of God, and it is through him we are all saved.  Someone who has never heard or read his name can still know Jesus without knowing his name when they acknowledge that there is a God and that they must rely on him for salvation. All our lives they and I are on a journey to know God more completely.

Not sure why you have a problem with this? How many other existential claims, besides your god claims, do you think your method would lead to accurate results?

How do I go about differentiating your method, from gullibility?

The reason I have a problem with the atheists method to determine if there is a God is because it doesn't work.  God is supernatural, not natural, and the only way to come to know him is to ask him to reveal himself to you.  This is what the bible teaches and this is what I discovered for myself.  I know that some atheists say they have sincerely asked God to reveal himself to them and have received no answer.  I can't get inside those people to determine whether or not they were sincere.  All I know is what I've learned from the bible and my and others experiences.  The bible does say the truth, but you won't believe it without the power of God.  I can defend it with historical and scientific arguments, but I can't prove it, so if that's what someone needs to believe I can't do that for them.  The only way to believe in God is for God to show you.

[Minimalist]

Christian: All I can say is that when God reveals himself to you then you know it's God.

And if the god turns out to be Odin your ass is grass.

[Harry Nevis]

I don't believe there is my God and their God.  There is only one God who is the God of all.  I don't think that anybody is fully aware of everything about him.  Anyone seeking God is on a journey toward Jesus, who is the incarnation of God, and it is through him we are all saved.

Christian arrogance rears its ugly head.

Not sure why you have a problem with this? How many other existential claims, besides your god claims, do you think your method would lead to accurate results?

How do I go about differentiating your method, from gullibility?

The reason I have a problem with the atheists method to determine if there is a God is because it doesn't work. 

Atheists are trying to determine if there is a god?  Not any that I know.

[Amarok]

1. If there is one god that's all god then he's either a duplicity jackass or a walking bag of contradictions . and nice dodge at having to deal with religious plurality but simply scream "we don't know him completely so there"


2 Atheists are trying to determine there is a god ?

[Lek]

1. If there is one god that's all god then he's either a duplicity jackass or a walking bag of contradictions . and nice dodge at having to deal with religious plurality but simply scream "we don't know him completely so there"


2 Atheists are trying to determine there is a god ?

I'm talking about the one God and you're talking about peoples' images of who or what he is.

There's plenty of atheists who have tried, or are trying, to determine if there is a God. I've conversed with them in this forum.

---

[quote='Lek' pid='1540249' dateline='1492029954']

I don't believe there is my God and their God.  There is only one God who is the God of all.  I don't think that anybody is fully aware of everything about him.  Anyone seeking God is on a journey toward Jesus, who is the incarnation of God, and it is through him we are all saved.

Christian arrogance rears its ugly head.

No more arrogant than atheists who mock theists. I'm just stating my honest opinion.

[Angrboda]

 In my case, God answered me very directly through another person.  

I don't think you understand what the word 'directly' means.