If God manifested himself, how would you know that it was God?

[Davian]

Actually my friend, Christianity sells you nothing. It offers a gift.

Not a free gift. The hat does get passed around - apparently, as George Carlton famously said, God needs money, lots of money - and I would have to abandon my intellectual integrity. That is a high price to pay.

Salvation....unless you think that renouncing your sins and turning from them is too high a price....

Sin, as a concept fabricated for the purposes of religion, doesn't apply to the non-religious. No religion, no sin.

It offers restoration, justification, redemption, adoption, a royal priesthood and a government and economy of righteousness.

Surely such an honorable and moral man as yourself would find yourself at home in such a kingdom...no?

At home with the likes of Jeffrey Dahmer? No, I do not think so.

"David Berkowitz (Corbis) called the SON OF SAM, murdered more than 10 women. The newspaper said "He called himself a born again Christian"

Berwid - The article in the Flint Journal quotes him "I was searching the bible and soul searching and I decided God wanted me to do that."

The Yorkshire Rapier "was on a divine mission and felt he had been chosen to hear the word of GOD (JESUS)." Reported the Flint Journal. He murdered 11 girls.

Miller a serial killer had that thing called faith, believed in Jesus. The Flint Journal article says he was always carrying the Bible.

Sampson Kanderayi, a mass murderer called The Ax Killer, killed more than 30 people. The newspaper reported "he did it to appease evil spirits." He was a Christian

Watts, The Sunday Morning Slasher killed 11 women. This article says he did it "to eliminate evil spirits".

Jeffery Dahmer is a typical serial killer. He killed more than 23 young men and eat many of them."

Serial Killers

 

[gnomon]

So here's a question for all to ponder: Suppose that God manifests himself in some sort of physical or spiritual revelation, to you personally, you and a group of people, or to the entire planet. How would you know that this was God? How would you know, for instance, that it wasn't some sort of alien with super-advanced technology pretending to be God?

A follow-up question for antitheists: If a personal manifestation/appearance of God wouldn't prove to you that God exists (since there could always be another explanation - aliens or whatever), then what sort of proof would you accept that God exists?

Or how would you know if it was the Devil?

The problem is that by definition we are a limited species in our understanding and ability to define the ineffable. If a being manifested itself in front of us exhibiting supernatural abilities beyond our understanding their is no way possible for a human being to definitely define that being as a superior alien species, a God, a demi-God or the Devil itself.

The only thing we could rely upon is belief.

Which is the state we live in today. It is only belief, that which lacks verifiable proof as well as a state in which we could never provide verifiable proof, that upon witnessing such a being exhibiting powers upon that which is naturally verifiable we could adequately define that being. So any answer from that being is a God or that being is a supernatural but mortal alien species would occupy the exact same status as an answer.

The problem being that a case of an alien with powers beyond our own and a proposed God occupy the same position in our understanding. That both are ineffable. In other words....beyond comprehension due to our own limited and mortal status in the universe.

 

[orangeness365]

Replace the word "Christianity" with "Islam." Does it convince you to become a Muslim? "Will there be greater loss for those who believe, or for those who don't believe but later found out Islam is true and they need to suffer an eternity as a result for a single choice?"

Do you see why this line of reasoning is unconvincing?

I'd rather put my trust in Jesus rather than Muhammad. Jesus was just plain a nicer guy. I'd rather be in the same place in the afterlife as Jesus.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I'd rather put my trust in Jesus rather than Muhammad. Jesus was just plain a nicer guy. I'd rather be in the same place in the afterlife as Jesus.

So you're staking it all on Jesus being a "nice guy"? This reminds me of people who say that they're going to vote for a particular politician because "He looks like a nice guy to have a beer with."

 

[Kylie]

I'd rather put my trust in Jesus rather than Muhammad. Jesus was just plain a nicer guy. I'd rather be in the same place in the afterlife as Jesus.

He's said to have been a nicer guy.

Since you were not there actually talking to him, you don't know for yourself, do you?

 

[orangeness365]

So you're staking it all on Jesus being a "nice guy"? This reminds me of people who say that they're going to vote for a particular politician because "He looks like a nice guy to have a beer with."

What criteria do go by? It's not just that he was nice. The scripture shows that he died for us and was without sin.

 

[orangeness365]

He's said to have been a nicer guy.

Since you were not there actually talking to him, you don't know for yourself, do you?

What history texts do you consider to be truth anyways? Only those that appeared during your lifetime?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

What criteria do go by? It's not just that he was nice.

Not by whether I think he was a "nice guy." My friend, Aaron, is a nice guy too, but I'm not going to worship him. I would think that for something that apparently has such high stakes you would demand a higher standard of evidence.

The scripture shows that he died for us and was without sin.

The scripture claims that is the case.

 

[orangeness365]

Not by whether I think he was a "nice guy." My friend, Aaron, is a nice guy too, but I'm not going to worship him. I would think that for something that apparently has such high stakes you would demand a higher standard of evidence.



The scripture claims that is the case.

He also said that he is the son of God, and he walked on water. I believe that that happened.

 

[Kylie]

What history texts do you consider to be truth anyways? Only those that appeared during your lifetime?

I consider to be factual things that have reliable sources to support the claims they make, things that have testable evidence where that evidence has actually been tested and withstood the testing.

It's also good when a source was actually produced during the event it describes. Anne Frank's Diary is a good source for WW2 because it was written as the events it describes actually happened. A book written about WW2 last year does not have this advantage, and must rely on other sources, and their accuracy cannot be determined as accurately.