God is omnipresent

Because there is nothing in omnipresence that implies being able to be detected by the senses.

Well except the "present" part.

>you can't see air
sight isn't the only way of interaction, user. Air can be quantified and measured and used.

What, can you see micro-organisms and infra-red color?

With the right equipment yes.

with certain devices, yes

It depends on how you define "presence".
Let me just simulate this chain of argumentation to see if I'm up to speed.

>God is omnipresent
>then how do we detect his "presence"?
>a. either god has a physical manifestation that we can detect or
>b. god has a "spiritual" presence that cannot be detected but must be "felt"
>if a. then what instrument can detect him?
>if b. then what spiritual exercise must we perform to feel him?
>answer to a: miracles, crystal chakras, emp fields, indwelling of tongues or whatever
>answer to b: join my religion and then pray/meditate/spirit journey, or whatever

>bonus alternative answer: you cannot detect god either physically or spiritually for whatever reason

Ultimately its "or whatever" and then you have to convince the other person somewhow and that's a whole nother story.

>he can't detect god's presence
kek pleb

OP is retarded.

You are God.

sorry we haven't been bros with God like you were, satan

>Christian god is "omnipotent"
>wasn't there when eve was tempted by the serpent
>wasn't there when eve gave the fruit to Adam
>couldn't find Adam and eve when they were hiding and had to call out for them

literally not omnipotent in the first book of the bible

u r him. can you see you?

>ehehehe he believes that he's not bros with god, my plan is almost complete

How is that an example of god not being omnipotent? The last passage of genesis states that even in evil god makes good. (See the family of Abraham breaking their covenant with god numerous times and yet he still shows them mercy)

God made adam sin and thus all of man doomed. God saved all mankind through jesus.

At least attempt to critically think about these things.

No fucking shit, I was just pointing out that you couldn't notice them at a glance, just like god. What, do you think you think I'm implying you can just zoom in with a microscope and see some old man in a beard sitting there? God is there, that doesn't mean he has any special recognizable form.

Atheist levels of nonargument here are absurd, holy shit.

>burden of proof

You can't see ((them)) either but they're there.

Its a book for fuck sake.

yes but user, there is currently no instrument in existence you can use to detect god
this basically

Yes but for Christians it's divine and some of us spend our entire lives studying it.

>God made adam sin and thus all of man doomed. God saved all mankind through jesus.
Wouldn't it just be easier to *not* punish the entire human race for a couple millenia just because two faggots ate an apple? And what's wrong with eating from the tree of knowledge? Isn't that humanity's purpose, to seek knowledge and happiness?

God is commonly believed to exist outside time, space and galactic jurisdiction.

>No but I can otherwise detect it.

About 98% of our universe is utterly undetectable. What's your point?

How do we know how much is undetectable if we can't detect it?

>seeing is the only form of knowing something

We can't observe most of the universe. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist. We didn't live through the roman empire, that doesn't mean it never was. We didn't experience the American Revolution, that doesn't mean it didn't happen. We don't see other anons, that doesn't mean that these posts aren't made by a person.

While the ability to clealry observe something can prove it exists, the lack of observation does not discredit it's existence

If it is everywhere then there's nowhere to test for its absence. There is no controlled variable.

>be God
>do some evil pointless shit like making childbirth torture and making man work for a living
>blame this on a serpent, punish him by making him move on the ground like a serpent (so just keep doing what you're doing then I guess since god is essentially hustling Adam and eve and the serpent is just a tool for his will as you say)
>make this serpent out to be an evil bastard when you were pulling all the strings in the first place

it doesn't make any sense and it's bullshit because you've interpreted it that way to fit into your box. Why make a big deal out of punishing the serpent if it was all God's will in the first place? Does God not take responsibility for his actions? What an immature god.

See it doesn't make sense because your idea of God doesn't mesh with the Genesis interpretation of god, or the Job interpretation of god, or the Moses interpretation of god, or the new testament interpretation of god, because these were all different interpretations that were never meant to be all one and the same until some guy hundreds of years later put them all in the same book together.

Because really, the wording is clear in Genesis and you REEEEEALLY have to make a stretch to claim "it's all just a test bro he knows what's gonna happen" because it's not written like that. God doesn't know what happened to Adam and eve until he sees their shame, which necessitates that he didn't know before that, which lines up perfectly with the idea that he wasn't present when the fruit was eaten and shared or when the serpent tempted eve. He wouldn't stroll through the garden calling out to them if he already knew where they were. He wouldn't punish the snake if the snake was his own instrument, etc. It literally only makes sense when you make a series of interpretations on top of each other, going against all rational sentence structure so that each leap can then leap straight to the next interpetation, can't you see its just confirmation bias?

>God is omnipresent
>is a non-spatial, immaterial entity and therefore not present anywhere

God is the unique substance of infinite attributes. I suggest you read Spinoza's Ethics OP

just because you cant see uv light or dark matter doesn't mean it doesn't exist

Nobody cares what you think is "easier".
It's "easier" for this moment to have sprang into existence fully formed, yet here we are at the end of a causal chain linking back to the end of time. Clearly what humans think is "easier' is entirely irrelevant to the cosmos

>waaaah it doesn't make sense
>is somehow able to accept that painful childbirth and the necessity of labor exist for no reason though because that somehow makes more sense

Let go of your hatred for God.

What if God IS the universe ? That would literally make him omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient.

God abhors a vacuum

>Wah it doesn't make sense
>But believe it anyway because I told you

In an absurd universe why not believe the absurd? Not because anyone told you to, but because it's more fulfilling that way.

Why do you get upset if I believe the wrong type of absurd then

clearly we just haven't invented the tools to find the god particle yet, get on it

I don't, I get annoyed that you somehow think it's worth complaining because you feel things in the Bible don't make sense while accepting an entire universe that doesn't make sense.

Depending on who you ask, this may be a lie, there are gnostic groups that claim the true God is called Abraxas and that Abraxas is in the Void before creation.