And you still think this God of yours is omnipotent? The evidence strongly leans against that conclusion.

If it's the Holy Spirit's job to convince me he's worthy of worship, then he's not doing a very good job of it. I figure if he has something to say to me, he'll say it to my face, and not hide like a little sniveling coward, or work through intermediaries who can't manage to explain who or what he is.

I already explained to you that I do not care about your attempts at inflicting psychological terror on me. Yet you persist with this trope. With every response you leave here, you keep providing evidence that no moral person has any business worshipping the deity you call your God. Terrorists should be opposed at every step, not worshipped. Yes, even if they're cosmic almighty creator-god terrorists. A terrorist is still a terrorist no matter how powerful s/he may be.

If you want to convince me that your God is worthy of my worship, you will have to do better than this. My guess is, you can't … because spewing threats of eternal damnation at people is all you know how to do. Your religion is so primitive, and your brain so straitjacketed by the savagery of it, that you haven't the ability to do anything else.

Well, then, bully for him. Wa hoo. But the same goes for almost anything … like a sculptor. I'm sure it's all great that a sculptor can demolish any statue he makes … but is that really an accomplishment of which he can be proud? Moreover, would it even make sense for a sculptor to make a lot of statues only to destroy them, solely for the purpose of expressing his power to destroy what he makes?

In other words … why would I be impressed with this?

Re: "If you don't like His rule for being saved, then that will be too bad for you."

Your threat of eternal perdition is noted, but dismissed as an attempt at inflicting psychological terror. Your threats of damnation do not impress me.

Re: "His 'path' for salvation is not the same as His 'will' that no one perish."

Illogical. It's inconsistent for your God to have set out a "path" that does not coincide with his "will." You're asking me to accept that the Almighty is absurd being that uses methods that thwart his own goals. That also does not impress me.

Re: "God's ways are too high for you to comprehend, sir."

Yet you tell me what they are. Or you pretend to, at least. Sorry, but that irrational and even juvenile kind of argument also does not impress me. (Are you seeing a pattern here, yet?)

Re: "Read His Word."

I have done so. I assure you, I know it better than you do. In fact, I've read the New Testament in its original Greek, to the point where I can recite and type parts of it in that language. If you need proof of that, here: εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος ουτος ην εν αρχη προς τον θεον

I absolutely have read the Bible. Every last word of it. That I disagree with you about what it says, or about its veracity, does not mean I have not read it. It simply means I disagree with you.

Get over it.

If God chooses to save only those who come to him "his way," this means, logically, that he's saving some but not others … and furthermore, it means he knows some will, in fact, NOT be saved. This contradicts your earlier assertion that God's will is that no one "perish." So which is it? Does he wish only to save some, but not all? Or does he want to save all? It can't be both ways, it can only be one or the other. Choose which one is the case.

As for "saving sinners," if the Bible is correct, then ALL are "sinners," by definition, and merely by virtue of having been born human (see e.g. Rom 3:23). If it's true that God wants to save ALL "sinners," then he wants to save all humans. This means he wants to save everyone, not just some (i.e. those who come to him "his way").

Again, logic tells us that salvation is either universal, or it's only given to some but not to others. You need to decide which of these your God adheres to. You can't claim both assertions are simultaneously true. They're mutually exclusive.