debating whether God exists in an empirical context is a flawed approach.
It is a flawed approach because God has no limitations.
God's WORD is very real and
I suspect
that is a better topic for
debate/discussion.
No, it's not a flawed approach "because God has no limitations." You are incorrect here because. while you are making the presumption that God both exists and has "no limitations," you are not treating it as a presumption, but rather as a given.
It's a flawed approach specifically because it is unsound to support a theory of something which is defined as being beyond the scope of empiricism with empirical evidence.