God as the hidden basis to our knowledge.

[Whateverist]

*Sigh* it seems most people are bent on making a straw man out of what I'm saying or perhaps I've been unclear.

I didn't mean to duck what you were saying. I only wanted to point out that atheists don't make regular use of the words "praise" or "glory" or "belief" for that matter at least in the way Christians use it. It is hard to take the meaning you intend when you use words that are fairly devoid of meaning for an atheist. You might as well ask if we ever get the urge to fall on our knees and thank God for his grace and mercy. (More terms which don't mean for us what they do for you.)

[Epimethean]

Gotta love the suggestion that ignorance is bliss, which is what the OP is suggesting in this thread.

[genkaus]

Thanks to everyone for their feed back.

So you are not actually going to answer the criticisms?

I just feel the world only makes sense with God as the basis of our perception.

And why do you feel the need to add god when reality is perfectly capable of making sense without him?

It's as if everything is a manifestation of our knowledge of God.

Again, unnecessary inclusion. People can know beauty even without knowledge of the god concept.

Perhaps because I've been thinking of everything as a sign of God, I'm use to seeing this way.

You guys are not use to it, so you see God as separate from your perception.

Just because one is used to it, doesn't make it right.

I see the world as a manifestation of God's beauty and glory.

It's not that I just believe, I see these things as manifesting an eternal absolute reality and feel our perception is such that is eternally based.

The constantly changing concepts regarding beauty and glory disprove any eternal basis for them.

We all free to have our opinion.

And unless justified, they are worthless.

It seems all praise we praise is derived from a eternal praiseworthy reality.

Not if the same thing can be considered praiseworthy and contemptible at the same time.

This is the way it seems me, and I find impossible to imagine the world as other then this. I try to see it through atheist view, but it just seems the beauty, glory, praise, all just disappears, as if we don't know and don't perceive, but we do perceive and know.

That's because the atheist view has nothing to do with beauty, glory, praise etc. These things come from something deeper, they come from the very convictions that your life is based on. They are the result of the philosophy you live your life by. Both theism and atheism are consequences of that philosophy. You cannot simply look to atheism as a source of those values because it is not and has never been the source of them.

---

...you realize that God is the hidden basis behind our knowledge of everything.

Or perhaps, hidden in plain sight. When something is ubiquitous we take it for granted and overlook its presence.

One old fish says to the other, "The water's cold today." A young fish overhears and asks, "What's water?"

God is air?

[Angrboda]

You are confused. You are mistaking your inability to think clearly with profundity. Until you can show why the effect requires the cause, you should rest.


The so-to-speak unity is more than likely a result of the unification of our genetic pool during a population bottleneck approximately 100,000 years ago.


The rest is argument from ignorance and incredulity. The, "Oh wow, therefore God," argument. (aka, "Cosmic...") That you can't see mundane explanations is not evidence that they don't exist.

[liam]

If god was the hidden reason behind all of our knowledge then for what reason would god create biased knowledges, such as those which lead to discrimination? empirical revelation is not subject to God, science is not subject to god, reasoning is not subject to god and, frankly, being an atheist and humanist I will reject all claims that knowledge can be derived from anything but these three fonts.

[Mystic]

I don't think experience has to be universal to have an eternal basis. It can have a relationship to an eternal reality, but it doesn't have to be perfect in tune with the eternal reality.

[Anomalocaris]

I don't think experience has to be universal to have an eternal basis. It can have a relationship to an eternal reality, but it doesn't have to be perfect in tune with the eternal reality.

Can you be more specific, so that what you say might give off a slight whiff of testability, and thereby cast a at least a minuscule amount of doubt on the notion that you have no clue what intellectual rigor means?