(November 15, 2016 at 5:00 pm)Ignorant Wrote:(November 15, 2016 at 2:56 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: So, Ignorant, basically I'm saying I accept that I would value having knowledge of the truth of a god's existence inasmuch as I value truth for its own sake... so that's step one. What's step two?
Step two involves, supposing god exists, valuing the truth about god existing in relation to you.
In short (as I have tried to explain to Rob), god being what-it-is, your being-you is fundamentally related to god-being-god. Knowing the nature of that relationship is valuable because it tells you about who and what you are.
IF a deity of some type exists, fine. It is "out there" somewhere, maybe, who knows? When it proves to me that it exists, then your "in relation to" will have some merit. But until I have some valid proof of its existence, then I cannot have a relationship with something that doesn't exist.
"The family that prays together...is brainwashing their children."- Albert Einstein