RE: ★★ [4.3 SECOND conversion] ★★: CONVERT religious to atheist, in roughly 4.3 seconds.
January 16, 2017 at 12:10 pm
(January 15, 2017 at 10:35 pm)ProgrammingGodJordan Wrote:You made the claim that the theist is not omniscient.(January 15, 2017 at 7:57 pm)Aristocatt Wrote: Why would anyone accept conclusion one (that absolute knowledge of god is impossible) given premises 1 and 2?
How does the admission that we don't know everything infer that we can't know anything?
Who made such a claim?
Then you made the claim that they want absolute knowledge of God.
You then claimed absolute knowledge of God is impossible because of the first premise, that we are not omniscient.
The problem is absolute knowledge and whether or not we can have it is an epistemilogical problem that lot's of people disagree on.
Claiming that one is not omniscient, does not (at least not obviously) lead to the conclusion that absolute knowledge is imposssible.
So, if I misunderstood part of the argument, feel free to explain, however I fail to see how this is a valid argument.
(January 16, 2017 at 4:11 am)ProgrammingGodJordan Wrote:(January 15, 2017 at 10:35 pm)ProgrammingGodJordan Wrote: Who made such a claim?
Albeit, "theist" are atheists.
They lack absolute awareness, or sufficient awareness to determine whether or not truth exists.
This claim was not part of your original argument.
Also why should I if I were a theist that claimed absolute knowledge of something accept that I lack sufficient awareness to have absolute knowledge. My own experience would immediately lead me to reject your premise that I can't determine whether or not I am capable of determining if truth exists.