About other gods-question for theists

[The Grand Nudger]

I'm just giving you a non-experiential proposition as a 'common ground or objective point from which to reason.' Something you've requested.

By asking me to assume jesus? Surely you jest.

I'm not using genealogies to argue for God. I'm seeking to test your proposition that apologists use 'experience' to defend their position, without allowing you to use your experience.

We all use our experiences to defend our positions or criticize the positions of others. It's not really something that we can avoid. Here, allow me to apply my experience to the offering above - even though it probably doesn't cut it as objective grounds - and that will become immediately clear.

-Fictional characters do not require a line of descent, nor, if the author chooses to give them one, do they need to be accurate -even within the narrative-. Textual dilemma that doesn't bother me in the least, solved - thank me later.

If rationalism is the philosophy that truth is found in the mind, and solipsism states all that can be proven to exist is the mind, it follows that they are cut from the same cloth. If all that can be proven to exist is the mind, then if truth exists, it would be found there.

With the minor caveat that any truth found there can only go so far as one's own mind, of course. Simultaneously handicapping truth to whatever might be understood by a human mind (my mind, in fact). Something I'm sure neither of us would really find all that useful. Thus, the spectre or shadow of solipsism. All of our postulates about what may exist beyond our own minds (including each others minds - and the sensory data upon which we rely) are - on some level - baseless.