Possible and impossible

[KUSA]

Why is it important for a theist to establish the possibility of a god? How is this even important?

Theist asks:
"Do you claim it is impossible for an all-knowing, all-powerful god can reveal things to you that you may know them for certain?"

Some non-theists are little baffled by this oddly phrased and ill-defined question and answer "I don't claim it is impossible."

"Aha! So you agree it is possible for my god to reveal things to me in a way that I may know them for certain."

[Minimalist]

The issue is probability - not impossibility.

[ignoramus]

Ask exactly the same question about your special pink unicorn.
When they give you the stupid look, just say, that's exactly how I feel also.

[robvalue]

The fact that they think it's possibility is even an issue betrays a lack of confidence on their part.

And it also undermines the idea of how "obvious" it is meant to be.

I've stopped using the word "possible" with regard to unfalsifiable/unknowable things. I've started using "consistent" instead. The thing is, their commonly proposed models are not even consistent with observed reality.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

The issue is probability - not impossibility.

^This.

From where I sit, I can see a large rock in my back garden. It's a little over two metres long, perhaps half that high. Other than being somewhat decorative, there's really nothing special about it. It's your typical biggish rock - kind of off-gray, a little mossy, and sports the occasional frog.

In my life - for gardening and construction purposes - I've broken apart perhaps a hundred rocks. In every instance, what was inside each rock was...more rock. Now, there is a probability that the rock in my garden isn't filled with more rock, but with cream custard. I consider this to be a very low probability because I've never found custard in any other rock. Moreover, I've never even heard of anyone finding custard in a rock. In all of the vast experience of the human species when it comes to opening up rocks, no one has ever reported a custard-filled rock. To even conjecture that some rocks, or even a single, unique rock contains custard is not only so low a probability as to be a waste of time, the Custard-In-A-Rock hypothesis doesn't help us learn anything about rocks. Does this mean that it is impossible for rocks to contain custard. Nope. But that doesn't mean I'm going to spend any thought or effort trying to convince people that they should be open-minded about the possibility.

So, in a sense, God is nothing more than a custard-filled rock.

Boru

[Bob Kelso]

The fact that they think it's possibility is even an issue betrays a lack of confidence on their part.

And it also undermines the idea of how "obvious" it is meant to be.

I've stopped using the word "possible" with regard to unfalsifiable/unknowable things. I've started using "consistent" instead. The thing is, their commonly proposed models are not even consistent with observed reality.

*my bold*

Man, I'm going to use this. Getting trapped in the mire of "possibility" always leads me to a snarky FSM response, and while it's a valid response I'd like to offer more to the conversation and I hadn't thought of that in reply to this particular situation.

[pocaracas]

The fact that they think it's possibility is even an issue betrays a lack of confidence on their part.

And it also undermines the idea of how "obvious" it is meant to be.

I've stopped using the word "possible" with regard to unfalsifiable/unknowable things. I've started using "consistent" instead. The thing is, their commonly proposed models are not even consistent with observed reality.

The trouble is that those models to carry a certain internal consistency, even if not fully "consistent with observed reality".
They're ambiguous enough for people to fail to grasp how reality does not match up to them, and thus keep them as potentially valid.

Indoctrination and/or some basic reasoning fallacies lead to regarding that "potential" as a certainty... or near enough as to make no practical difference... a belief.

A model bred by ignorance, refined by wishful thinking... it saddens me that so many people fall for it...

[robvalue]

Bob: Thanks! I'm glad you like it

Poca: Yeah, if they keep it vague enough, they can pretend it is consistent. But when you hammer down any specific, almost always you can find contradictions either within the beliefs themselves, or with reality. Sadly they mostly don't care. It is really sad to me too how many people fall for all these mental traps.

[Old Baby]

My experience in 30+ years of Christianity is that people's "God spoke to me" experiences are scrutinized just as much WITHIN the body of believers. Almost everyone thinks God is talking to them and telling them a specific thing. The trouble comes when Roger is listening to Nancy share her testimony of what God told her, realizing it conflicts with what God told him. Long before I stopped being a believer in Jesus, I stopped believing in people's personal "Gold told me this and I know that I know that I know" testimonies when it became clear to me how self-deceptive people are in just telling themselves what they want to hear and giving God the credit. Now, when I see someone sharing "the Truth" with an unbeliever, the first thing that comes to my mind is the fact that their "Truth" is not even supported by a consensus among other believers.

[drfuzzy]

My experience in 30+ years of Christianity is that people's "God spoke to me" experiences are scrutinized just as much WITHIN the body of believers.  Almost everyone thinks God is talking to them and telling them a specific thing.  The trouble comes when Roger is listening to Nancy share her testimony of what God told her, realizing it conflicts with what God told him.  Long before I stopped being a believer in Jesus, I stopped believing in people's personal "Gold told me this and I know that I know that I know" testimonies when it became clear to me how self-deceptive people are in just telling themselves what they want to hear and giving God the credit.  Now, when I see someone sharing "the Truth" with an unbeliever, the first thing that comes to my mind is the fact that their "Truth" is not even supported by a consensus among other believers.

Exactly Old Baby!  Not only that, but I clearly remember a church (pentecostal) where people were strongly encouraged to stand up during services and share personal experiences.  Shy people were given a pass, but still expected to say something . . . once-a-month-ish.  People were praised afterwards, (the obligatory after service gathering with juice and coffee and tea and cookies) for particularly eloquent descriptions of how god worked in their lives and answer their prayers. So teens would gather beforehand, and come up with stories. People came to service prepared with stories. I actually think that a lot of those folks BELIEVED their own lies, once they had been spoken.  It was really quite amazing.