God, Energy and Matter

[Simon Moon]

It's something he has revealed directly to humans since the beginning of humanity.  He revealed it to early hunters, farmers, tradesmen, royalty, doctors, scientists, etc.  People have had visions and other mystical and supernatural experiences.  I don't just examine these things and dismiss them as people's imaginations.  Most of all, I believe God himself has put into my consciousness because I've been unable to shed my belief in God.

And yet, there are tribes in South America that have zero god beliefs.

But of course, there is no demonstrable, falsifiable evidence, or valid and sound logic to support any of this.

I haven't hidden myself away, you know.  I've been participating in this forum for years.  I've listened to pretty much all of the arguments against God and have discovered nothing that would disprove my beliefs, so I'll continue to rely on what I've learned until something convinces me otherwise.

That is the complete opposite method that is known to reliabley result in true beliefs, and eliminate false ones.

Existential claims should not be believed until they are shown to be false, they should have belief withheld until they are supported to be true.

And everything you've ever posted here in support of your beliefs, has possible natural explanations that would also explain them. And you are unable to eliminate those possible naturalistic explanations.

[Lek]

SO, I noticed in your special pleading response, you ignored the most important part of my post.

Here it is again: So please, demonstrate that faith is a reliable path to knowledge.

I've been asking theists this one, seeming straight forward question for decades, and not one had been able to answer. Including some pretty well known apologists.

So please, let us know how faith is reliable.

I think nobody could tell you how it is reliable because they can't demonstrate to you in words how they know.  Someone who has had faith in God and then had a mystical experience of God would say that their faith was shown to be true by that experience.  We really don't know if faith gives us knowledge until we encounter the God in which we have faith.  So, as far as it applies to your criteria, the answer is I don't know.  If you're using your criteria you won't gain knowledge of God or the supernatural.  You've already ruled it out.

[Simon Moon]

SO, I noticed in your special pleading response, you ignored the most important part of my post.

Here it is again: So please, demonstrate that faith is a reliable path to knowledge.

I've been asking theists this one, seeming straight forward question for decades, and not one had been able to answer. Including some pretty well known apologists.

So please, let us know how faith is reliable.

I think nobody could tell you how it is reliable because they can't demonstrate to you in words how they know.  Someone who has had faith in God and then had a mystical experience of God would say that their faith was shown to be true by that experience.  We really don't know if faith gives us knowledge until we encounter the God in which we have faith.  So, as far as it applies to your criteria, the answer is I don't know.  If you're using your criteria you won't gain knowledge of God or the supernatural.  You've already ruled it out.

So...

You do understand, that if you can't demonstrate how something is reliable, that would make it.... wait for it... unreliable.

If a god exists, and has the ability to demonstrate to me that it does exist, then it would certainly have the ability to know how to do so, despite my criteria.

So, either it doesn't have the ability to demonstrate it exists, *doesn't care to demonstrate to me it exists, or does not exist.


*Despite several decades of being a sincere believer, praying for this god to let me know it exists, reading dozens of books on apologetics, etc, etc,

[Anomalocaris]

SO, I noticed in your special pleading response, you ignored the most important part of my post.

Here it is again: So please, demonstrate that faith is a reliable path to knowledge.

I've been asking theists this one, seeming straight forward question for decades, and not one had been able to answer. Including some pretty well known apologists.

So please, let us know how faith is reliable.

I think nobody could tell you how it is reliable because they can't demonstrate to you in words how they know.  Someone who has had faith in God and then had a mystical experience of God would say that their faith was shown to be true by that experience.  We really don't know if faith gives us knowledge until we encounter the God in which we have faith.  So, as far as it applies to your criteria, the answer is I don't know.  If you're using your criteria you won't gain knowledge of God or the supernatural.  You've already ruled it out.

Right...…..     We don't know if there is a god until when we certainly meet god and he tells us there is him ……….  right...….

Would you like to be burped now?

[Lek]

I think nobody could tell you how it is reliable because they can't demonstrate to you in words how they know.  Someone who has had faith in God and then had a mystical experience of God would say that their faith was shown to be true by that experience.  We really don't know if faith gives us knowledge until we encounter the God in which we have faith.  So, as far as it applies to your criteria, the answer is I don't know.  If you're using your criteria you won't gain knowledge of God or the supernatural.  You've already ruled it out.

So...

You do understand, that if you can't demonstrate how something is reliable, that would make it.... wait for it... unreliable.

If a god exists, and has the ability to demonstrate to me that it does exist, then it would certainly have the ability to know how to do so, despite my criteria.

So, either it doesn't have the ability to demonstrate it exists, *doesn't care to demonstrate to me it exists, or does not exist.


*Despite several decades of being a sincere believer, praying for this god to let me know it exists, reading dozens of books on apologetics, etc, etc,

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

SO, I noticed in your special pleading response, you ignored the most important part of my post.

Here it is again: So please, demonstrate that faith is a reliable path to knowledge.

I've been asking theists this one, seeming straight forward question for decades, and not one had been able to answer. Including some pretty well known apologists.

So please, let us know how faith is reliable.

I think nobody could tell you how it is reliable because they can't demonstrate to you in words how they know.  Someone who has had faith in God and then had a mystical experience of God would say that their faith was shown to be true by that experience.  We really don't know if faith gives us knowledge until we encounter the God in which we have faith.  So, as far as it applies to your criteria, the answer is I don't know.  If you're using your criteria you won't gain knowledge of God or the supernatural.  You've already ruled it out.

How charmingly tautological of you.

Boru

[Lek]

God lets us know his way, not ours. And it might not be scientifically provable. He may also not be what you envisioned him to be.

---

I think many atheists already know God exists, but won't let themselves believe because, like our culture, they think they need to scientifically prove everything. They end up spending their lives searching for God or trying to prove he doesn't exist.

[Anomalocaris]

God lets us know his way,  not ours.  And it might not be scientifically provable.  He may also not be what you envisioned him to be.

---

I think many atheists already know God exists, but won't let themselves believe because, like our culture, they think they need to scientifically prove everything.  They end up spending their lives searching for God or trying to prove he doesn't exist.

You made up a god to suit your needy yet over reaching ways, and in the process dragged down the average virtue of the specie as thinking organisms.

[Rahn127]

God lets us know his way, not ours. And it might not be scientifically provable. He may also not be what you envisioned him to be.

Each morning you hear a rooster Crow and you wake up. We'll pretend you live in an area where it's possible that a neighbor has a rooster or a wild rooster is naturally crowing in the morning.

You may think nothing of it. Until one morning you are with someone else after a drunken night of hookers and cocaine and you are the only one to hear the rooster.

You had assumed all this time that the rooster existed.

You went on a cruise and still heard the rooster every morning, but no one else did.

Now it's no big deal if you hear a rooster crow when there isn't one there.

It's a much bigger deal if you believe that same rooster created the universe.

He may also not be what you envisioned him to be.

(He may just be all in your head)

[Simon Moon]

God lets us know his way,  not ours.  And it might not be scientifically provable.  He may also not be what you envisioned him to be.

As far as I can tell, gods aren't provable in any way, scientifically, logically, whatever.

Since every theist (including every Christian) I've ever talked to, has a different definition of their god, gods are not what theists envisioned him to be, either. Like, probably, nonexistent.

I think many atheists already know God exists, but won't let themselves believe because, like our culture, they think they need to scientifically prove everything.  They end up spending their lives searching for God or trying to prove he doesn't exist.

Yeah, you have to believe this kind of nonsense, since the Bible says something like this in Romans 1:18-21.

As I have stated more times I can remember, one of my main motivations in life, is to believe as many true things as possible, and eliminate as many false beliefs as possible.

If a god or gods exist, I want to know about it. This motivation is my main reason for having these discussions with theists. I am not motivated to prove theists wrong, I am motivated to learn if theists are able to support their claims with good evidence, and reasoned argument. When I point out bad evidence and flawed arguments, it is not to prove theists wrong, it is to show why theist's arguments are unconvincing.

But, is it my fault that a 'god created me' with a brain that just won't let me accept claims of his existence as being true, without good evidence, and valid and sound logic to support their existence?