You haven't established that you have a relationship with a universe-creating superbeing. That isn't hair splitting. It's the very issue in question -- an epistemological one -- and it's a significant issue. How can I possibly just take that at "face value"?
I cant establish that I have a relationship with God to your satisfaction, to anyone's satisfaction. I cannot meet the epistemological threshold, I have repeatedly acknowledged that. A religionist cant adequately describe their experience with the spirit of God any better than you could describe the personality of an acquaintance well enough for me to be able to pick them out of a lineup. One personality can experience the spirit/personality of another but such an experience is so unique to the exchange that it's not adequately definable. We could use comparisons, personality patterns, concepts, but no description that would be absolute in communicating a personality.
I'm not expecting you to just buy into my assertion and become a believer in my God experience. You really would just be pretending to be having the experience rather than genuinely experiencing God on your own.
So, the answer to your question is that you can take on face value that I am having the experience without believing in the entity that I am experiencing.
I've mentioned AA's founding in the past, the cofounder Bill W. had the same kind of spiritual awakening that I had. The attending physician Dr. Silkworth, who knew Bill well from his many drying-out stays in Towns Hospital, spoke with Bill right after this strange occurrence in Bills hospital room. Bill thought perhaps this was more of the DT's or something because Bill was an agnostic-skeptic scientific type. After talking with this remarkably different Bill, of just a few hours earlier, Dr S. remarked, "I don't know what it is you have, but it's a lot better than what you had just a short time ago." Bill left the hospital a "free man", not only did he remain sober the rest of his extraordinary life, but he systemized his experience in the 12 steps which have been followed by millions of others who have also become spirit born and free from alcohol.
Again, this doesn't mean you have to believe in the
source of the experience because you can't unless you come to know the entity yourself, but I would think you could acknowledge that others do.
I do believe that others believe. I don't doubt that you believe that God exists. I don't think that you are lying to us.
If you believe in God, that's fine with me. However, let's keep in mind that I'm responding to the charge -- your charge -- that atheists pursue error and don't actually pursue truth at all levels, while you are perfectly free to pursue truth and don't potentially run into error with your adamant belief in the existence of some sort of God. You had no qualms whatsoever making judgments about atheism and atheists, so I don't see why you are complaining.
Please note too which sub-forum you are posting on. Seriously, what did you expect?
It's been my experience that Atheist look for what's wrong with explanations of spiritualism, for apparent errors, from people who may not be well equipped to explain their experience and then subsequently use those weakness to attempt to convince the believer that they are just imagining things. Atheist imply that, while they can't really explain away the experience of the religionist, at some future time science will account for everything currently unexplainable and consciousness will be proven to be an electrochemical phenomenon. That is why I say that Atheism is faith in the doctrines of doubt.
