Is science irrational?

[Chriliman]

How can God give certainty, if you already admitted, your perception of this God, can be fallible.

Relying on something that is fallible, can never give you certainty, because of this fallibility.

Can you see how my beliefs and God can be seen as separate things?

My beliefs are fallible. God is not.

If God were fallible, He would not be God.

If my beliefs were infallible, they would cease to be beliefs.

 

[bhsmte]

Can you see how my beliefs and God can be seen as separate things?

My beliefs are fallible. God is not.

If God were fallible, He would not be God.

If my beliefs were infallible, they would cease to be beliefs.

A chain is only as strong as it's weakest link.

 

[Chriliman]

Who said there is no doubt that God does not exist?

So you admit that you have doubts that God does not exist?

 

[bhsmte]

So you admit that you have doubts that God does not exist?

Have you paid any attention to people's positions after all this time?

I have always said, I do not believe that a God exists and I see no reason to believe a God exists, but I may be wrong.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Have you paid any attention to people's positions after all this time?

I have always said, I do not believe that a God exists and I see no reason to believe a God exists, but I may be wrong.

As far as I know, all the atheists here would say the same thing.

 

[Chriliman]

Have you paid any attention to people's positions after all this time?

I have always said, I do not believe that a God exists and I see no reason to believe a God exists, but I may be wrong.

That's good! I'm glad you can admit that.

 

[bhsmte]

As far as I know, all the atheists here would say the same thing.

That fact has seemed to have slipped by our friend, who needs to claim atheists feel differently.

 

[bhsmte]

That's good! I'm glad you can admit that.

I always have, sorry you missed it.

 

[HitchSlap]

So you admit that you have doubts that God does not exist?

More like we doubt your claims that he exists. Savvy?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

That's good! I'm glad you can admit that.

Just like you can admit that you may be wrong about a god existing...

 

[Chriliman]

Just like you can admit that you may be wrong about a god existing...

I guess that's the difference. I'm convinced God exists.

I'm as convinced as you are about your own existence. Would you ever deny that you exist?

 

[expos4ever]

Can you see how my beliefs and God can be seen as separate things?

My beliefs are fallible. God is not.

If God were fallible, He would not be God.

If my beliefs were infallible, they would cease to be beliefs.

You seem to want to sneak in certainty by the back door, as it were.

I suspect all agree that:

1. It is possible that God exists;
2. It is possible that God has perfect knowledge;
3. It is possible that God transmits knowledge to you.

I think what bothers us all is your claim of certainty. Granted, you concede that, apart from a connection to God, all knowledge you have would be uncertain. So far so good. But you assert that you have a "pipeline" to God and that He downloads "perfect, certain" knowledge to you. And, presto, you claim certainty about such downloaded knowledge.

This is highly suspicious (to me at least) for at least the following three reasons:

1. I have known fellow Christians who made similar claims, yet the way they lived and the things they said suggested not only that such claims to perfect knowledge were incorrect, these people were "out of touch with reality" to a rather disturbing degree. Granted, I would not say this was true of many Christians but I will make the following claim admitting it is based solely on my anecdotal experience: The more certain believers seem to be, the less functional, stable, and mature they seem to be.

2. More importantly, it is my own personal experience that it is more or less impossible to clearly categorize my own thoughts and beliefs as to whether they are "generated by me" or "generated by God". In fact, I doubt such a distinction makes practical sense.

 

[HitchSlap]

I guess that's the difference. I'm convinced God exists.

I'm as convinced as you are about your own existence. Would you ever deny that you exist?

Being convinced is not evidence of existence.

If I am convinced I am a ripe tomato, does that make me a ripe tomato?

 

[expos4ever]

Would you ever deny that you exist?

Actually, I have to admit that I am indeed "certain" that I exist (in the spirit of "I think therefore I am"). But I really do believe this is clearly a special case that has to do with the fundamental way the world is structured, namely that each thinking individual - person, dog, cat, whatever - has immediate access to its own thoughts and sensations, and even though we can imagine that such thoughts and sensations do not necessarily accurately describe the world out there, it is nigh on impossible to imagine there is not "something" that is thinking those thoughts.

 

[Chriliman]

You seem to want to sneak in certainty by the back door, as it were.

I suspect all agree that:

1. It is possible that God exists;
2. It is possible that God has perfect knowledge;
3. It is possible that God transmits knowledge to you.

I think what bothers us all is your claim of certainty. Granted, you concede that, apart from a connection to God, all knowledge you have would be uncertain. So far so good. But you assert that you have a "pipeline" to God and that He downloads "perfect, certain" knowledge to you. And, presto, you claim certainty about such downloaded knowledge.

Again, I'm not claiming I have perfect knowledge. I'm claiming God has perfect knowledge and something God says himself is that we are made perfect through Christ. I'm being made perfect, but I'm not there yet in terms of the perfection God has intended for me in heaven, I'm still a human, but I am a new creation in Christ.

This is highly suspicious (to me at least) for at least the following three reasons:

1. I have known fellow Christians who made similar claims, yet the way they lived and the things they said suggested not only that such claims to perfect knowledge were incorrect, these people were "out of touch with reality" to a rather disturbing degree. Granted, I would not say this was true of many Christians but I will make the following claim admitting it is based solely on my anecdotal experience: The more certain believers seem to be, the less functional, stable, and mature they seem to be.

We're all at different stages in our spiritual walk with Christ. Trust in Him.

2. More importantly, it is my own personal experience that it is more or less impossible to clearly categorize my own thoughts and beliefs as to whether they are "generated by me" or "generated by God". In fact, I doubt such a distinction makes practical sense.

I would agree with this, which is why I've said many times that I continually deny myself and trust God as much as I can.[/QUOTE]

 

[ToddNotTodd]

I'm as convinced as you are about your own existence.

That's highly illogical.

 

[quatona]

Can you see how my beliefs and God can be seen as separate things?

Most definitely. That´s the core of the problem of your arguments, after all.

My beliefs are fallible. God is not.

If God were fallible, He would not be God.

If my beliefs were infallible, they would cease to be beliefs.

One of your beliefs is that a God exists.

 

[expos4ever]

I would agree with this, which is why I've said many times that I continually deny myself and trust God as much as I can.

You clearly did not understand my point but that might be at least partially my fault. I will try to be very precise: Since you agree that we cannot disentangle thoughts generated by ourselves from those generated by God, we cannot be sure that any thought is our own is put there by God. You seem to want to maintain this distinction between the uncertain creaturely thoughts generated by you, and the "certain" thoughts that God has sent you.

But you just agreed that we cannot distinguish these two categories of thoughts.

 

[Chriliman]

Most definitely. That´s the core of the problem of your arguments, after all.


One of your beliefs is that a God exists.

Can you understand how God could be seen as the highest being imaginable?

Understanding that is different than believing it.

 

[HitchSlap]

Can you understand how God could be seen as the highest being imaginable?

Understanding that is different than believing it.

Right, because, while you could imagine me as a big ripe tomato, to believe that I was actually a big ripe tomato.