"Knowing" God exists... is this possible?

[Zzyzx Road]

Can Christians truthfully answer that question?

The popular atheist thinker, Richard Dawkins, created a scale that identifies theistic beliefs. He lists peoples’ beliefs from 1-7.

1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung: "I do not believe, I know."
2. De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. "I don't know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."
3. Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. "I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God."
4. Completely impartial. Exactly 50 per cent. "God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."
5. Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."
6. De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. "I don't know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."
7. Strong atheist. "I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung knows there is one."

Where do you lie on this scale? Most Christian’s default answer is “1”.

Personally, I lie somewhere in between 1 and 2. I would say I am a 1.8. Yes, you understood me correctly. I do not know 100% if there is a God; moreover, a Christian God. Does this make me blasphemous? Maybe to some, but I don’t believe it does.

Firstly, let’s define absolutism as it relates to a theistic belief:

Being absolute is being 100% in something. Perfect. Without error. Knowing without any doubt. Infinite.

Words that are associated with absolutes: never / always

Secondly, let’s take a look at the words “never” and “always”.

We live in a finite world. God created it this way. In our finite world, can something always be “always” and never be “never”? Without going into philosophy, the answer is “no”. There is nothing in our world that is absolute.

The existence of God can be argued ad nauseum, and there will never be a 100% conclusion. The fact remains; you cannot disprove or prove something that that is metaphysical (not empirical). Both sides of the argument have an equal share but both lack evidence (because empirical evidence is impossible as both are unfalsifiable claims). Even Dawkins does not claim to be a 7 because he acknowledges that he cannot definitely prove that there isn’t a God.

So, what does being a 1 or 7 claim? Simple. It claims omniscience. Saying that you are a 1 or 7 is implying that you know all things in their truth. For atheists, this isn’t logically honest, and for theists, this is an equivocation of yourself to God.

Omniscience is unobtainable; therefore, claiming you know that God 100% exists is dishonest.

There is a key word in scripture that defines this point – faith.

Faith is defined as: firm belief in something for which there is no proof; complete trust.

This means that you cannot have faith in something if you believe it to be 100% true.

Now, let’s take a look at what the Bible has to say about faith:

2 Cor 5:6-7
6 Therefore, being always of good courage, and knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord— 7 for we walk by faith, not by sight—

We walk in Christianity not because of what we see but because of what we believe and trust. This is the cornerstone in the acceptance of Christ.

Eph 2:8-9
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;

Through God’s grace and our faith in Him we are saved. It is by having faith in something that we can’t see or touch that we are saved. Without faith – a fraction of not knowing for sure – we could not be redeemed.

Rom 1:17
17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “ BUT THE RIGHTEOUS man SHALL LIVE BY FAITH.”

Living by faith – a subtle unknowing – is crucial to being righteous. Why do we need faith? So God can work in us. If we had absolute knowledge, then we would depend on ourselves; simply because, we would know. Since we do not have absolute knowledge, we are forced to depend on God because His absolute knowledge is what guides our lives.

As a Christian, I believe, you cannot claim to know 100% that God exists. This would destroy faith and the need for it. You would no longer need to trust God or rely on Him.

So, claiming absolute knowledge of God is actually denying Him. Remember, since you are not omniscient, you cannot rely on yourself but have to rely on God.

Pro 3:5-6
5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart
And do not lean on your own understanding.
6 In all your ways acknowledge Him,
And He will make your paths straight.

Thoughts?

 

[Albion]

Can Christians truthfully answer that question?

Personally, I lie somewhere in between 1 and 2. I would say I am a 1.8. Yes, you understood me correctly. I do not know 100% if there is a God; moreover, a Christian God. Does this make me blasphemous?

Personally, I don't find this answer to be especially shocking or challenging.

 

[bhsmte]

Can Christians truthfully answer that question?

The popular atheist thinker, Richard Dawkins, created a scale that identifies theistic beliefs. He lists peoples’ beliefs from 1-7.

1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung: "I do not believe, I know."
2. De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. "I don't know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."
3. Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. "I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God."
4. Completely impartial. Exactly 50 per cent. "God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."
5. Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."
6. De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. "I don't know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."
7. Strong atheist. "I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung knows there is one."

Where do you lie on this scale? Most Christian’s default answer is “1”.

Personally, I lie somewhere in between 1 and 2. I would say I am a 1.8. Yes, you understood me correctly. I do not know 100% if there is a God; moreover, a Christian God. Does this make me blasphemous? Maybe to some, but I don’t believe it does.

Firstly, let’s define absolutism as it relates to a theistic belief:

Being absolute is being 100% in something. Perfect. Without error. Knowing without any doubt. Infinite.

Words that are associated with absolutes: never / always

Secondly, let’s take a look at the words “never” and “always”.

We live in a finite world. God created it this way. In our finite world, can something always be “always” and never be “never”? Without going into philosophy, the answer is “no”. There is nothing in our world that is absolute.

The existence of God can be argued ad nauseum, and there will never be a 100% conclusion. The fact remains; you cannot disprove or prove something that that is metaphysical (not empirical). Both sides of the argument have an equal share but both lack evidence (because empirical evidence is impossible as both are unfalsifiable claims). Even Dawkins does not claim to be a 7 because he acknowledges that he cannot definitely prove that there isn’t a God.

So, what does being a 1 or 7 claim? Simple. It claims omniscience. Saying that you are a 1 or 7 is implying that you know all things in their truth. For atheists, this isn’t logically honest, and for theists, this is an equivocation of yourself to God.

Omniscience is unobtainable; therefore, claiming you know that God 100% exists is dishonest.

There is a key word in scripture that defines this point – faith.

Faith is defined as: firm belief in something for which there is no proof; complete trust.

This means that you cannot have faith in something if you believe it to be 100% true.

Now, let’s take a look at what the Bible has to say about faith:

2 Cor 5:6-7
6 Therefore, being always of good courage, and knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord— 7 for we walk by faith, not by sight—

We walk in Christianity not because of what we see but because of what we believe and trust. This is the cornerstone in the acceptance of Christ.

Eph 2:8-9
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;

Through God’s grace and our faith in Him we are saved. It is by having faith in something that we can’t see or touch that we are saved. Without faith – a fraction of not knowing for sure – we could not be redeemed.

Rom 1:17
17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “ BUT THE RIGHTEOUS man SHALL LIVE BY FAITH.”

Living by faith – a subtle unknowing – is crucial to being righteous. Why do we need faith? So God can work in us. If we had absolute knowledge, then we would depend on ourselves; simply because, we would know. Since we do not have absolute knowledge, we are forced to depend on God because His absolute knowledge is what guides our lives.

As a Christian, I believe, you cannot claim to know 100% that God exists. This would destroy faith and the need for it. You would no longer need to trust God or rely on Him.

So, claiming absolute knowledge of God is actually denying Him. Remember, since you are not omniscient, you cannot rely on yourself but have to rely on God.

Pro 3:5-6
5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart
And do not lean on your own understanding.
6 In all your ways acknowledge Him,
And He will make your paths straight.

Thoughts?

I have typically found with theists, the more fundamental their beliefs are and the more evidence they need to deny to protect their belief, the more certain they claim to be about their beliefs.

 

[TillICollapse]

Good question.

I think that if God is capable of communicating and demonstrating existence, then it's possible to know "God" exists. Whether a person would identify "God" as actually being God, or a god, is another matter and perhaps dependent upon the way a person would themselves define "God" or a "god". As it is, I think the term "God" is too muddled and ill defined. One would need to be more specific. Typically, "God" with a capital "g" denotes a singular instance of an apex type of deity ... however we cannot agree on what a deity is, nor who/what God would be in relation to deity classification.

If God were to demonstrate and communicate God's existence and even claim, "I am God," ... the issue of others disputing that claim would likely still persist based on a variety of factors.

 

[Zzyzx Road]

Good question.

I think that if God is capable of communicating and demonstrating existence, then it's possible to know "God" exists. Whether a person would identify "God" as actually being God, or a god, is another matter and perhaps dependent upon the way a person would themselves define "God" or a "god". As it is, I think the term "God" is too muddled and ill defined. One would need to be more specific. Typically, "God" with a capital "g" denotes a singular instance of an apex type of deity ... however we cannot agree on what a deity is, nor who/what God would be in relation to deity classification.

If God were to demonstrate and communicate God's existence and even claim, "I am God," ... the issue of others disputing that claim would likely still persist based on a variety of factors.

From what I'm deducing, you're more or less agreeing with me.

Another thing to consider is this:

There is no such thing as 100% or knowledge. Absolutism doesn't exist if we are not omniscient.

That being said, one cannot say with absolute certainty that one actually exists... or that anything we experience actually exists (ala Matrix). Now, I know that's crazy talk, and .99999999999999999 is essentially 1; however, there is always that small fraction of of "what if" that prevents full knowledge.

 

[True Scotsman]

Can Christians truthfully answer that question?

The popular atheist thinker, Richard Dawkins, created a scale that identifies theistic beliefs. He lists peoples’ beliefs from 1-7.

1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung: "I do not believe, I know."
2. De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. "I don't know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."
3. Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. "I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God."
4. Completely impartial. Exactly 50 per cent. "God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."
5. Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."
6. De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. "I don't know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."
7. Strong atheist. "I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung knows there is one."

Where do you lie on this scale? Most Christian’s default answer is “1”.

Personally, I lie somewhere in between 1 and 2. I would say I am a 1.8. Yes, you understood me correctly. I do not know 100% if there is a God; moreover, a Christian God. Does this make me blasphemous? Maybe to some, but I don’t believe it does.

Firstly, let’s define absolutism as it relates to a theistic belief:

Being absolute is being 100% in something. Perfect. Without error. Knowing without any doubt. Infinite.

Words that are associated with absolutes: never / always

Secondly, let’s take a look at the words “never” and “always”.

We live in a finite world. God created it this way. In our finite world, can something always be “always” and never be “never”? Without going into philosophy, the answer is “no”. There is nothing in our world that is absolute.

The existence of God can be argued ad nauseum, and there will never be a 100% conclusion. The fact remains; you cannot disprove or prove something that that is metaphysical (not empirical). Both sides of the argument have an equal share but both lack evidence (because empirical evidence is impossible as both are unfalsifiable claims). Even Dawkins does not claim to be a 7 because he acknowledges that he cannot definitely prove that there isn’t a God.

So, what does being a 1 or 7 claim? Simple. It claims omniscience. Saying that you are a 1 or 7 is implying that you know all things in their truth. For atheists, this isn’t logically honest, and for theists, this is an equivocation of yourself to God.

Omniscience is unobtainable; therefore, claiming you know that God 100% exists is dishonest.

There is a key word in scripture that defines this point – faith.

Faith is defined as: firm belief in something for which there is no proof; complete trust.

This means that you cannot have faith in something if you believe it to be 100% true.

Now, let’s take a look at what the Bible has to say about faith:

2 Cor 5:6-7
6 Therefore, being always of good courage, and knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord— 7 for we walk by faith, not by sight—

We walk in Christianity not because of what we see but because of what we believe and trust. This is the cornerstone in the acceptance of Christ.

Eph 2:8-9
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;

Through God’s grace and our faith in Him we are saved. It is by having faith in something that we can’t see or touch that we are saved. Without faith – a fraction of not knowing for sure – we could not be redeemed.

Rom 1:17
17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “ BUT THE RIGHTEOUS man SHALL LIVE BY FAITH.”

Living by faith – a subtle unknowing – is crucial to being righteous. Why do we need faith? So God can work in us. If we had absolute knowledge, then we would depend on ourselves; simply because, we would know. Since we do not have absolute knowledge, we are forced to depend on God because His absolute knowledge is what guides our lives.

As a Christian, I believe, you cannot claim to know 100% that God exists. This would destroy faith and the need for it. You would no longer need to trust God or rely on Him.

So, claiming absolute knowledge of God is actually denying Him. Remember, since you are not omniscient, you cannot rely on yourself but have to rely on God.

Pro 3:5-6
5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart
And do not lean on your own understanding.
6 In all your ways acknowledge Him,
And He will make your paths straight.

Thoughts?

We do not need to be omniscient to know for certain that some things aren't true. For instance I know for certain that I do not play basketball for the Chicago Bulls and I know there are no square circles. I need not go looking everywhere for square circles

Christianity and Islam and Judaism make claims about the fundamental nature of existence which can be falsified.

 

[Davian]

Can Christians truthfully answer that question?

The popular atheist thinker, Richard Dawkins, created a scale that identifies theistic beliefs. He lists peoples’ beliefs from 1-7.

1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung: "I do not believe, I know."
2. De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. "I don't know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."
3. Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. "I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God."
4. Completely impartial. Exactly 50 per cent. "God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."
5. Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."
6. De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. "I don't know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."
7. Strong atheist. "I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung knows there is one."

Where do you lie on this scale? Most Christian’s default answer is “1”.

I am not on that scale, as you have presented it here. I do not claim that there are no gods, but ask, what do you mean by "god"?

Personally, I lie somewhere in between 1 and 2. I would say I am a 1.8. Yes, you understood me correctly. I do not know 100% if there is a God; moreover, a Christian God. Does this make me blasphemous? Maybe to some, but I don’t believe it does.

Firstly, let’s define absolutism as it relates to a theistic belief:

Being absolute is being 100% in something. Perfect. Without error. Knowing without any doubt. Infinite.

Words that are associated with absolutes: never / always

I think it a safe bet to consider anyone that declares themselves or their experiences to be infallible to be wrong. They cannot be all right.

Secondly, let’s take a look at the words “never” and “always”.

We live in a finite world. God created it this way.

Allegedly.

In our finite world, can something always be “always” and never be “never”? Without going into philosophy, the answer is “no”. There is nothing in our world that is absolute.

The existence of God can be argued ad nauseum, and there will never be a 100% conclusion. The fact remains; you cannot disprove or prove something

You cannot disprove anything that is not defined in a testable, falsifiable manner. That burden lies with the religionists.

I cannot disprove that there is a giant stuffed animal strapped to the far side of a moon orbiting Saturn, that moves so as to be obscured from Earth-or space-bound telescopes, but I also have no good reason to believe that it is there.

that that is metaphysical (not empirical).

How do you know this, that it is metaphysical and not emprical? Are you just defining that way because you cannot show that it exists?

Both sides of the argument have an equal share

No, they don't. The burden lies 100% with those making the claim.

but both lack evidence (because empirical evidence is impossible as both are unfalsifiable claims). Even Dawkins does not claim to be a 7 because he acknowledges that he cannot definitely prove that there isn’t a God.

No, I have seen that quote, and he is using the word in general, not in reference to a specific god.

So, what does being a 1 or 7 claim? Simple. It claims omniscience. Saying that you are a 1 or 7 is implying that you know all things in their truth. For atheists, this isn’t logically honest, and for theists, this is an equivocation of yourself to God.

Omniscience is unobtainable; therefore, claiming you know that God 100% exists is dishonest.

Not if you are making the statement in reference to a specific god concept.

There is a key word in scripture that defines this point – faith.

Faith is defined as: firm belief in something for which there is no proof; complete trust.

This means that you cannot have faith in something if you believe it to be 100% true.

Now, let’s take a look at what the Bible has to say about faith:

Is that not like looking at the glossy brochure for that new car for an honest opinion of its performance and quality?

2 Cor 5:6-7
6 Therefore, being always of good courage, and knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord— 7 for we walk by faith, not by sight—

We walk in Christianity not because of what we see but because of what we believe and trust. This is the cornerstone in the acceptance of Christ.

Eph 2:8-9
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;

Through God’s grace and our faith in Him we are saved. It is by having faith in something that we can’t see or touch that we are saved. Without faith – a fraction of not knowing for sure – we could not be redeemed.

Rom 1:17
17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “ BUT THE RIGHTEOUS man SHALL LIVE BY FAITH.”

Living by faith – a subtle unknowing – is crucial to being righteous. Why do we need faith? So God can work in us. If we had absolute knowledge, then we would depend on ourselves; simply because, we would know. Since we do not have absolute knowledge, we are forced to depend on God because His absolute knowledge is what guides our lives.

As a Christian, I believe, you cannot claim to know 100% that God exists. This would destroy faith and the need for it. You would no longer need to trust God or rely on Him.

So, claiming absolute knowledge of God is actually denying Him. Remember, since you are not omniscient, you cannot rely on yourself but have to rely on God.

Pro 3:5-6
5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart
And do not lean on your own understanding.
6 In all your ways acknowledge Him,
And He will make your paths straight.

Thoughts?

It is up to the religionist to define the god that they claim exists, in a testable, falsifiable manner. Does the existence of this "God" require that the Earth be less than 10000 years old, and that the Earth's population of animals, including humans, are descendants of a tiny group that survived, in a boat that cannot be built, a global flood that left no evidence, missed wiping out the Chinese civilization of the time, yet killed all the dinosaurs (except the avian ones) in a manner that give palaeontologists the impression through independent and repeatable methodology that it happened more than 65 millions years ago, in almost complete contrast to almost all of modern scientific knowledge on geology, genetics, astronomy, and astrophysics?

I am comfortable saying that such a "God" is only a character in a book.

 

[TillICollapse]

From what I'm deducing, you're more or less agreeing with me.
Another thing to consider is this:

There is no such thing as 100% or knowledge. Absolutism doesn't exist if we are not omniscient.

That being said, one cannot say with absolute certainty that one actually exists... or that anything we experience actually exists (ala Matrix). Now, I know that's crazy talk, and .99999999999999999 is essentially 1; however, there is always that small fraction of of "what if" that prevents full knowledge.

I don't really purposefully set out to think in terms of "absolutes" ... I recognize extremes and where certain trains of thought may terminate, but in general I don't find those extremes very practical. So, generally speaking, I believe some knowledge can be based on objective truth for practical application purposes, and concerns about absolutism need not apply. I can state with practical certainty a lot of things, that for all intent and purposes are "100%" in that moment, although again, I don't think it's necessary to think of it in those terms.

 

[ananda]

Omniscience is unobtainable; therefore, claiming you know that God 100% exists is dishonest.

Why do you say omniscience is unobtainable?

 

[Percivale]

I agree with you, Zzyzx, for the most part. I would add that subjective (feelings) and objective (evidence) certainty are two different things, and tend toward inverse proportions if taken to extremes. For me though both are around 2. I think that a few things are certain, or at least impossible to deny, but they are all metaphysical--the law of non-contradiction, and that a thinking thing exists. That God exists is too much a fact about reality to be actually certain. It is supported by empirical evidence, such as miracles, by reason, such as in the cosmological argument, as well as subjectively, as in religious experiences and the universal tendency of humanity to believe in something divine. All of these are probabilistic evidences rather than deductive certainties.

Davian, if you know English, you know the definitions of the word 'god.' It has a range of meaning, but not an unlimited one. You've said you don't believe the extreme Christian fundamentalist concept of God; I don't either, but I do believe in God by the basic Christian concept. As used in apologetics God means, at minimum, a conscious, intelligent being who created the universe, as I think you know. Also your expectation that every truth must be scientifically testable and falsifiable. Even the basic assumptions that uphold science don't meet that requirement, though they are well supported by reason. And human relationships wouldnt work too well by that requirement either. Btw, your comic strip shows a misunderstanding of teaching the controversy--I think it would mean presenting the evidence for and against popular ideas (which would effectively debunk most of them).

 

[Davian]

...

Davian, if you know English, you know the definitions of the word 'god.' It has a range of meaning, but not an unlimited one.

I have seen many and wildly varied descriptions and claims about gods.

As for a robust, coherent definition - nothing yet.

You've said you don't believe the extreme Christian fundamentalist concept of God; I don't either, but I do believe in God by the basic Christian concept. As used in apologetics God means, at minimum, a conscious, intelligent being who created the universe, as I think you know.

No, I do not know. The only "beings" that I am aware of that are conscious and intelligent are biological in nature - and that consciousness and intelligence processes appear to be - in the absence of evidence to the contrary - products of brains. How you got to a "conscious, intelligent being" that could exist prior - if that is even the right language to use - the instantiation of the cosmos I have no idea.

Also your expectation that every truth must be scientifically testable and falsifiable.

No, that is not my position. In these forums, "truth" appears to be synonymous with "religious opinion". So, I avoid that word, and seek accurate descriptions of reality. Now, if you have a better tool for exploring reality than science, let me know.

Even the basic assumptions that uphold science don't meet that requirement, though they are well supported by reason.

Better to say that those conclusions are held tentatively, and are subject to change with new information; that they remain relatively unchanged can be viewed an indication of increasing degrees of accuracy. I do not think it likely that semiconductor theory will be falsified in the near future.

From what I have seen in these forums, the holding of religious beliefs is the opposite of tentative.

And human relationships wouldnt work too well by that requirement either.

Where did that come from?

Btw, your comic strip shows a misunderstanding of teaching the controversy--I think it would mean presenting the evidence for and against popular ideas (which would effectively debunk most of them).

It's not about teaching the controversy, it is a comment on how we should qualify our beliefs, if we desire that they comport with reality.

 

[Messy]

As a Christian, I believe, you cannot claim to know 100% that God exists. This would destroy faith and the need for it. You would no longer need to trust God or rely on Him.

That doesn't destroy faith. You need faith to get to know Him.
If you talk daily to your dad and he talks back and you see him are you 80% sure he exists because maybe it is an illusion and we're all strings or something?

 

[Davian]

That doesn't destroy faith. You need faith to get to know Him.
If you talk daily to your dad and he talks back and you see him are you 80% sure he exists because maybe it is an illusion and we're all strings or something?

Does this god of yours talk back to you? Do you hear voices?

 

[Moral Orel]

Why do you say omniscience is unobtainable?

What if there is something that you are totally unaware of? Then you don't know that you don't know about it right? For example, even when people finally started to believe that the world was round and began sailing across the ocean to the other side, they didn't know that the Americas was there, so they didn't know that they didn't know about the Americas. Sounds funny, but it makes sense right?

So no matter what you think you know, there is always a chance there is something else you are completely unaware of. There is a chance you know about everything that is, but you still don't know if you know everything, and therefore don't know everything, and are therefore not omniscient. I'm dead serious, by the way, no matter how confusing it may sound, it does make sense.

 

[Kylie]

Can Christians truthfully answer that question?

The popular atheist thinker, Richard Dawkins, created a scale that identifies theistic beliefs. He lists peoples’ beliefs from 1-7.

<<List snipped>>

Where do you lie on this scale? Most Christian’s default answer is “1”.

Personally, I lie somewhere in between 1 and 2. I would say I am a 1.8. Yes, you understood me correctly. I do not know 100% if there is a God; moreover, a Christian God. Does this make me blasphemous? Maybe to some, but I don’t believe it does.

Just out of curiosity, what is there that could change your mind and convince you that God doesn't exist, or at least is extremely unlikely to exist? Hypothetically speaking, of course.

For me, I would never claim to "know" that my beliefs are accurate. Heck, I can't even be sure that my husband or daughter exists, they could be simulations in the Matrix that I could conceivably be plugged into. However, since their existence is entirely consistent with everything I am aware of, then I think their existence is quite likely.

 

[Messy]

Does this god of yours talk back to you? Do you hear voices?

No I personally don't hear an audible Voice but some do. I used to have obsession thoughts but got a Word from God through a prophet that He set me free from that and since then I only hear His Voice, it comes as a strong thought.

 

[bhsmte]

That doesn't destroy faith. You need faith to get to know Him.
If you talk daily to your dad and he talks back and you see him are you 80% sure he exists because maybe it is an illusion and we're all strings or something?

Do you know many people who would state they are 80% sure their dad exists?

Also, do you think your average person, has more evidence to know their dad exists, or that a God exists?

 

[Messy]

Do you know many people who would state they are 80% sure their dad exists?

Also, do you think your average person, has more evidence to know their dad exists, or that a God exists?

If they never met him and they don't know if he's still alive they've got no idea.
I think I have more evidence now.
You can always be 100% sure though that you have a dad, even if he's not alive anymore, otherwise you wouldn't exist.

 

[Davian]

No I personally don't hear an audible Voice but some do. I used to have obsession thoughts but got a Word from God through a prophet that He set me free from that and since then I only hear His Voice, it comes as a strong thought.

When I see my dad - with my own eyes - I can talk to him, and hear his voice. How does that compare to your "God", if you cannot do the same?

 

[ananda]

What if there is something that you are totally unaware of? Then you don't know that you don't know about it right? For example, even when people finally started to believe that the world was round and began sailing across the ocean to the other side, they didn't know that the Americas was there, so they didn't know that they didn't know about the Americas. Sounds funny, but it makes sense right?

So no matter what you think you know, there is always a chance there is something else you are completely unaware of. There is a chance you know about everything that is, but you still don't know if you know everything, and therefore don't know everything, and are therefore not omniscient. I'm dead serious, by the way, no matter how confusing it may sound, it does make sense.

If I am unaware of something, does it really exist? Perhaps I am omniscient, and know everything there is to know, and my known universe that I can observe is all that truly exists. Everything else remain potentials.