Reply #65: But you're only validating my argument.

[Meldread]

You say you are 100% certain and yet continuously use terminology to undermine what you say, such as "to the best of my knowledge". You are not saying "I am absolutely correct." Please clarify if you believe you are absolutely correct and that everyone who disagrees is absolutely incorrect, or if you are simply "confident" that you are correct based on the knowledge you currently possess. If it is the latter then we are in agreement, if it is the former I believe you are committing a logical fallacy.

---

Here is where we come into dispute. I am confident that there is no God, based on the evidence and my personal knowledge, but willingly admit that my knowledge is limited. I can't possibly know everything, and by definition if there is a God - wouldn't it be unknowable to creatures such as us with limited facilities? To judge the existence of God we only have the following tools: Hearing, Tasting, Touching, Smell, Seeing and our personal experience which is comprised of all of our knowledge.

We are extremely limited. I cannot perceive radio waves yet I know they are there because we have instruments which "see" and "hear" them for us. If I were to go back in time before the invention of radio and broadcast radio waves no one on the Planet Earth would know that they exist, and yet they surely would just as they do today.

This is the problem. Based on our five senses and our experiences which comprises our personal knowledge we can be confident that we are correct in our assumptions. However, we cannot be absolutely certain - in anything. Yes, in anything. Everything is simply an assumption based upon our previous knowledge.

We can only be positive about our claims. Look at a schizophrenic. That person hears voices. To them those voices are real and yet to us they are not. Look at every delusional person who has ever existed. Look at the world as a whole and its diversity of thought and opinions. Who is right and who is wrong?

We are limited by our perceptions. I do not believe it is silly to say that there is no reality, that there is only our perception of a reality. We may have shared experiences but when we walk away we may have two totally different ways of perceiving and interpreting the experience. Which is right and which is wrong? Which is valid and which is not? How can we, who are also limited, be the judge of that?

You must accept - and admit - that you could conceivably be wrong. After all, how do you know God isn't sitting right in front of you right now, but like a radio wave is unperceivable, and there is yet to be a tool developed to hear him?