Not true.
We don't even know much about any of that stuff. And what we do know we argue about.
<<What is the nature of awareness?
What is the nature of truth?
What is the nature of justice?
What is the nature of love and hate?
What is the nature of purpose?
What is the nature of Consciousness?
What is the nature of reason?
What is existence/non-existence?
Why is there experience?
Why is there something instead of nothing? >>
I can declare as a fact that we are aware and we all know it as we are also self aware. I can declare this to be an indispubable fact. Physical facts, on the other hand, are disputed and disproven repeatedly.
I can also speculate that the universe is aware but you would have to read a few books to be able to discuss that topic. Start here: amazon.com
I can declare facts about the nature of truth and justice. It is a fact that when a person attempts to decieve another that person is not being truthful. That fact is indisputable.
I can declare as a fact that when a wrong has not been made right through resolution and reconciliation justice has not prevailed.
I can go on but apparently you are either unwilling or incapable of thoughtful discussion, so I will end here and you can look for some one else to throw your nonsensical challenge at. You have not even shown you understand the difference between non-physical and physical issues. The kind of fact you are demanding involves physical evidence, which of course is ludicrous.
* The challenge you issue requires that any God be limited enough to objectify, which contradicts the idea of a being beyond the ideas of limited or even unlimited.
* The challenge you issue requires that hard facts can be observed. Hard facts are bound in the limits of space and time, which contradicts the notion of an eternal being.
* Mystical experiences which some people have claimed (not me) cannot be observed.
* No type of objective evidence would conform to the characteristics given to God, even though charlatans continue to surface claiming they have some sort of objective evidence. So demanding objective evidence just sets up a false notion of provability.
Belief in God is a faith based notion not a hard facts based issue. Based on arguments like these, attempting to prove God is a fool's errand.
"God does not exist, he is eternal. If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe." Kirkegaard.
"God does not exist, He is the Ground of existence." Tillich
According to these philosophers, existence is the hard proof of God. However, those with no faith are bound to struggle with alternative explanations, which never seem to pan out. |
