tillingborn wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:31 am
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 4:38 am
tillingborn wrote: ↑Sun Jan 31, 2021 3:16 am
That is not my argument.
I didn't say it was YOUR argument.
My argument...is that I believe things that I don't know
Of course...if by "know" you mean "know without possibility of doubt or revision." Nobody knows anything
that well. So if that were the required standard, there would be no such thing as "knowledge" at all: nobody could ever have it.
But we still do use the word "know," and justifiably so.
We say that I "know" gravity exists. We say I "know" smoking causes cancer. We even say I "know" the Chiefs will win the Super Bowl, even when we are really meaning, "I expect, or hope." But we "know" these things with different degrees of conviction, because they have different degrees of probability. Gravity always seems to work -- so much so, that when we see something seeming to defy it, we don't believe our eyes, and go looking for an explanation. Smoking does often cause cancer: but the certainty level is not that high in any single case...maybe 70%, given enough time? And the Chiefs: well, it's pretty much 50-50 who's going to win the Superbowl, but the Chiefs are slightly favoured.
So what level of "knowing" do you have about God? You say "there's no evidence": how sure are you of that? Do you think you "know" it?