Logically speaking: God is knowable

Anyone who claims to be at 1 or 7 has to be deluded because either position requires a certainty about the source of their absolute certanty that it is impossible to have.The key difference is that those of faith are necessarily 1s whilst those that call themselves atheists would more likely describe themselves as 6.999999999Rs as they would generally accept that absolute certainty about anything requires the sort of faith that they oppose!!

The difference between the positions of absolute faith (i.e. the 1s and the 7s) and the rest is that the 1s and 7s are immune to evidence.If you absolutely know 100% something to be true then any evidence to the contrary MUST be wrong/false as your "knowledge" is unshakable.That is why in my opinion no atheist can be a full 7. As an atheist I believe that evidence based inverstigation is the only method of making conclusions about the real world. If all the evidence did point towards God, Genesis and all the rest of it then I would be be a 2-. The reason I am a 6+ is that all the evidence points to the contrary. If you base your beliefs on evidence rather than faith alone you cannot logically be a 1 or a 7 on this scale.

You are claiming that your "knowledge" that God exists is the evidence on which that "knowledge" is based. that is a circular argument!!To be a 1 on this scale you have to "know" that God exists and you have to also have 100% certainty that your "kowledge" is not the result of any (non God) outside influence.There are lunatics that "know" Jesus told them to kill people. I hope both of us would agree that what they "know" to be true is actually not true. Nevertheless they genuinely believe it to be so.My question is how can you know the reliability of your knowledge? How can you know that what you "know" to be true really is?How can you be absolutely sure that your knowledge of Gods existence is not due to hypnotic suggestion (for example)Either a 1 or a 7 is impossible if you factor in any evidence no matter how spiritual you claim that evidence to be.

I am new to this forum how do you add the quote boxes?"A 1 doesn't need to prove it to anyone in order to be"A 1 needs to prove with 100% certainty to themselves that they are free from brain washing, insanity, hypnosis and any other external influence which could affect that which they "know" to be true. Any such proof has to be empirical and therefore has to be impossible according to your own view of empericism as unverifiable.

Yes that is true. That is why absolute certainty is impossible. that is why a 1 or a 7 is impossible except on evidenceles faith.Anyone who claims absolute certainty (i.e. a 1 or a 7 on this scale) must also have absolute certainty in their knoweldge. Absolute certainty in their knowledge is emperical. Absolute certainty in empirical knowledge is impossible.You may think therefore you are but what you think is not necessarily true and there is no way you can prove to yourelf it is.What about deranged lunatics who have equal conviction in what they "know"? All your arguments could be aplied to them?Edited by Straggler, : missed quote

Let me give you a scenario.You are a 1 in relation to God
For arguments sake I am a 1 regards a different god that contradicts yours in some way
For arguments sake lets both accept that one of us is actually correct
We both have absolute and equal knowledge, conviction and "evidence" (in your terms) in our knowledge.
We cannot both be correct
Therefore one of us is derangedHow can we find out who is right and who is deranged?
If it is impossible to differentiate between the two then all your arguments so far are contradictory as they apply equally to the truth of either position.

The equal conviction in the unprovable existence of different Gods is exactly what I was getting at with my scenario above.If we non believers need empirical evidence (which of course we do!) that all those of faith are equally deluded it is provided by the fact that all the opposing faiths are equally convinced they are absolutely correct.

My point exactly. How can you be a 1 if you also assert that what is "known" is not necessarily true.
That automatically puts doubt on what you "know" and therefore a lack of certainty which is what a score of 1 precludes.
A 1 on the scale in question is impossible except through faith alone!! You have demonstrated it for me.Edited by AdminJar, : fix quote box

Iano
Non empirical arguments such as yours are inevitably circular and will therefore just go round in circles when debated.You "know" that God exists
You have personal evidence to convince you of this
The personal evidence is the "knowledge" that God existsThis could be applied to any number of faith based positions that you would very probably disagree with e.g.The Koran is the literal word of God
This is known because the Koran says this
This must therefore be true because the Koran is the word of God