Logically speaking: God is knowable

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

So take the case of a God who is omnipotent and "hates wickedness", and pours out his wrath on "all the ungodliness and wickedness of man ". An exception to this claim disproves the existence of such a God. Yes, but the Bible also agrees with me. You pays your money and you takes your choice. So would you claim that it's possible to know God but not to know what he's like? Surely at least we can specify that he prefers good to evil.

Yes of course, Iano, I'm simply blind to the "truth" of your faith/evidence.Oh, and let me guess. If I believe then I WILL see the "truth", is that it?Round and round the circle goes...

Is it not the evidence of a computer screen on front of you that lets you know there is a computer screen in front of you? You know it because it is there in front of you. Whats the difference? And before you cry 'empiricism'...Does it actually exist at all? You can't know that. You assume it does because you assume objective reality to be objective. Not even wheeling a bunch of other people in to confirm it exists helps - you don't even know whether they exist so using that which you don't know to exist (them) to confirm the existance of something else you don't know exists (the computer screen) is circular. Empiricism sails in the same circular boat that I do.That is why I say knowing something (whether empirically or otherwise) says nothing at all about it actually being the case.

You are not expected to believe something for which you have no reason to. That would be irrational. He will attempt to give you that reason and you can refuse it. If you do not then those reasons will come and then you will believe (no choice implied) and when you do then you will see the truth.But I digress... See the post above to Straggler to see your own current position. People in glass houses...

God is wrathful, loving (benevolent) and just (as well as other things). No matter. Point being, there is no point looking for exception to the rule unless your definition is complete. Now how a person would go about doing that I cannot tell. How would they know they had arrived at it? Only good. Find an exception and I'll renounce my faith or eat my hat - whichever you prefer

There is a difference.You are a self confessed evangelist, so now, by your own reasoning, are telling others what they MUST do because YOUR circular reasoning forces you to. You are essentially forcing your unknowable Truth on to others as Truth when you freely admit that it is based on self delusion, this is something that Christian churches have a very dark record on since the 3rd century.I am all for people having hobbies, but should these people really force these hobbies on to others and call them evil and depraved because a part of their hobby suggests this?You should take up snooker or pool, something a bit more productive than this Christianity lark Brian.

CK is dead long live CK{AbE} btw, the OP is an apologetic not evangelism. Guess that makes me an apologist too. If it is possible for a person to know God exists then it might dilute the notion floating around in peoples heads that God cannot be knownEdited by iano, : No reason given.

But you are ignoring what I said.Your hobby essentially consists of insulting people's intelligence if they don't believe everything in the Bible.Criticising their way of life.Condemning their morality.All this and you don't know if you have deluded yourself or not?You don't see Trekkies going around slagging people off. But you haven't shown that this is possible, if anything you have shown that it is impossible because our senses and thoughts are unreliable!If you know God exists, as in the Christian God, then it means that Allah doesn't exist. Thus, a Muslim cannot know that their God exists because Allah cannot exist if your God does, and there are a great many Muslims who 'know' that Allah exists, therefore your God Yahweh does not exist.Surely you can see how you have falsified your own argument? Not on this occassion mate.Edited by Brian, : No reason given.

You obviously haven't been paying attention at the back Brian. Knowing something does not mean that actually is the case. Not my knowing God exists, nor a Muslim knowing Allah exists, nor you knowing there is a computer screen on front of you.Knowing is the best anyone can say regarding their own certainty. The highest court in anyones land. But that doesn't mean a thing if the objective reality one resides in is not in fact objective. Which of us is deluded, you, the muslim, me. There is no way to tell for any of us (unless of course God exists - then we are not reliant on our assumptions about reality. He can overcome them - being God)Lets not put knowing above its station huh?Edited by iano, : No reason given.

so what is your point again ?

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

If you admit that God is supposedly benevolent, then my original point still stands.

nor knowing that god doesn't exist. How is that different?

Oh I have been paying attention, and we are way back at the position I stated last week. You do NOT know that God exists, you BELIEVE that you know God exists.If your senses are not reliable then we do not know anything for sure, which is pretty much the Buddhist stance.But, as has been pointed out, what is the point in claiming to know something exists then saying it may not be true? The problem I have is that if everything is an illusion, we cannot know anythig for certain, and relaity is a construct of our own mind then why do so many negative events occur in our lives. If I am constructing a reality out of my own thoughts and emotions I can assure you that reality would have no religious groups in it and I'd be having a threesome every night with Audrey Hepburn and Shakira! So next time I am in court I will tell the judge that he cannot be sure if I even exist so how can he send me down?Oh of course, the judge may not exist either!Have you ever read William James' Varieties of Religious Experience? You would enjoy it. But we would be fools to trust that He has overcome them wouldnt we?Brian.

And I believe that I know that you exist. What exactly is the difference here?