LOL! Then I need to be honored beyond anyone else who ever lived because no one else so far has proven such a thing.
If you would like to see it I will show it to you
I am waiting...
“LOL! Then I need to be honored beyond anyone else who ever lived because no one else so far has proven such a thing.”
I’ll honor you anyway, kosta mou! :)
It could be named, in your honor,"The kosta50 Stove Top Proof for the Existence of God".
You wrote:
Unlike those who claim "spiritual knowledge," I can show you how I know and if you have any doubts you can try it yourself. Such as "don't touch the hot stove top, but if you don't believe me, go ahead!"
As per Hume and the Problem of Induction, you cannot show how you know because you are relying here on the inductive principle, i.e., the assumptions that the past predicts the future. i.e., our past experience with hot stove tops, and two, the belief that nature is uniform - that the future is like the past. But induction is not made by reason. It relies on premises, on which there is no logical basis for affirming on the basis of past experiences that even probability is true of the natural order. The principle of induction is thus left without a foundation and is philosophically arbitrary. The bottom line is that reasoning itself rests upon the presupposition of faith and collapses arbitrary without it.
You stated earlier that
.. it's valid criticism. rejecting claims that cannot be backed with evidence is rational and justifiable.and
Our proofs must be compatible with our nature. We can't presume something exists unless we have evidence of it that is not only in our heads, but clearly demonstrable directly or indirectly.
Your reliance on the inductive principle violates your own standard of evidence and rational justification here because, again, "Induction as a method cannot be justified using induction, nor deduction, or therefore at all by pure reason".
However, the uniformity of nature is perfectly compatible with Christian theism because in the Christian worldview the Sovereign Creator God has revealed to us in Scripture that we can count on regularities in the created world, and because of this God-governed regularity in creation, the scientific enterprise is possible and even fruitful.
Now if the Christian worldview is compared with the atheist world view, which one comports with the inductive principle and thus provides the preconditions for science, language, learning, and any intelligible human experience? It is certainly not atheism. Atheism's view of reality cannot provide a coherent reason for what all your reasoning takes for granted. Consequently, it is reasonable to believe in God and entirely unreasonable not believe in God, for God's existence is the precondition of all reasoning whatsoever.
Cordially,