@sonship saidWhat I said and the nature of that suggested discussion topic is here Thread 180349
You said you were considering that position for yourself.
I suppose a "100% atheist" would be an "explicit atheist". I am not an "explicit atheist".
You SUPPOSE something? I thought no one was as clear about everything on Spirituality as you are? You sit back and interrogate Christians a lot. I mean, like your position is the default position of realism. Everyone else speaking of faith needs to be examined for realism.
Do you suppose someone may know God, just not you?
If not how do you know no one knows God ?
@sonship saidI have been answering all your questions. Are you upset?
@FMFI suppose a "100% atheist" would be an "explicit atheist". I am not an "explicit atheist".
You SUPPOSE something? I thought no one was as clear about everything on Spirituality as you are? You sit back and interrogate a lot me a lot.
I understand that most people believe they "know" God and I understand their reasons for doing so.
I distinctly remember that when I was an unbeliever I THOUGHT for certain I KNEW what was REALLY going on in people who said there is God.
I distinctly remember that attitude - "Poor guys. They don't know what is going on in them. But I know. I understand what is REALLY going on in them."
A bit of nostalgia just set in.
@sonship saidI'll leave it to you to use the verb "know" when you talk about the results of your speculation and conjecture about supernatural matters. I don't use the word "know".
If not how do you know no one knows God ?
This is because I do not seek to add some heft or edge to my personal and highly subjective certainties regarding what I believe... by slapping adjectives [like "absolute" or "objective"] on what I say about my perception of the "truth" or talking about what I "know" when we are talking about things that are immune to the empirical scrutiny that enables me to say I "know" things that occur in the non-spiritual and non-supernatural domain.