The Uselessness Of Personal Revelation

[jo1952]

Is God's physical existence purported by mormons to be a fact about reality or not?

God's "physical" existence is in a different "reality" than the one Christ created for us to experience while we are in the flesh. God lives outside the realm of what we think is real. Until you can let go of what you think is real (i.e., this world), you will not be able to experience God regardless of religious affiliation. When/if you experience Him while your spirit is housed within your mortal body inside of the Creation, it will be a spiritual experience; not a physical experience (unless you still happen to be alive in your mortal body when Christ returns and His identity is revealed and the veil is removed between the physical and the spiritual realms).

Be at peace,

jo

[bookofmormontruth]

Is God's physical existence purported by mormons to be a fact about reality or not?

Rejecting G-d doesn't eliminate His reality.

[elguanteloko]

You do not understand what "reality" is.

I am a strict empiricist. Reality is experience. Nothing more, nothing less, either subjective or objective. There is no "reality" outside of what is experienced.- nothing more "out there". Period.

Fine, but still, since "everything goes" doesn't go then somethings don't go. That is, we can be shown to have been wrong. Then, how is this relevant to my point? It isn't. I can grant everything you've been saying, mf, and still have the same problem. You aren't solving or dissolving anything of relevance here.

God's physical existence is a theoretical construct which is "verified" by my subjective experience that thinking this way enriches my life immeasurably. It is similar to the model of Newtonian physics which was based on experience- but objective experience, (a difference) which "worked" to enable many improvements in science- until a better theory came along, verified by other experiences (again objective- )

As you should know, mf, no one here is claiming a monopoly on "truth" or on "reality". Neither science nor philosophy can do that. We can distinguish, however, between worst and better explanations and that has been my task all along.

In addition, I have had sublime experiences which I know come from him; and there is no possible way to verify that experience as being "correct" any more than I need to verify I am being "happy"; it is a self-defining feeling. It is like suddenly coming on the rim of the Grand Canyon and you give out a gasp -"Beautiful!"-

Once again, I'm not claiming that atheism is correct or THE TRUTH. I'm simply saying it is better than theism as an explanation of the world and I can show you why if you realize your criticisms here have little to do with my point.

Can you be mistaken at that moment that in fact the scene is NOT "beautiful"?

No one is questioning the experience, mf. No one. The explanation of the experience is what is questioned here, not to claim that another thing is the case but that another thing is more likely to be the case.

It is as real as any subjective experience can be- I don't doubt when I am hungry, or if I have a pain in my knee- I cannot be mistaken that I have a pain in my knee. There may be no explanation for pain- but it is "real" regardless and I cannot be mistaken that that is what I am feeling.

I think that is one of the points on which we part company. You cannot conceive of NOT doubting- I cannot conceive of doubting. I know it, Period, just as I know the sound of my wife's voice.

The type of experiences you are talking about need not be doubted for you to get my point. I accept ALL the experiences you may have but the explanations (NOT THE DESCRIPTIONS) of those experiences are what is being questioned.

There are no facts which could prove or disprove any of this.

Thinking this way gives my life true meaning and has changed the core of who I am. In that way, it is similar on a subjective basis to Newtonian physics-(analogy) it works for me to produce meaning in my life until and if something "better" comes along- but I am certain at this moment that will never happen.

I am just doing this hopeful of a breakthrough, hopeful but far from confident.

...

[elguanteloko]

Rejecting G-d doesn't eliminate His reality.

Who says it does? Not me.

[elguanteloko]

God's "physical" existence is in a different "reality" than the one Christ created for us to experience while we are in the flesh. God lives outside the realm of what we think is real.

It doesn't matter where he is; that he is is enough of a point.

Until you can let go of what you think is real (i.e., this world), you will not be able to experience God regardless of religious affiliation.

If I let go of what is real then I go to what is not real or to what I don't know if it's real or not. Is God there? If he is then he either doesn't exist or you can't know if he exists. Which one do you choose?

When/if you experience Him while your spirit is housed within your mortal body inside of the Creation, it will be a spiritual experience; not a physical experience (unless you still happen to be alive in your mortal body when Christ returns and His identity is revealed and the veil is removed between the physical and the spiritual realms).

"There is no such thing as immaterial matter". The "Spiritual" as you use it is a meaningless scapegoat.

[Hamba Tuhan]

Then, of what use is "personal revelation"?

As I've shared on this forum before, I was on my way to work one morning a few years ago when--after having already got my ticket punched and gone through the turnstile but before I got to the train platform--I was stopped in my tracks by a clear impression that I needed to go back into the station, that someone there needed me. I thought it was silly and tried to ignore it, in part because I knew that I needed to be near the edge of the platform when the train arrived, or I would never get on the train, and I'd be forced to ride on the outside, which terrified me. Several times I tried to continue down the path to the platform, but each time I felt like I was--almost mime like--hitting an invisible glass wall. Finally, frustrated with myself, I turned around and walked back into the station, knowing full well that, when there was nothing to see or do there, I'd have to buy another ticket, get it punched again, and quite possibly ride on the outside of the train all just because I was being irrational.

Back inside the station, I did a circuit of the interior. In one corner, I came upon an 18-year-old boy who was, I thought, asleep under a flattened-out cardboard carton--a not unsual sight. As I stood over him, though, he opened his eyes and looked up at me. Because of the impression I'd had, I asked him if he needed help. He said yes. Still eager to catch my train, I offered him some over-the-counter pain tablets, which he took, and started to get up and go buy a second ticket. It was then that I noticed the blood just starting to flow out from under the carboard which covered him. Lifting up one corner, I discovered that he'd been in a accident whilst riding on the outside of the train, and his entire calf muscle had been ripped off from below the knee to the ankle. He was bleeding profusely from the wound, but, having no money to pay to go to hospital, he'd simply been left in a corner of the station to die.

To make a long story short, I ended up carrying him to a nearby police station, where I asked for help, assuring them that I was happy to pay for medical expenses and even the trip to hospital. Then we had to wait whilst the police themselves waited for their day's ration of petrol to arrive so that they could fuel up their vehicles. Multiple times this boy stopped breathing as his life literally drained away from him via a wound that was simply too enormous to staunch, and each time it got harder and harder for me to rouse him from unconsciousness. Scared that I was going to lose him any moment, I explained to him that, though Christian, I would like to pray for him. When he managed a faint nod, I quickly annointed him and gave him a priesthood blessing.

Soon thereafter, a police officer came to tell me that they had a truck ready to go. I spent the next hour holding this boy in my arms as I sat in the back of a police truck which was overwhelmingly stuck in traffic jams. When we finally arrived at hospital, the back of the truck was awash in blood, and I was soaked to my skin with it, but not once during the entire drive had the boy stopped breathing or lost consciousness. The doctors immediately started blood transfusions, and they were able to reattach the muscle and heal up the infection. The boy left the hospital walking on crutches, accompanied by the cousins he'd originally been travelling to visit.

I could be wrong, but I suspect that this boy, now man, would strongly disagree with you that the personal revelation which came to me on the path between the station and the platform that morning had been anything close to 'useless.'

[Hayds]

I find it interesting that the Bible and BOM are chock full of people getting "revelations" or commandments from God to kill people. This is clearly against the laws of God yet it happens quite a bit in the scriptures. The danger of these types of verses is what if someone prays and gets a revelation to kill someone? If God allowed it numerous times in the scriptures why wouldn't he be issuing similar revelations today? Radical Islam is an example of people praying and getting so called revelations to blow people up. We can say it was Satan, but they have scriptural examples to justify it amongst themselves.

[Hamba Tuhan]

Radical Islam is an example of people praying and getting so called revelations to blow people up.

CFR that radical Muslims claim to blow people up because they've prayed and received revelations validating it.

[Libs]

Hamba...that was an amazing story. It is amazing to me that someone would just throw this young man in a corner of the station to die! I mean, really?? Wow. Thank God you followed that God-given impulse to help.

Thank you for sharing that.

[rodheadlee]

Wow. That sounds like quite an experience. Good for you guys, seriously.

I don't want to touch on such a sensitive case so I'll use another one.

Let's say I receive a revelation that my son is going to have a car accident and I, somehow, manage to save him thanks to the revelation. My question to you is, could Satan have worked a miracle and given me this information for some purpose I know not of just yet? We know from scriptures that Satan will work miracles in the last days. Do you accept this?

When in doubt I always refer to Scripture:

Moroni 7:

12 Wherefore, all things which are good cometh of God; and that which is evil cometh of the devil; for the devil is an enemy unto God, and fighteth against him continually, and inviteth and enticeth to sin, and to do that which is evil continually.

13 But behold, that which is of God inviteth and enticeth to do agood continually; wherefore, every thing which inviteth and enticeth to do good, and to love God, and to serve him, is inspired of God.

14 Wherefore, take heed, my beloved brethren, that ye do not judge that which is evil to be of God, or that which is good and of God to be of the devil.

15 For behold, my brethren, it is given unto you to judge, that ye may know good from evil; and the way to judge is as plain, that ye may know with a perfect knowledge, as the daylight is from the dark night.

16 For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God.

17 But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil; for after this manner doth the devil work, for he persuadeth no man to do good, no, not one; neither do his angels; neither do they who subject themselves unto him.

[Deborah]

Once again, I'm not claiming that atheism is correct or THE TRUTH. I'm simply saying it is better than theism as an explanation of the world and I can show you why if you realize your criticisms here have little to do with my point.

I don't think so. Atheism is nothing new and even in atheistic countries such as the old Soviet Union, religion still had a way of surviving, even at risk of a person's life for so believing. Atheism just doesn't have answers for all those little things in life which are beyond understanding in terms of empirical evidence.

I find atheism very limiting in its explanations. It allows for the evidence of the 5 senses but misses out on the evidence beyond those.

[Nofear]

I don't think so. Atheism is nothing new and even in atheistic countries such as the old Soviet Union, religion still had a way of surviving, even at risk of a person's life for so believing. Atheism just doesn't have answers for all those little things in life which are beyond understanding in terms of empirical evidence.

Atheists can simply point to a study like Humans 'predisposed' to believe in gods and the afterlife and say religion survives because it is integral to human nature and not because God is real. Such is foolishness on their part, but doesn't mean they can't use the argument.

I find atheism very limiting in its explanations. It allows for the evidence of the 5 senses but misses out on the evidence beyond those.

New Scientist has a fun article The grand delusion: Why nothing is as it seems pointing to various articles about how our perception and memory of the world is a mental fabrication (each of the sub articles can be read with a free registration -- a silly nuisance -- but the articles really are fascinating). An atheist will simply wrap spiritual perception into that grand delusion though I side with Brigham Young who said,

The eye, the ear, the hand, all the senses may be deceived, but the Spirit of God cannot be deceived; and when inspired with that Spirit the whole man is filled with knowledge, he can see with a spiritual eye and he knows (that which is) beyond the power of man to controvert.

Though ironically, we are not above deceiving ourselves from time to time as to what is and isn't the Spirit of God.

[Hamba Tuhan]

It is amazing to me that someone would just throw this young man in a corner of the station to die! I mean, really?? Wow. Thank God you followed that God-given impulse to help.

Yeah, things can be quite different in countries where the bulk of the population doesn't share the basic Christian values we so often take for granted. My first thought was to try to get him to hospital via a taxi, but both drivers I managed to hail down at such a busy time of the morning refused to take the fare once they saw the 'mess.' At the same time, there are very, very good people in such places, too. My cries for help were answered by two filthy street sweepers who agreed to help me carry the poor boy to the police station. They were the 'dregs' of society, but they had pure hearts when called upon to give assistance. God bless them!

[bookofmormontruth]

Yeah, things can be quite different in countries where the bulk of the population doesn't share the basic Christian values we so often take for granted. My first thought was to try to get him to hospital via a taxi, but both drivers I managed to hail down at such a busy time of the morning refused to take the fare once they saw the 'mess.' At the same time, there are very, very good people in such places, too. My cries for help were answered by two filthy street sweepers who agreed to help me carry the poor boy to the police station. They were the 'dregs' of society, but they had pure hearts when called upon to give assistance. God bless them!

Thanks for sharing your inspiring experiences. You definitely should write a book!

When the non-believers and those who turned their backs on G-d ask in the after-life where the "evidence" was for His existence? They will be told that the evidence was around their lives continually for everything denotes that their is a G-d and that He showed His evidence through people like Hamba Tuhan and his sharing of his experiences to the world. Not sure how a person can honestly reject countless testimonies of the truth, but I have to give credit to the great deceiver or our world, he is doing a fine job, unfortunately!

[CV75]

the explanations (NOT THE DESCRIPTIONS) of those experiences are what is being questioned.

RE: an explanation of the usefulness of the experience of personal revelation:

Its usefulness is in its promotion of well-being. As the essential link between faith and knowledge, personal revelation is useful for advancing one’s well-being if it is applied correctly. It serves as such a link when it comes from God.

When it comes from Satan, it only a bridge between a belief and a conclusion that is accepted as knowledge, but it does not advance one’s well-being. In this case it is not useful, expect perhaps to Satan.

I differentiate between a link and a bridge as follows: a link is an integral part of the working relationship between faith/belief, revelation/discovery, and knowledge/conclusion that produces well-being, and a bridge is an artificial construct that connects these things without necessarily sustaining long-term well-being.

Personal revelation most often, it seems, comes from oneself, as with the typical learning process in using the five senses. In this instance it sometimes links a correct belief with a correct knowledge (useful); sometimes it bridges a correct belief with incorrect knowledge (not useful) or vice-versa (temporarily useful, but if the incorrect belief isn’t eventually corrected it will not be useful); sometimes it bridges an incorrect belief with incorrect knowledge (not useful).

People learn the difference between the divine, devilish, and human (a.k.a. carnal and sensual, and not necessarily in a completely negative way) sources of revelation through experience. Personal revelation may be rendered useless if it is not heeded or if it is misapplied, but it is not in and of itself useless.

[mfbukowski]

Fine, but still, since "everything goes" doesn't go then somethings don't go. That is, we can be shown to have been wrong. Then, how is this relevant to my point? It isn't. I can grant everything you've been saying, mf, and still have the same problem. You aren't solving or dissolving anything of relevance here.

As you should know, mf, no one here is claiming a monopoly on "truth" or on "reality". Neither science nor philosophy can do that. We can distinguish, however, between worst and better explanations and that has been my task all along.

Once again, I'm not claiming that atheism is correct or THE TRUTH. I'm simply saying it is better than theism as an explanation of the world and I can show you why if you realize your criticisms here have little to do with my point.

No one is questioning the experience, mf. No one. The explanation of the experience is what is questioned here, not to claim that another thing is the case but that another thing is more likely to be the case.

The type of experiences you are talking about need not be doubted for you to get my point. I accept ALL the experiences you may have but the explanations (NOT THE DESCRIPTIONS) of those experiences are what is being questioned.

...

Here is the problem:

You seek for an "explanation" within your own paradigm, which is that "Truth corresponds to reality"- that there is an "explanation" which is "better" than others because it "corresponds" better to what you call "reality".

The truth is, you are believing in a world which doesn't exist. There are no "better explanations".

How do you think your explanations are "better"?

What do they do better?

[mfbukowski]

As I've shared on this forum before, I was on my way to work one morning a few years ago when--after having already got my ticket punched and gone through the turnstile but before I got to the train platform--I was stopped in my tracks by a clear impression that I needed to go back into the station, that someone there needed me. I thought it was silly and tried to ignore it, in part because I knew that I needed to be near the edge of the platform when the train arrived, or I would never get on the train, and I'd be forced to ride on the outside, which terrified me. Several times I tried to continue down the path to the platform, but each time I felt like I was--almost mime like--hitting an invisible glass wall. Finally, frustrated with myself, I turned around and walked back into the station, knowing full well that, when there was nothing to see or do there, I'd have to buy another ticket, get it punched again, and quite possibly ride on the outside of the train all just because I was being irrational.

Back inside the station, I did a circuit of the interior. In one corner, I came upon an 18-year-old boy who was, I thought, asleep under a flattened-out cardboard carton--a not unsual sight. As I stood over him, though, he opened his eyes and looked up at me. Because of the impression I'd had, I asked him if he needed help. He said yes. Still eager to catch my train, I offered him some over-the-counter pain tablets, which he took, and started to get up and go buy a second ticket. It was then that I noticed the blood just starting to flow out from under the carboard which covered him. Lifting up one corner, I discovered that he'd been in a accident whilst riding on the outside of the train, and his entire calf muscle had been ripped off from below the knee to the ankle. He was bleeding profusely from the wound, but, having no money to pay to go to hospital, he'd simply been left in a corner of the station to die.

To make a long story short, I ended up carrying him to a nearby police station, where I asked for help, assuring them that I was happy to pay for medical expenses and even the trip to hospital. Then we had to wait whilst the police themselves waited for their day's ration of petrol to arrive so that they could fuel up their vehicles. Multiple times this boy stopped breathing as his life literally drained away from him via a wound that was simply too enormous to staunch, and each time it got harder and harder for me to rouse him from unconsciousness. Scared that I was going to lose him any moment, I explained to him that, though Christian, I would like to pray for him. When he managed a faint nod, I quickly annointed him and gave him a priesthood blessing.

Soon thereafter, a police officer came to tell me that they had a truck ready to go. I spent the next hour holding this boy in my arms as I sat in the back of a police truck which was overwhelmingly stuck in traffic jams. When we finally arrived at hospital, the back of the truck was awash in blood, and I was soaked to my skin with it, but not once during the entire drive had the boy stopped breathing or lost consciousness. The doctors immediately started blood transfusions, and they were able to reattach the muscle and heal up the infection. The boy left the hospital walking on crutches, accompanied by the cousins he'd originally been travelling to visit.

I could be wrong, but I suspect that this boy, now man, would strongly disagree with you that the personal revelation which came to me on the path between the station and the platform that morning had been anything close to 'useless.'

Wow.

I don't think this happened in Los Angeles.

Edit- of course he is now rich from the lawsuit against the train company, right?

[Lightbearer]

This thread has reminded me of an account of a similar conversation many years ago, I quote the following:

(Alma 30:37-42) "And then Alma said unto him: Believest thou that there is a God? And he answered, Nay. Now Alma said unto him: Will ye deny again that there is a God, and also deny the Christ? For behold, I say unto you, I know there is a God, and also that Christ shall come. And now what evidence have ye that there is no God, or that Christ cometh not? I say unto you that ye have none, save it be your word only. But, behold, I have all things as a testimony that these things are true; and ye also have all things as a testimony unto you that they are true; and will ye deny them? Believest thou that these things are true? Behold, I know that thou believest, but thou art possessed with a lying spirit, and ye have put off the Spirit of God that it may have no place in you; but the devil has power over you, and he doth carry you about, working devices that he may destroy the children of God."

The only way to determine if something is of God is by the spirit. If we have not denied the Holy Ghost and sinned against the light, it is possible to know the truth of all things. While Satan is a great orator and does have means to deceive, he cannot decieve the pure in heart who earnestly seek the truth. But it must be on God's terms, not ours and we cannot reject the spirit and expect to learn the truth. For His spirit will not always strive with man. If we grieve the spirit by our wickedness or by our unbelief, we are left to grapple in the dark unless we humble ourselves and have a desire to know the truth. As for those of other faiths I would have you consider the following:

(Alma 12:9-11) "And now Alma began to expound these things unto him, saying: It is given unto many to know the mysteries of God; nevertheless they are laid under a strict command that they shall not impart only according to the portion of his word which he doth grant unto the children of men, according to the heed and diligence which they give unto him. And therefore, he that will harden his heart, the same receiveth the lesser portion of the word; and he that will not harden his heart, to him is given the greater portion of the word, until it is given unto him to know the mysteries of God until he know them in full. And they that will harden their hearts, to them is given the lesser portion of the word until they know nothing concerning his mysteries; and then they are taken captive by the devil, and led by his will down to destruction. Now this is what is meant by the chains of hell."

It takes faith to understand these things as stated here:

(Alma 32:21-23) "And now as I said concerning faith—faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true. And now, behold, I say unto you, and I would that ye should remember, that God is merciful unto all who believe on his name; therefore he desireth, in the first place, that ye should believe, yea, even on his word. And now, he imparteth his word by angels unto men, yea, not only men but women also. Now this is not all; little children do have words given unto them many times, which confound the wise and the learned."

I suggest that the very key to you question in the OP is to be found in Alma 32. I know that it is not "scientific" even for you to accept in your present mindset, but it is the only way we as believers can convey to you how we "know" and what the means of revelation is. It is not to be comprehended without the spirit of the Lord.

[mfbukowski]

It is not to be comprehended without the spirit of the Lord.

You know, you may be on to something here....

[mfbukowski]

New Scientist has a fun article The grand delusion: Why nothing is as it seems pointing to various articles about how our perception and memory of the world is a mental fabrication (each of the sub articles can be read with a free registration -- a silly nuisance -- but the articles really are fascinating). An atheist will simply wrap spiritual perception into that grand delusion though I side with Brigham Young who said,

Though ironically, we are not above deceiving ourselves from time to time as to what is and isn't the Spirit of God.

Fascinating articles- thanks!

This is precisely the sort of thing I was talking about with E- Mr crazy glove.

"What is real" is not always that clear!

[Nofear]

Fascinating articles- thanks!

This is precisely the sort of thing I was talking about with E- Mr crazy glove.

"What is real" is not always that clear!

I'm glad you liked them. It is with irony that you interpret them as sustaining empiricism, while I realist such as myself interpret them as a denunciation of empiricism. But that's consistent with what the article on biases suggested would happen.

[mfbukowski]

I'm glad you liked them. It is with irony that you interpret them as sustaining empiricism, while I realist such as myself interpret them as a denunciation of empiricism. But that's consistent with what the article on biases suggested would happen.

Some brands of realism and Pragmatism are very close in nature and hardly distinguishable. I really don't consider myself as an "empiricist" in a technical sense, but Pragmatism is a fusion of Idealism and empiricism. Some Pragmatists call themselves "radical empiricists", which is accurate in spirit but somewhat confusing when talking about schools of philosophy.

[Nofear]

Some brands of realism and Pragmatism are very close in nature and hardly distinguishable. I really don't consider myself as an "empiricist" in a technical sense, but Pragmatism is a fusion of Idealism and empiricism. Some Pragmatists call themselves "radical empiricists", which is accurate in spirit but somewhat confusing when talking about schools of philosophy.

I am a strict empiricist.

Nevertheless, I get what you mean and glad.

[elguanteloko]

When in doubt I always refer to Scripture:

Moroni 7:

12 Wherefore, all things which are good cometh of God; and that which is evil cometh of the devil; for the devil is an enemy unto God, and fighteth against him continually, and inviteth and enticeth to sin, and to do that which is evil continually.

13 But behold, that which is of God inviteth and enticeth to do agood continually; wherefore, every thing which inviteth and enticeth to do good, and to love God, and to serve him, is inspired of God.

14 Wherefore, take heed, my beloved brethren, that ye do not judge that which is evil to be of God, or that which is good and of God to be of the devil.

15 For behold, my brethren, it is given unto you to judge, that ye may know good from evil; and the way to judge is as plain, that ye may know with a perfect knowledge, as the daylight is from the dark night.

16 For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God.

17 But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil; for after this manner doth the devil work, for he persuadeth no man to do good, no, not one; neither do his angels; neither do they who subject themselves unto him.

Do you? Well, good for you!

How does this answer anything we are talking about?

[elguanteloko]

I don't think so. Atheism is nothing new

Why don't you think so? Also, who cares if atheism is nothing new? Is atheism wrong because it isn't new? Less important or less accurate because it is old? Religion is, too, nothing new... and?

and even in atheistic countries such as the old Soviet Union, religion still had a way of surviving, even at risk of a person's life for so believing.

Religion had also a way of surviving in atheist circles... AND?

Atheism just doesn't have answers for all those little things in life which are beyond understanding in terms of empirical evidence.

Atheism can't because it doesn't strictly speak of purpose in life at all. Atheism, all it is, is a "There is no God" claim. That's it. Also, I already gave examples of knowledge that is NOT empirical and no one here is saying science can go into all of reality; that's silly. Logical, mathematical, philosophical knowledge are examples of non-empirical knowledge and that's fine. This, again, has nothing to do with the issue and some of you guys just keep on not getting it.

I find atheism very limiting in its explanations. It allows for the evidence of the 5 senses but misses out on the evidence beyond those.

Again, no. Atheism just says we are justified in saying there is no God just as we are in saying other similar things don't exist. That's it. It doesn't say what type of knowledge we can get and I certainly don't subscribe to the idea that only the five senses can get us knowledge. That's a sad caricature of philosophy.This, however, doesn't mean everything goes or that everything can pass as knowledge which is what some of you think it does. OK, so not all types of knowledge are "empirical"... therefore, God? Come on. Instead of trying hard and do the thinking properly you guys keep on wanting to mystify God as if that is going to help you; it won't.