Arguments for god from a former atheist

[Syne]

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/Pnn1iiVegYY

[Secular Sanity]

Reality as in 'all' is something that we’ll never fully grasp. This is an area where uncertainty cannot be removed with further analysis and experimentation.

I think that someone needs to overcome their fear of the unknowable.

[Syne]

As Feser says, if the ultimate basis for reality is not only unknown but also unknowable, not because of the limitations of our knowledge but because it is without intelligible cause/reason, then any argument in that vein is equally unintelligible, as that argument denies that the very reason used to assert it has any fundamental basis in reality. It's a self-defeating argument.

You've missed the point entirely if you think having an intelligible basis for reality means everything can be known. The limitations of our knowledge have nothing to do with whether reality is fundamentally intelligible.

I think that someone needs to overcome their defensive use of snark in lieu of intelligence.

[Secular Sanity]

I think that someone needs to overcome their defensive use of snark in lieu of intelligence.

You’re kidding, right?

*Eyes widen* and I think to myself…Ought oh! He’s not kidding, and this guy, Edward Feser, is actually saying a 'purely actual actualizer' and refers to it as highly technical language. Oh my god! He’s a professor. [WTF?] He’s drawing a crowd. [WTF?] No—no, he didn’t just say 'unchanging changer,' did he? [WTF?] No—no, he didn’t just say 'unmoving mover,' did he? [WTF?] OMG! People are really buying into it. Unfucking believable!

And then—and then I start to get a little scared.

[Ostronomos]

I think that someone needs to overcome their defensive use of snark in lieu of intelligence.

You’re kidding, right?

*Eyes widen* and I think to myself…Ought oh! He’s not kidding, and this guy, Edward Feser, is actually saying a 'purely actual actualizer' and refers to it as highly technical language. Oh my god! He’s a professor. [WTF?] He’s drawing a crowd. [WTF?] No—no, he didn’t just say 'unchanging changer,' did he? [WTF?] No—no, he didn’t just say 'unmoving mover,' did he? [WTF?] OMG! People are really buying into it. Unfucking believable!

And then—and then I start to get a little scared.

You are not in the know. Atheism, according to the above interview, is due to hyper-specialization. You simply do not know much outside of your own area of specialization. And your ego prevents you from opening your mind thereby objecting to sound arguments on the existence of God.

[Secular Sanity]

You are not in the know. Atheism, according to the above interview, is due to hyper-specialization. You simply do not know much outside of your own area of specialization. And your ego prevents you from opening your mind thereby objecting to sound arguments on the existence of God.

How would you know?

[Magical Realist]

I think that someone needs to overcome their defensive use of snark in lieu of intelligence.

You’re kidding, right?

*Eyes widen* and I think to myself…Ought oh! He’s not kidding, and this guy, Edward Feser, is actually saying a 'purely actual actualizer' and refers to it as highly technical language. Oh my god! He’s a professor. [WTF?] He’s drawing a crowd. [WTF?] No—no, he didn’t just say 'unchanging changer,' did he? [WTF?] No—no, he didn’t just say 'unmoving mover,' did he? [WTF?] OMG! People are really buying into it. Unfucking believable!

And then—and then I start to get a little scared.

LOL! Sounds like so much theological bunk.

[Ostronomos]

You are not in the know. Atheism, according to the above interview, is due to hyper-specialization. You simply do not know much outside of your own area of specialization. And your ego prevents you from opening your mind thereby objecting to sound arguments on the existence of God.

How would you know?

Because I have actually seen that vast all-encompassing consciousness.

[Secular Sanity]

Because I have actually seen that vast all-encompassing consciousness.

And then—and then things start to get really scary.

Were you with Syne?  Were guys smoking, snorting, or drinking anything?

[Syne]

I think that someone needs to overcome their defensive use of snark in lieu of intelligence.

You’re kidding, right?

*Eyes widen* and I think to myself…Ought oh! He’s not kidding, and this guy, Edward Feser, is actually saying a 'purely actual actualizer' and refers to it as highly technical language. Oh my god! He’s a professor. [WTF?] He’s drawing a crowd. [WTF?] No—no, he didn’t just say 'unchanging changer,' did he? [WTF?] No—no, he didn’t just say 'unmoving mover,' did he? [WTF?] OMG! People are really buying into it. Unfucking believable!

And then—and then I start to get a little scared.

LOL! So an appeal to your intelligence just provokes more snarky bullshit. And YOU complain about the level of discourse around here.
So you're happy having faith in either an infinite regress or some inscrutable and not even theoretically intelligible basis for reality? O_o
What am I thinking, of course you are...because you never do bother to contemplate anything with any real rigor. You just make jokes of anything that may cause you the slightest cognitive dissonance...as usual.

And there's no accounting for people who do not understand philosophy. You'd be wiser not to comment on topics in which you're bound to prove yourself a fool.

LOL! Sounds like so much theological bunk.

Apparently you can't differentiate theology from philosophy.