What is Truth? said,

“The German philosopher Immanuel Kant has demolished the notion that it is possible to prove things about the nature of reality, including claims about the existence of supernatural entities, based purely on logical arguments; only perception can give us knowledge about the world.

As there is no empirical evidence for the existence of God, it is impossible to prove the existence of God. It is something that is based on blind faith or claimed religious experiences, and as far as I know, most theists justify their belief on their emotional experiences.”

… I dont know if you are aware that Kant was a believer in God.. He did argue that you could not prove God empirically, but he also argued that you could not disprove him empirically either. His argument for God rested on the theistic moral argument–that the metaphysical concept of good and bad proves there is a God…

.. I noticed that people here talk about “blind faith”, and only attribute it to believers.. Do you guys not realize that it takes “blind faith” to reject God as well..

.. EVERY single scientific fact is meaningless in itself (eg. All bodies of mass take up space)… it is only when we connect these facts into a world view that they mean anything at all. I could add up every single observation made by science and it would mean nothing unless I connected all the facts and interpreted them through a world view.

Furthermore, all of our worlds views appeal to authority. Even if I have looked into a philosophy myself, believe in my own theory, and I am appealing to myself as a valid authority who has discovered the truth. This is why every single one of us has to put faith in either someone else, or ourselves..

In the post modern world people are placing their faith in atheism and the naturalist perspective.. It is being taught in the schools, and thought to be the most ‘logical’..

Naturalists tells us that all events are determined by laws. Our logical behaviour, or our thoughts, and our ideals, are governed by biochemical laws. These laws, in turn, are governed by physical laws which are themselves observable statements about the movements of matter. Naturalists contend that the universe was not designed, but it is the product of the law of averages combined with random variations in movement of matter governed further by other laws. They argue organisms are here by chance—that the relevant chemicals on earth, and the suns heat, gave rise to organisms. Natural selection, operating on small details, over large amounts of time, blundered into the mirage which we call consciousness — and that, in some cortex beneath our skulls, still in obedience to physical laws, but now filtered through more complicated laws, the form of what we call thought is created.

My thoughts are then, simply, a causal chain. I am simply writing this because my brain is behaving a certain way–and the whole history of the universe up to this moment had forced it to behave this way. Or course it does not feel this way to you or me. I appear to be studying the nature of things, even super sensuous realities outside my own head, but if strict naturalism is right, I am deluded. I am merely enjoying a conscious reflection of irrationally determined events in my own head… My thoughts are no more then a hiccup or a sneez. ..

There problem with atheistic naturalism is that it is a system of thought.. But for naturalism, all thoughts are causes occurring without rational or intelligent design… Everything people think or say is wholly due to complexes or to a bit of bone pressing on their brain, and therefore cannot attach any meaning to it. … If naturalism is true, all thoughts are the result of irrational causes and all our thoughts are equally worthless… Even the theory of naturalism is worthless because it is a thought! .. This idea is self refuting.. It claims we can know no truths! (But then that would be the truth itself)..

This is the major view, it is taught in the schools and widely believed.. I cannot empirically prove it wrong (as Kant said), but I believe it takes more faith to believe in that then it does to believe in God…
So many people I know and talk to hold fast to the idea that there is no real truth to be discovered, and that I should just be a good person and live my life to be happy… I will not put faith in that, to me it is nonsense. It is a truthless truth.

All our beliefs comes from an authority. We either appeal to ourselves, or to someone else (eg. Socrates)… but I would prefer to appeal to a revelation from God. I put my faith in Jesus because he is the most valid authority which I can find. His early followers gave up everything to follow him, the early church has thousands of followers who had seem him and believed in him. The growth rate of the early church did not come from lies and power struggles… The early disciples gave up everything they had to follow Christ, and 10 of the apostles died for what they believed and saw. It is only thousands of years after, in the hands of the corrupt, that the church became a power system, but this has nothing to do with teachings in the bible—in fact it went against them. Jesus to me is sufficient evidence of a revelation from God.. You guys should not come at Christianity with such a presupposing view that its wrong before you begin to question it.. Or even God for that matter.. If God is really trying to speak to us, and we keep calling religious experiences mere products of the mind, then how will we ever hear Him..