UCTAA churchlight

Site Search via Google

Discussion 5 to Meditation 832
Unknowable beyond reasonable doubt

by: JT

I think an Agnostic would be the more correct description of my state of mind. The whole subject [of God] is beyond the scope of man's intellect. Charles Darwin

To add to this exchange of views (or any other,) please use the Contact form. This discussion has been continued.

I realise others may see things differently, but, I confidently assert that the existence of a Supreme Being is currently unknowable, and my confidence level in that assertion is beyond reasonable doubt.

I base that on the idea that an essential element of a Supreme Being is that it operates, at least in part, in the supernatural realm. I suggest that anything claimed to be a deity which exists and operates entirely in the natural world is not a supreme being.

Now, we have not a single test which proves something is supernatural. We can only disprove.

Depending on the specific circumstances:

But "we do not know" does not lead to "therefore this was supernatural." Failure to establish a possible natural cause does not demonstrate a supernatural cause. It just keeps the possibility open, just the same as it also keeps open the possibility of yet to be determined natural causes.

If we have no way to test for the supernatural; if we have no way to logically establish that something is truly supernatural; then the supernatural is indeed unknowable. And any deity operating in the realm of the supernatural is unknowable.

Now all the above keeps "unknowable" in the present - it represents the situation as it stands today (today, as I write; and I expect, today, as you read.) If you want to consider "unknowable" as applying on into an indefinite future, and that's the way I choose to interpret it, then it requires an assumption that there will never be a test to demonstrate something is supernatural. And that assumption is not something which can be strongly supported. But remember, we are talking Articles of Faith.