Changes

A theist might respond to this line of reasoning by challenging as [[non sequitor]] the argument that "because you cannot comprehensively explain what you mean, then you are unjustified in believing it."   

A theist might respond to this line of reasoning by challenging as [[non sequitor]] the argument that "because you cannot comprehensively explain what you mean, then you are unjustified in believing it."   

For example, atheists cannot comprehensively explain what the "big bang" was.  They have a vague concept that the universe began in a single point.  They speculate about what it might have been like.  But they cannot comprehensively explain what they are talking about.  Does that then mean that the "big bang" is a meaningless concept?

For example, atheists cannot comprehensively explain what the "big bang" was.  They have a vague concept that the universe began in a single point.  They speculate about what it might have been like.  But they cannot comprehensively explain what they are talking about.  Does that then mean that the "big bang" is a meaningless concept?  Even more importantly, does that mean it didn't happen?

Further, children commonly repeat what they are told by their parents without fully understanding what the sentences mean.  That does not make them unjustified in believing that what their parents say is true.  And it certainly does not make the sentences themselves false.  When a theist holds a position he does not fully understand, he does so based on his [[faith]] that the statement is true, based on the credibility of his source.  In other words, if God in all His glory sat down with the believer and said, "I transcend space and time," without explaining it, the believer could reasonably accept the conclusion based on the credibility of God, even without understanding it.   

Further, children commonly repeat what they are told by their parents without fully understanding what the sentences mean.  That does not make them unjustified in believing that what their parents say is true.  And it certainly does not make the sentences themselves false.  When a theist holds a position he does not fully understand, he does so based on his [[faith]] that the statement is true, based on the credibility of his source.  In other words, if God in all His glory sat down with the believer and said, "I transcend space and time," without explaining it, the believer could reasonably accept the conclusion based on the credibility of God, even without understanding it.