Changes

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?

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.   

Finally, the fact that the believer did not fully understand what the phrase meant would certainly not stand as proof that the statement itself was false.  Thus, while this argument stands as a warning against casually using language without assigning definite meaning to our words, it certainly does not prove that the God about whom these words are spoken does not exist.

Finally, the fact that the believer did not fully understand what the phrase meant would certainly not stand as proof that the statement itself was false.  Thus, while this argument stands as a warning against casually using language without assigning definite meaning to our words, it certainly does not prove that the God about whom these words are spoken does not exist.