How can we be sure that all religions are wrong?

Do you have anything to say about gods in general?

God in general, is an invented idea, humans lack the tools to deal with (will gladly elaborate should someone respectfully request that),

Do you think gods are not possible?

Do you discount any possibility that what we human call "the universe" was brought into existence by something that existed before it did?

that depends on the definition of universe

something being possible, is a good reason to ignore it

Good morning Frank.

First a reminder.
If you are an observant religious person, stop please reading right here.

In other words, our observation, that all is caused, applies to the parts and stages of creation our perception can access.

Good morning Frank.

First a reminder.
If you are an observant religious person, stop please reading right here.

Now, to elaborate.

What if we possess verified info, that worlds like ours, keep on coming into being consistently,
it's only the items in the final stages of a creation, that all of them ( finalists) are being caused by the items in the earlier stages.

In other words, our observation, that all is caused, applies to the parts and stages of creation our perception can access.

We are programmed (for many excellent reasons) from day one, to ignore possible info we don't yet know.

That habit, produces misconceptions like religion.

As far as we are concerned, everything is caused.

The big defect here, our concern, is secluded from close to 100% of crucial data, critically required to assume and conclude in this matter.

To illustrate,
I am rushing to Beijing unprepared,
Get in the rental car with my american maps GPS. And expect it to get me to my destination, simply because that's the only data (maps) I possess,

Sorry honey, that data, applies to an different and exclusive location (usa), when attempting to combine it with the incompatible Beijing reality, good luck trying.

One more.
I jump into the river for a refreshing swim, a stunning multi colored fish lines up with me for a chat,
fish is healthy, happy functional,etc.

In my attachment to my newfound friend, I simply grab the poor thing tightly, haul him onto shore, place him on the picnic table facing me, eager to continue chatting with my vibrant energetic fellow.

The observation of a fish exploding with life and a promising future, is only accurate in a particular habitat.

When applying that, to an incompatible environment, the result will be the stench of dead fish.

All human logic, reasoning, and data.
Are accurate, applicable, in their designated environment only, which is where we can be witnesses,

It in no way applies, to any location or time position, humans weren't observing.

It's somewhat similar to the faulty reasoning about the conviction of the world having a purpose, once God is accepted as fact.

If you find a religion that logically portrays god as humanly limited, then we will reconsider.

Otherwise to pick on a human attribute, that is directly connected to human limitation (without limitation, purpose cannot exist), and apply it to a limitless God,
Is another illustration of human nature to apply human law of function everywhere indiscriminately

Do you think gods are not possible?

reaction,

there is a very limited range of items which are not possible,
everything else is possible,

something being possible, is a good reason to ignore it

So...do you discount any possibility that what we humans call "the universe" was brought into existence by something that existed before it did?

that is definitely so.

(above reaction is based on assumption that "we humans" ignore and disrespect our huge information void)

I haven't read much in this post. Just stopped in a few minutes for old times' sake.

"Do you discount any possibility that what we human call "the universe" was brought into existence by something that existed before it did?"

Suppose I do, Frank. Then what am I? An atheist, an agnostic or what?

Oh, wait, I forgot. An atheist and an agnostic are the same damn thing, eh?

There is no such thing as an agnostic.