What is Proof?

Perhaps this is more than many are willing to invest. It was too much for me, as well, until I found reasons for me to make it worthwhile.

I suggest that knowledge of God is available to us only on a personal level unaffected by erudition.

And after all that flowery and erudite sounding talk about Proof, you come up with this little ditty:

I suggest that knowledge of God is available to us only on a personal level unaffected by erudition.

The very antithesis of Proof.

This need to believe in the supernatural, and further, the dogma of a particular religion, is different from the belief that one comes to from the observation of natural phenomenon, as in the sun rising every morning. You're conflating the two.

O taste and see that the Lord is good: blessed is the man that trusteth in him.

InfraBlue wrote:

This need to believe in the supernatural, and further, the dogma of a particular religion, is different from the belief that one comes to from the observation of natural phenomenon, as in the sun rising every morning. You're conflating the two.

No, you have failed to note that every jot and tittle of my belief has been subject to personal scrutiny. It differs from epistemological proof in that you cannot replicate my experience. You would have to choose to experience it yourself. Obviously, before you can make such a choice you would need a reason.

I haven't talked about reasons.

You have suggested we look at your selected quote...

O taste and see that the Lord is good: blessed is the man that trusteth in him.

Surely the key contentious word there is 'good' even if we assume that 'the Lord' is meaningful. A historical hiatus in Christian belief resulted from the Lisbon earthquake of 1755 in which the 'faithful' attending prayers in the cathedral were decimated, and the 'heathens' who didn't survived. Then we might consider the controversy over Mother Theresa, who tended the sick but preached the 'anti birth control' policy of the Catholic Church in a country where unwanted children are abandoned or worse. None of this is helped by paedophilia scandals.
And all the above only considers Catholicism. We have not even touched on genocides or current natural disasters for which presumably the Lord's 'mysterious ways' need to be invoked !
So instead of ' blessed is the man that trusteth in him' it looks we should be saying 'wise is the man who distrusteth palliatives'.

"Every jot and tittle?" How revealing: For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled., Matthew, Chapter Five, Verse Eighteen, in the King James version.

This is a case of name your poison, and you have named yours. That's all the proof that I need that what we are dealing with here is your preferred delusion.

This need to believe in the supernatural, and further, the dogma of a particular religion, is different from the belief that one comes to from the observation of natural phenomenon, as in the sun rising every morning. You're conflating the two.

No, you have failed to note that every jot and tittle of my belief has been subject to personal scrutiny. It differs from epistemological proof in that you cannot replicate my experience. You would have to choose to experience it yourself. Obviously, before you can make such a choice you would need a reason.

I haven't talked about reasons.

You say no, but proceed to illustrate precisely why it's different. That you can't see that is your failure.

Captain Morgan 100 Proof Spiced Rum is a blend of Caribbean rums and select spices brings out the intensity of rum in full flavor, try it with Cola. A few hits of this and you will soon forget why you even came here.

So the aberrant priests and Mother Theresa 'who trusteth' are still 'blessed' according to your quote ?
And of course it is totally illogical to classify atheism as either a 'doctrine' or 'social agency'.

That you do this in your own mind does not negate your failure. It confirms it.