And don't we interpret other people's thoughts all the time when we make judgments about them? Say my friend was offended by something you said, but knowing that you are forthright about your opinions I tell her you probably didn't mean it to be offensive. I am guessing your thoughts (with an educated guess) in order to mend a relationship. What is wrong with that, as long as I include the word "probably" in my guess to qualify it as such?
I notice something among Christians. Christians like to simplify what they say with analogies. What I'm saying, is that the analogies themselves are simplified.
Take for example, a popular Christian argument against evolution. (I will be paraphrasing.) "A bridge is a complex structure, and when you look at a bridge you know it has a maker and a purpose. We are complex structures, therefore we have a maker and a purpose."
There are of course, many flaws with this argument, as I am sure that even you, Melidere, can see. However, this post is not about that argument; that argument was listed to show you common simplification of things with analogies.
You're analogy about a friend compared to God and understanding him, are not equal in any shape, way, or form. 'Reading' the thoughts of someone you know is one thing, 'reading' the thoughts of someone that you
think you know is another, especially when the consequences of the latter are much more catastrophic than the former.
Just because God is real in your head, doesn't mean he is real. Just because you think you know what he wishes, doesn't give you the right to act upon those wishes, especially when those wishes harm other people, which they often do.
Yes, you do have the possibility of being wrong, but the probability of being wrong is not that great.
What is the chance of being wrong based off of? That is an empty statement, it could be considered a lie actually.
