What about conflicting religious experiences? Graham Oppy & Guillaume Bignon

Atheist philosopher Graham Oppy and Christian philosopher Guillaume Bignon debate how to account for the diversity of religious experiences. Watch the full episode here: www.thebigconversation.show/v...
• More shows, free eBook & newsletter: premierunbelievable.com
• For live events: www.unbelievable.live
• For online learning: www.premierunbelievable.com/t...
• Support us in the USA: www.premierinsight.org/unbelie...
• Support us in the rest of the world: www.premierunbelievable.com/d...

[@drawn2myattention641]

Bignon gives a very oily response at the end: the point is not to survey those few experiences that lead a non-Christian believer to Christianity, but rather to explain those numerous, self-authenticating experiences that confirm a non-Christian religion and condemn Christianity as false and evil.

[@radscorpion8]

oily like all christians :P

[@Venaloid]

So why hasn't Guillaume looked into those other religious miracle claims if he thinks it's so important that atheists look into his? And why does he trust that *his* personal experiences are accurate while those of all other religions are wrong?

[@freddieclark]

Not one single religious miracle has ever been substantiated and personal experience is not now, nor has ever been a reliable or verifiable way of proving them.

[@BackToOrthodoxy]

So he’s supposed to look at all 1 billion claims in order to make a decision on his? Lol

[@JosephVK]

@@BackToOrthodoxy You’re making a straw man argument. Now go to your room and think about what you’ve done

[@BackToOrthodoxy]

@@JosephVK questions aren’t arguments. I asked a question lol but go ahead and be obnoxious

[@JosephVK]

​@@BackToOrthodoxy I'm sorry if that came off as obnoxious. I probably should've added an emoji as I was making a joke. My bad! From my view, it seems like you're misrepresenting OP's comment by rephrasing what OP said in the form of a rhetorical question and adding hyperbole (i.e. "1 billion claims"). Obviously, if someone argued anyone should look at 1 billion miracle claims before making their mind up, that would be an easy point to refute. Therefore, I took it you were making a straw man out of OP's argument via a rhetorical question. Unless you think OP was really arguing for Guillaume to look at 1 billion claims in order to make a decision?

[@heethanthen]

That’s easy, whichever religious experience conforms to your own beliefs is genuine, the other one is just demons or something like that.

[@gjeacocke]

how do you examine the account of the donkey in the OT when a non Israelite was involved talking about the Israelite God? this person did not say the voice they heard was a demon but understood it to be God. surely a person who has understanding must genuinely know whether something is good or bad. how else do you chose friends?

[@20july1944]

Do you know basic science, such as how a star works?

[@Iamwrongbut]

Tons of people attribute God speaking when they hear something. It could easily be a demon and there’s no way to know otherwise.

[@20july1944]

@@Iamwrongbut Yes, the killer about something like that is that it could be God or Satan or an auditory hallucination. I am a Christian and I think I heard God's voice while fully awake and on a prayer/walk in 1984 as an adult. However, the experience is useless as anything but an anecdote.

[@colinloechel8378]

@@gjeacockeYes, good point. God gives people the ability to distinguish between spirits, whether from Him or from the enemy. Even someone who does not know God can generally exercise reliable discernment as in the example you gave of choosing friends. And our discernment improves with practice.

[@anthonycostello6055]

We wouldn't want to dismiss out of hand, either, what the bible says about supernatural visions as well as prophecy, which is that not all super mundane or supernatural visions or prophecies are from God, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are not real (as in being caused by immaterial, moral agents like angels or demons).

[@TaylorWalston]

So let's compare some scenarios. Let's say an angel exists. Something good happens. Believer asserts an angel did it. But the angel did not. Do you know who in the believing community will challenge this assertion? How will they demonstrate that the angel did not, in fact, do anything? Let's imagine a world where the angel does not exist, but stories of angels do. Something good happens. Believer asserts an angel did it. An angel did not exist to do anything. Do you know who in the believing community will challenge this assertion? How will they demonstrate that an angel did not act? Let's take it a step further; if an angel did exist, what if it acted for someone else and against you? Disregarding supernatural claims is warranted as they do not occur in the same manner as your oldest stories. I like to point out that the Jewish magi one-upped him when the pharaoh's magi turned staves into serpents. That clearly happened off camera, in a story in the past, and does not happen at all. Why not? We have a human history of people sincerely believing in thousands of gods, and there is only one thing in common between these supernatural "experiences" that we can actually demonstrate. The ability to convince humans of things that are not necessarily true.

[@JimFortune]

"I have very good reasons for believing what I believe. I won't tell you what any of them are, but..."

[@20july1944]

What do you believe about the origin of our universe, Jim?

[@Theloneyat]

@@20july1944 Presumably Jim believes that nothing created everything with an enormous amount of faith.

[@urmomma2688]

@@Theloneyat Jim also presumably believes that that is a strawman

[@piesho]

@@Theloneyat Nobody says that, but you.

[@loganleatherman7647]

@stev_e3288 You and every other theist trying to strawman what atheists think

[@carlosreira413]

First straw man fallacy-- Religious belief is astonishingly diverse (and therefore unreliable as evidence). Not so, really. I propose that if we were (able) to tally the "experiences" of various groups we would find that they line up in rather astonishingly consistent ways. Which brings me to the second fallacy in this man's reasoning-- A straw man can't fall both ways. How can one argue that religious belief is both too diverse and too similar to be counted as evidence? The implication here concerning prophecy is that others (Mormons) are big on this one too. Therefore, taking into account these two fallacies of reasoning, we could note: When you get to make up the questions to your taste, you get to control the answers. Phrased differently, in more open and honest words, it's a very valid question. What are Christians to make of others' seemingly profound religious experiences? Can we invalidate them outright? Or do we need to appeal to more "reasonable" theological grounds?

[@draxthemsklonst]

🤪 that clarifies things

[@0nlyThis]

No experience is it ever it’s own description. The one is direct, the other conceptual. The one neural, the other psychological. One should be thoughtful that one not conflate the current experience of a memory with the experience, no longer available for direct examination, which engendered it. All NDEs, without exception, are memories - symbols of events which are no more.

[@foodforthought8308]

Massive claim here that is impossible to defend

[@0nlyThis]

@@foodforthought8308 Thank you.

[@foodforthought8308]

@@0nlyThisI didn't actually read your full comment, sorry

[@Hhjhfu247]

B

[@DIBBY40]

It is a sort of special pleading. Because I bet you could find a Christian who had some sort of experience with God and then became Muslim. Atheists can become Christians or muslims or Hindus and vice versa. My own view is that we are all growing and evolving spiritually; what may be good for a person at one time, may not be good at another.

[@deniss2623]

David Dibben "May be , may not be, may not be, may be." Wow! Such clarity!

[@DIBBY40]

@@deniss2623 You having a bad day Denis? 😀

[@deniss2623]

@@DIBBY40 Life is difficult, David. How is your day? And no, I don't believe that we are all growing and evolving spiritually. We are naturally estranged from God, and heading for a Hell of our own choosing.

[@DIBBY40]

@@deniss2623 Fair enough.

[@deniss2623]

@@DIBBY40 Indeed. Indisputable. Reality is so binary, isn't it? One thing or the other, despite the multi-coloured lunatics.

[@donrayjay]

Others are demons, not discounted, also supernatural origin

[@FaptainCalcon750]

God seems to prefer to focus the demons pretty unevenly on Earth, then.

[@radscorpion8]

That was a pretty sleazy response by Guillaume. The question was whether or not he's done the requisite amount of research into the supernatural experiences of other religious practitioners, and instead of admitting that he hasn't, he goes off making up a story about how certain Muslims may not be having experiences that point to Islam but instead point to Christianity. Of course, the reverse is easily true and there could be and probably are many Christians having supernatural experiences that instead point to Islam. And there HAVE BEEN many Christians who converted to Islam and all the other faiths lol. So he is just giving a very oily, slippery response at the end that doesn't remotely answer what Graham is asking. Namely, one have you done the actual research in order to dismiss other religions, and two, on what basis can you claim that Christianity is somehow the exception. And the moderator of course, is not bothered by any of this. He continues to be a firm cheerleader for Christianity no matter what is said :P. Man its always frustrating to watch someone have that small, smug smile on their face, while they're asking questions, and you know that no matter what the response is or how badly Christianity gets disproven, they are going to have the same unshakeable faith in it. Its like I am looking at the death of reason and all I see is a smiling face looking back at me. Sad and frustrating at the same time

[@johndoe1909]

so the guy saying he has no special pleading, uses special pleading. as usual.

[@daveyofyeshua]

The Christian world view of a God or God's is utterly unique, whereby while you are alive you are justified 🙌

[@JosephVK]

“On that day many will say to me Lord, Lord…” and Jesus will say “I never knew you. Depart from me, you workers of lawless”. Pretty weak justification if you ask me

[@daveyofyeshua]

@@JosephVK that's in reference to weak Christians Revelation 3:16 So, because you are lukewarm-neither hot nor cold-I am about to spit you out of my mouth. Read your Bible

[@mohamedali2858]

Maurice Bucaille : book The Bible, the Qur'an, and Science He is a French doctor, a scientist and the author of many books.

[@tommytomtom320]

The Bible is not a reliable historical source because it does not meet the standard criteria of source reliability used by historians. The Bible is not, as many believers assume, eye witness testimony. Reliable sources are generally based on authors who were eye witnesses to an event (i.e. it is a primary source). Since any particular source may be fabricating their story, multiple independent sources are usually required for confidence. Establishing the lack of author biases, including religious motivations, is also necessary if a work is to be read at face value. The Bible satisfies none of these requirements. Based on historical and archaeological research, there are known historical inaccuracies in the Bible. The Bible is considered Mythological by most historians. Historians know the Gospels are largely or entirely Myths because they share the same characteristics in that they are an apparently normal story except: The text is structured to convey an underlying meaning, usually to convey some Political or Value System, Using Symbols that are familiar the intended audience. Refers to or retells other myths and stories but often some aspects are changed to make a specific point. Historical improbabilities, occurrence of miracles or people acting unrealistically. Lack of corroborating evidence. People do more research on their Cars and Homes they buy. But not on the religion they live life by... Blind Obedience is a Dangerous Thing... Christianity may be considered a religion, but it was actually developed and used as a system of MIND CONTROL to produce Slaves that believed God decreed their Slavery. DOING REAL RESEARCH WILL SHOW YOU IT'S ALL BEEN A LIE... And “NO” you can't use the Bible to prove the Bible. That's not how “TRUTH” works. That's using a book of LIE'S to tell false TRUTHS...

[@samuelcallai4209]

I hear the exact opposite of almost all you said when I listen to new testament scholars. I wonder what are your sources.

[@Eben_Haezer]

You should really need to read historical scholars than copying others unfounded speculations

[@tommytomtom320]

@@samuelcallai4209 Being educated often means having a Critical Mindset. Simply put, you don’t take things for granted and you don’t believe stuff just because an authority figure or book says so. That transfers to the Bible and gods as well: “it says so in the Bible” isn’t automatically true for someone with a Critical Mindset, and things are not necessarily believable just because a pastor says it. The problem is that in particular Islam and Christianity are authoritative religions. In Christianity, the only path to heaven is to accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour, and in Islam, you submit to Allah as Muhammad revealed through the Qur’an - the word “Islam” even means “submission”. The natural response from the Educated Critical Mind is, of course, “Why?” And “because Muhammad/Jesus/God/the Bible/the Qur’an says so” is not a valid answer. Because we had the luxury of an Education that afford us the Skills to Think Critically, Rationally, and Reasonably. This, in turn, allowed us to Objectively read the bible, koran, dhammapada, vedas, and other scriptures and holy books. When that happens we often reject the claim that the characters found within exist in Reality. If so many Highly Educated people don’t believe in god… maybe is because they know something you don’t, perhaps? It’s because, due to their High Intelligence and Education, they have realized that all gods are imaginary. Educated people tend to believe in things that can be Proved and for which there is Evidence. I don’t believe in God for the same reason you don’t believe in Vampires, Faeries, Werewolves, Pegasus, Mermaids, and numerous other supernatural beings from Myth, Folklore, and Fantasy. You make an exception for one preferred flavor of Myth; I don’t. I believe in the Power of Loving Kindness, Illuminated by Self-Reliance and Mindfulness. I neither need, nor desire, a belief in deities to walk that path.

[@tommytomtom320]

@@Eben_Haezer The Information is still True...

[@SSJCyan]

Thats why what you believe should be based on the Word and not experiences.

[@loganleatherman7647]

How do you know the “Word” is true? You have no way to really test it, so all you have is to blindly accept it as true and then make up all the evidence that “proves it to be true” from there. You can’t use an apologetic work (e.g. the Bible) to show that the Bible is true

[@troysmalley7886]

​@@loganleatherman7647 justified belief and proven belief are distinct such that a person who thinks that a pot 'seems' hot, is justified in believing that it is hot, or a person who believes his wife is standing in front of him, is justified in disbelieving someone who calls him and says that his wife us actually with the other guy -- even if that other guy has an equally strong sense that the wife is with him instead. It would be special pleading to expect someone else to believe our own report, when there are other conflicting reports. But this does not undermine a person's justification for believing their own report regardless of other conflicting reports.

[@st.mephisto8564]

Conflicting religious experiences exist because of cultural and Exoteric differences people have. The experience is one, people describe it differently due to outer differences

[@20july1944]

Do you know basic science such as how a star works? I get that we don't agree on whether God exists or not, but do you respect and know some basic science?

[@vejeke]

@@20july1944 "In the 1920s, there was a dinner at which the physicist Robert W. Wood was asked to respond to a toast ... 'To physics and metaphysics.' Now by metaphysics was meant something like philosophy-truths that you could get to just by thinking about them. Wood took a second, glanced about him, and answered along these lines: The physicist has an idea, he said. The more he thinks it through, the more sense it makes to him. He goes to the scientific literature, and the more he reads, the more promising the idea seems. Thus prepared, he devises an experiment to test the idea. The experiment is painstaking. Many possibilities are eliminated or taken into account; the accuracy of the measurement is refined. At the end of all this work, the experiment is completed and ... the idea is shown to be worthless. The physicist then discards the idea, frees his mind (as I was saying a moment ago) from the clutter of error, and moves on to something else. The difference between physics and metaphysics, Wood concluded, is that the metaphysicist has no laboratory." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark.

[@20july1944]

@@vejeke Do you know basic science such as how a star works? I get that we don't agree on whether God exists or not, but do you respect and know some basic science?

[@vejeke]

@@20july1944 "In the 1920s, there was a dinner at which the physicist Robert W. Wood was asked to respond to a toast ... 'To physics and metaphysics.' Now by metaphysics was meant something like philosophy-truths that you could get to just by thinking about them. Wood took a second, glanced about him, and answered along these lines: The physicist has an idea, he said. The more he thinks it through, the more sense it makes to him. He goes to the scientific literature, and the more he reads, the more promising the idea seems. Thus prepared, he devises an experiment to test the idea. The experiment is painstaking. Many possibilities are eliminated or taken into account; the accuracy of the measurement is refined. At the end of all this work, the experiment is completed and ... the idea is shown to be worthless. The physicist then discards the idea, frees his mind (as I was saying a moment ago) from the clutter of error, and moves on to something else. The difference between physics and metaphysics, Wood concluded, is that the metaphysicist has no laboratory." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark.

[@20july1944]

@@vejekeOK, Pedro: do you know how a star works? I guess you're saying that science is better because it draws clearer conclusions? I would 100% agree with that, so do you know how a star works?

[@shawnstephens6795]

I do not doubt these other religions had experiences. I doubt their experiences were from the God of the bible...because they deny the gospel.

[@colinloechel8378]

Yes good point - any spirit that denies that Jesus is Son of God and Messiah is not from God, and is therefore opposed to God.

[@FaptainCalcon750]

If anything, you’re implying polytheism with that statement.

[@shawnstephens6795]

@@FaptainCalcon750 ...no...im implying that Satan can appear as an angel of light...Lucifer.

[@FaptainCalcon750]

@@shawnstephens6795 then satan and his demons masquerade as quite a few different entities lol. God seems rather selective about where he allows satan to do his oh so evil teachings of other faiths, considering most of Asia isn’t Christian.

[@piesho]

I'm sure a Muslim would say exactly the same thing about Christian experiences, but he would use the Quran instead. What do we do now?

[@thomaskist9503]

What? Am I the only Christian Who knows how to argue biblically? Christian, get your act together you may only have a few minutes to share the gospel. It goes like this: Hear are your facts atheist: The old testament was written by multiple people thousands of years ago. The new testament was written by multiple people more than a generation after the old testament. The last step is opinion, interpretation, or faith: I assert the New Testament, answers the Old Testament, as if it was written by one mind, and the answer is Jesus.

[@coreylapinas1000]

That wasn't the question.

[@loganleatherman7647]

You’re here rebuking another Christian for arguing poorly and this is what you come up with instead…? Don’t quit your day job bro

[@tylerdavis520]

🤦‍♂️

[@Paradoxarn.]

So Christian religious experiences aren't evidence for Christianity, got it.

[@20july1944]

Are you an atheist?

[@josephpostma1787]

@@20july1944 I would consider myself an agnostic leaning agnostic-deist (the number of necessary supernatural beings is unknown). I understand that the failed assassination of Hitler is a Christian.

[@20july1944]

@@josephpostma1787 Yes, he is.

[@merrybolton2135]

Why O Why We still argue about each religious person has a different make believe god that suites there way of thinking // This is iron age thinking , GET REAL

[@20july1944]

Do you know basic science such as how a star works? I get that we don't agree on whether God exists or not, but do you respect and know some basic science?

[@colinloechel8378]

Why O Why are you participating in such “fruitless” arguments? Iron Age participation? 🤔🤭😀

[@therottingstench]

*sighs* (Slams head against desk)

[@20july1944]

@@therottingstench Whom are you responding to?

[@MortenBendiksen]

When ever Islam is one of the examples brought up, you know the person has not looked into any of it. I see in all religion a true seeking and openness to the same reality. Except regular Islam. It consists of shutting down openness, truth, faith. I'm sure there are some crazy small sect that does not do this, but I'm unaware. In other religions its the small sects that do this, in Islam its opposite.

[@alexandertaylor7316]

Galileo would like a word with you.

[@MortenBendiksen]

@@alexandertaylor7316 Galileo was deeply Christian. And he was following his Christian faith. He was reprimanded for claiming the Copernican theory was THE truth. This in an age that knew what a theory is, a model, not the actual truth. His teachings that the theory was the simplest model, was not in question. Nor was it particularly new. It had been taught for some time, along with many other variants. It was his philosophical claims he was reprimanded for. I personally think he was wrong, and the church was right. However, I do not think the church was in the right to give anyone house arrest for such an error. However, such were the times. This is not what I was getting at. The point is that anyone who looks into it, finds Islam as it functions is a complete jail for the soul. It's secretive, it deals in the darkness, it keeps people in fear. Other religions, insist on making people feel safe and loved. Though there are always power structures trying to subvert that, of course. Just Islam is designed to subvert such a feeling from the get go. I'm talking about the actual reality people live, not some abstract theory from apologetics of polemicists. One just need to look.

[@deeplyhidden4880]

Yeah when he mentioned that Islam has better historical documentation I knew he is not familiar with the reliability of the gospels and what a person Mohammed actually was

[@alexandertaylor7316]

@@MortenBendiksenI find it interesting that Islam is, apparently, a jail for the soul, but historical instances of the Church doing the exact same thing are just waved away with "those were the times". For the majority of its existence, was Christianity open to diverging thought and truth or wasn't it?

[@vejeke]

Faith is not a reliable pathway to truth but a shortcut to self-deception.

[@Drawn-by-Abundance]

Justin, As one who loves and promotes your wonderful channel and desires its immediate and long-term success, I express the deep disappointment and concern that you continue to alienate and segregate the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from the rest of Christianity, while giving them no platform to respond. You've had on Muslims, atheists, etc.; you have a growing fanbase of LDS and non-LDS who greatly look forward to the day when your channel is finally big enough to include the “Mormons” in the conversation. They are ready and eager to join it. They are ready to have their positions challenged. May Jesus Christ continue to bless you in all your righteous efforts. God bless!

[@20july1944]

Mormons don't believe in The Father or His Son as depicted in the Bible. Mormons aren't a branch of Christianity.

[@thetrollpatrol8799]

What about “Jehovah’s Witnesses”? Muslims? Why not them?

[@20july1944]

@@jennifer97363 Why are you an atheist?

[@jayjackson5932]

I did a search for "mormon" in the Unbelievable Podcast and found 13 results. Do your research before making false claims.

[@Drawn-by-Abundance]

@@jayjackson5932 Thanks for responding! I'm happy to be corrected, if I'm in error. Would you mind sending me that link? In all my years of listening to Unbelievable I've never seen an active Latter-day Saint brought on to debate. If any were brought on before I subscribed to Unbelievable, I'd love to see it. I'm having a hard time finding any fruitful search results on the website.

[@MarkHunterSolo]

Graham Oppy is neglecting an important point with regard to comparing Christianity with other religions. That is the requirement to be sustainable for eternity. If a religion claims to provide eternal bliss as does Christianity then it has to offer a God of credible character and nature to logically uphold that! The fact that Christianity has a God of selfless love at the heart of it (see Romans 5:8 & 1 Corinthians 13 for example) it suggests that God has revealed the secrets of everlasting community through harmony of relationships rooted in God himself. No other religion has the substance or foundation to support any similar claim…

[@roarilan]

I guess we are ignoring the God of the Old Testament then?

[@MarkHunterSolo]

@@roarilan The God of the Old Testament is the same as the God of the New Testament. The only thing that changed was His Covenant with mankind. The first (old) covenant centred around the 10 Commandments which Moses brought down from mount Sinai. But the second (new) covenant was summed up by Jesus in just 2 Commandments which were actually also in the Old Testament scriptures already, but Christ shifted focus onto them as the real emphasis of what God was about. That is Deuteronomy 6:4 4 “Hear, O Israel: [a]The Lord our God, the Lord is one! 5 You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength” and also Leviticus 9:18 “… you shall love your neighbor as yourself”. Under the Old Covenant things were largely dealt with externally since the Holy Spirit had not yet been poured out on mankind as Christ had to first die to cleanse our sins before the Spirit of God could take up residence within us. So in the Old Testament judgement was executed to eliminate all oppressive external satanic practices which corrupt mankind and lead to hell on earth, whereas in the New Testament judgement was executed against Christ so God could deal with evil internally and save us from hell in the afterlife.

[@roarilan]

@@MarkHunterSolo I am aware. What baffled me and the reason I even brought up the Old Testament was because of your statement "The fact that Christianity has a God of selfless love at the heart of it". I was seriously confused because the God of Christianity seems to me to be a morally bankrupt, misogynistic, murdering dictator. But maybe that is just me...

[@MarkHunterSolo]

@@roarilan He is just wildly misunderstood that's all. The cross of Jesus Christ was proof of that & is the standard we will all be judged by. Hope you get to see it that way😁

[@rogermills2467]

@@MarkHunterSolo "The God of the Old Testament is the same as the God of the New Testament." - That's not what worshipers of the God of the old testament believe. "I, even I, am the LORD, and apart from me there is no savior. Isaiah 43:11 "And if we are careful to obey all this law before the LORD our God, as he has commanded us, that will be our righteousness.” Doing the law is his people's righteousness. Paul preaches against this. Paul preaches rebellion as defined by God: 13 [a]If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder spoken of takes place, and the prophet says, “Let us follow other gods” (gods you have not known) “and let us worship them,” 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The Lord your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the Lord your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. 5 That prophet or dreamer must be put to death for inciting rebellion against the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery. That prophet or dreamer tried to turn you from the way the Lord your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you. What must his people do if they love God? "keep his commands"!

[@user-ck3pb9do2m]

Islam is the fastest growing religion.

[@therottingstench]

Why

[@user-ck3pb9do2m]

@@therottingstench because

[@joygibbons5482]

@@therottingstench by birth rates, not conversion

[@jesusstopsbullets5111]

Christianity is still the biggest religion

[@user-ck3pb9do2m]

@@joygibbons5482 By both

[@freddieclark]

After watching this whole video I realise that Bignon, has no proof, so why would he make claims that cannot be proven.