Gibberish literally means nothing. It is defined as meaningless speech or writing that is nonsense. When using terms that have no understandable meaning or are perhaps contradictory you can’t impart a discernibly consistent message, it’s gibberish.
If your goal is to explain something, it must be done in terms that we can already understand in a way that is not ambiguous.
Example, is it even possible to believe the following explanation for gravity is true? Megolontiams engourge with plamorites to create an energy vacuum whenever they are exposed to tannerite, and since tannerite is timeless and spaceless by definition, their exposure must occur in a state of intense globularity which allows for gravity to come into existence through any spacial medium. Clearly this explanation gibberish. There is no way to determine if the statement is true because the terms used are undefined, or meaningless.
A quick rewrite to the following, a meaningless word interacts with another meaningless word, in a way that has no parallel in our current understanding, and therefore is an explanation for gravity, perfectly demonstrates the issue. Can you believe something you can’t understand? No. Perhaps the real question should be can you believe a claim regarding causation is true when the claim about the cause cannot be understood? Also no.
Terms that have no consistent definition or understanding such as spirit, higher power, or something being described as having scientifically impossible characteristics such as timeless and spaceless (a contradiction to Einstein’s well proven theory of relativity) have no real explanatory power.
With regard to the question “how did the universe come to exist?” Saying something like, “God did it with his power,” is functionally no different from god did it with magic, and neither explains HOW acts of creation are done.
Where scientific explanations seek to describe how the mechanisms of the world around us work, and to demonstrate how those mechanisms reliably lead to a given outcome, (Example a planet coalescing from preexisting matter as an act of creation) a genuine common understanding can be reached such that a reproducible conclusion can be achieved by anyone.
Religious or other supernatural explanations can’t be demonstrated or verified to be valid mechanisms and as their definitions are fluid and rarely agreed upon. And, we have no understanding as to how they actually work. They cannot be truly meaningful or informative. Explanations that can’t possibly be quantified, verified, or even consistent with what we know about reality are nothing more than a placeholder for something we can’t understand. Something that can’t be understood can’t be believed and people who claim they do understand that which is meaningless are literally pretending to understand gibberish.
If god exists and has a plan for me, in order to follow his plan (a series of steps to reach a preferred outcome) I must understand the list of steps to take. God cannot be speaking gibberish. Assuming he is all powerful, his plan cannot be something that can be interpreted multiple ways or even misinterpreted. If an all-powerful creator of the universe existed and wanted me to know his plan for me, it would be impossible for me not to understand it, if he had created me with the specific ability to understand it.
The very fact that I and many others either don’t think such a plan exists in reality, or at least claim that god’s mysterious ways are the reason they can’t understand, actually disproves the claim that there is an all-powerful creator god who wants us to know about his message for us. It is a contradiction, either GOD is all powerful, and therefore can communicate unambiguously, or he doesn’t really try to communicate at all in any really meaningful way to impart his most important message to us that we could ever receive, demonstrating he couldn’t possibly want us to receive his message.
It seems to me that every single person has their own “unique understanding” of God, demonstrating that he cannot really be understood collectively with agreed upon characteristics. How is it possible for an all-powerful god to miscommunicate a message about who he is to every person who ever thought he talked to them?
On the other hand, if God’s plan for any of us doesn’t require us to act in any particular way, for example if his plan doesn’t require us to act in accordance with his will, then he really doesn’t need to tell us his will or how we should act, no list of steps to follow are needed, and perhaps we can say “God has a plan but how we act will have no impact on it.” So, if nothing we can do changes gods plan for us, then there can be no consequences from God for how we act, feel, or believe.
In light of the above, it seems far more likely the actual perceived experiences with gods of every type and from every culture, are all human constructs with as many versions as there are people who can make up gibberish.
For those who argue it is possible to believe something we can’t understand and for many of us quantum theory is an example of that. I would point out that “can’t understand” is different from “don’t understand”. This speaks to the issue of whether something is knowable at all vs, I personally don’t know it, but with the proper education in the fundamentals I could learn to understand it.
If you accept the preceding argument is correct you now have a logical disproof of any god who is described as both all-powerful and wanting all of us to understand his message.
If you accept the above reasoned argument against the existence of this type of god, how does it force you to modify your belief in god?
This is a perfect place for a quote from John Adams (1735-1826) Founding Father, 2nd US President. “mystery is made a convenient cover for absurdity”
