"your suggestion utilize the human construct. I see no reason to consent to your subjective suggestions. "

Asserting that rational methods of reasoning are more likely to reflect objective reality is not a subjective assertion, quite the opposite. I certainly see no reason to accept claims asserted on naught but faith in bronze age superstitions, even if logic and science didn't exist, and were not successful methods of objectively explaining reality. Which is a more salient point of course, and one that theists always try so desperately to ignore, as you're doing here, whilst attacking objective methods like science and logic, but only of course when they don't reflect results that theists long for. As if we won't notice the double standard of sending your messages from a computer via internet powered by electricity all of which are achieved by some of the innumerable successes of objectives methods such as science in advancing technology via a clearer understanding of reality.

You even stated in another thread you had a rational basis for your belief, now within 24 hours you are decrying all rationality as unnecessary, that's the sort of inconsistent mental contortions that theists so often seem not to experience any cognitive dissonance over. I can only marvel at thinking that can dishonestly compartmentalise facts in such a conveniently ad hoc fashion.

@catholicray

"If we exist in an infinite reality then rationality is a human construct."

You are the one making the assertion, thus it is up to you to prove it. Let us begin please by you offering your definition of "infinite reality".

In order for there to be an honest and adult conversation, we require clarification so misunderstandings do not happen.

Is the earth flat? Was it made more likely to be flat when more people believed it was?

Again rationality can be demonstrated to produce consistently objective results as can science. And again, simply throwing them away lends no credence to religious superstition, so I'm not sure what you hope to achieve with this nonsense we have seen so many times before on here.

I also don't accept demonstrably objective methods that better help us understand reality because I am an atheist, rather I am an atheist because no such methods return any evidence for any deity or anything supernatural, and religious apologetics have too often outraged such objective reasoning, and denied objective scientific facts.