I relate to that, as it describes my spiritual quest pretty accurately. [...] I perfectly agree that dogmatic fundamentalism is odious. — Wayfarer

The topic isn't so much spirituality as such, or ...

The likes of panpsychism [...] Spinozism [...] non-descript unassuming deism — jorndoe

As an aside, I think Papal infallibility is perhaps taken with a grain of salt these days (in practical terms)?
The Protestants aren't on board anyway.

Apropos, there were some rumors on the street ...

Pope Advances One World Religion Agenda: Presents Buddhist Leader with Manifesto
Adam Eliyahu Berkowitz
Breaking Israel News
Dec 2019

In other words, the conclusion isn't God(s) don't exist, it's that if they exist they apparently don't care to set the record straight as to who if anyone is speaking on their behalf, and so probably aren't authorizing most if not all of these contradictory proselytizers to speak on their behalf at all. If they even exist. — Pfhorrest

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how often I have longed to gather your children together, and you were not willing.

How exactly would God go about "authorizing those speaking on his behalf"? What kind of certificate would be sufficient and foolproof? Jorndoe would quibble even if the Monty Python God (from the Holy Grail, clouds parting, big crown) were to admonish him about that. People hallucinate, after all. What is the solution here?

It looks like this is an unfalsifiable quibble. If it is falsifiable, perhaps someone can offer a circumstance which would falsify it.

(And, by the way, even if it were absolutely correct, it would have zero bearing on the ethics of preaching. As pointed out earlier, if someone believes he has something good to communicate to others, why shouldn't he, as long as he respects the wishes of others to not listen to him?)

how modern man is unequipped to understand what "God's existence" refers to — Mariner

Yep, for the most part. — Mariner

And with that you're now just declaring that your story (Catholic style?) is the be-all-end-all really real truth, incidentally contrary to ...

Just to clarify, the opening post is about authentic legitimacy of preachers (indoctrinators proselytizers), not so much about whether Yahweh is real or not.
Yahweh, Ahura Mazda, Shiva, Mahavira, Vishnu, Tonatiuh, or Allah may or may not be real; there's no particular assumption either way. — jorndoe

That's fine if you call it faith. Otherwise, it's starting to look like plain old fund⚠mentalism (unless you can show authentic legitimacy of course). :meh:

the notion of "gods" — Mariner

... in this context was already exemplified.

• Ahura Mazda, Yahweh, Shiva, Mahavira, Vishnu, Tonatiuh, Allah, etc refuses to authenticate and legitimize preachers (indoctrinators proselytizers) to the subjects/targets of those preachers
• Ahura Mazda, Yahweh, Shiva, Mahavira, Vishnu, Tonatiuh, Allah, etc refuses to delegitimize other preachers (indoctrinators proselytizers) to the subjects/targets of those preachers — jorndoe

^{(Not the likes of spirituality, panpsychism, Spinozism, non-descript unassuming deism, God of the philosophers, ...)}

And with that you're now just declaring that your story (Catholic style?) is the be-all-end-all really real truth, incidentally contrary to ... — jorndoe

Man, now you`re just preaching.

How exactly would God go about "authorizing those speaking on his behalf"? — Mariner

Good question. I'm sure any almighty universal deity can come up with something quite good (if there's something sufficiently important to impart). Aren't they supposed to have created everything and know it all? Solipsists or some mentally challenged may not be reachable I suppose.

By the way, as of 2015, Christianity was the largest overall religion, counting about 1/3 of the world's population (not differentiating denominations sects cults fundamentalist or loosely associated etc). At best, some 67% had something wrong.
Projections will have it that Islam will become the largest religion in some decades, because they outbreed others and indoctrinate their children (those are my words, not Pew's, they're more "diplomatic").
Going by the 2m:48s youtube posted earlier, Sunnis already overtook Catholics about 20 years ago.
The truth of the matter is not a popularity contest, or what the most shrewd preachers preach, or who can produce the largest number of indoctrinated kids.

I'll just ask for authentic legitimacy of preachers (indoctrinators proselytizers) the moment they start preaching, be they Shaivists, Catholics, Sunnis or Mormons. — jorndoe