No data supports these ideas. That means that the data we DO have is, is consistent with a model that does not include these ideas.
No data supports the idea of santa or unicorns. That means that the data we DO have is, is consistent with a model that does not include God. Did i get it right? Do i get an A? I want you to expand this answer. I want you to be more extensive. Show me what supports this evidence?
I don't know what is so hard for you to comprehend this basic concept.
Please excuse me, it may the case that you are smarter than me! Congratulations my dear.
Its all good, i have you to help me grasp mentally - that is - to understand. Thank you for all your replies so far, lets not be shy, give me all that you have. As realitycheck01 said to me once "One reason that science is highly correct is because scientists are taught to distrust authority and reexamine the evidence". I distrust scientific authority and i want to examine your evidence!
If you have no data to support X, then by definition the data you DO have is consistent with not-X.
Please excuse my inability to learn fast. How does this relate to God?
I think the problem is rather you not knowing how to deal with a worldview that doesn't include your religious beliefs.
How do my religious beliefs and experiences - lets use my testimony as an example - conflict with this world view you speak of?
Humans have psychological problems with "not knowing" things. To the point that humans will just invent things and pretend them to be the answers to their unanswered questions for their own piece of mind.
Evolution is in fact a plurality of theories and suppositions. Why is the theory of evolution human psychological problems, an alternative to Creation for those who reject God?
Humans are also pattern seeking creatures. We are so obsessed with pattern seeking, that we will also see patterns where there really aren't any.
You know what coming next! Why is the evolution pattern exempted? Why do you not question evolution and why do you take it as 100% truth? Why is the case so strong for you? Please be genuine and give me more!
Humans are also very prone to the cognition error of the "false positive".
Excellant. You are in good company. "The human mind is extremely likely to suffer from faulty reasoning and making mistakes. We all suffer from that as we are all human" - dogmahunter, 2018. The scientific mind is a human mind. The conclusions of the scientific method are human reasoned. Why do you trust in evolution which is prone to error?
All these things together result in humans being very prone to be superstitious.
Hahaha nice! So why is your excessively belief in and reverence for the evolution not human error that we all are prone to?
This is why con-men such a sceance readers, tarrot card readers, fortune tellers, psychics, etc have such success. Even today, in just about every magazine you can read your "horoscope", as if the position of the stars and planets affect what will happen to you this week.
I never subscribed to the new age movement either.
All that together and humans are bound to invent religions.
So you disregard the spiritual world and believe it not to exist. What testing have you done to come to this conclusion?
We have even seen this within our lifetime, or the lifetime of our parents at least. Like scientology. Or a bit further back, Mormonism. Or Rastafari.
I disagree woth these things too.
We have actually very recently observed humans inventing religions. We know for a FACT that humans do that.
Do you believe scientist are not biased and do not invent things either? What have you observed that makes you reject Jesus?
You are more then welcome to provide us with objective verifiable evidence.
Would you consider the Holy Spirit objective verifiable evidence? If not, why? Detail will be needed?
But I know you don't have such.
What did you think about my previous answer re Holy Spirit?
Nobody has. If such evidence existed, it would be known by everybody.
It is known to millions of Christians and it can be known to you if you follow the formula ie 100% trust.
So I won't be holding my breath.
I would advise not to do this often!
I would prefer you to read with more attention and to not try and shift the burden of proof.
My dear im fascinated by you and your position. I merely ask you questions for more depth, i like for you to explain yourself.
If you think I'm wrong, all you would need to do is to provide us with examples of observations that objectively and verifiably points to gods. If you fail to provide us with even just one of such evidences, then the statement that all evidence at our disposal is consistent with no gods existing, is accurate.
We will be looking at the Holy Spirit as an example for evidence. I cannot wait to see how we go with this.
Human population size has never been below several thousand individuals. According to the bible, it was once just 2 and at another time it was reduced to 8. When the evidence of reality disagrees with a story in a book, then it is the story in the book that is incorrect.
Actaully the Bible doesnt suggest that adam and eve were the first 2. There appears to be evidence - in text - that they were a second creation and not the 6th day creation. Wanna discuss? Lets explore?
I'm not sure what budhism has to say about it. I thought certain versions believe in reincarnation. If they believe in reincarnation, that means that they believe that a "person" is something more then just the body and brain. If "you" can reincarnate as some other animal or person, then it implies that there is some "soul like" thing that defines personhood, rather then just the physical body and brain. I'll call that a "soul".
I have nothing to say about your anecdote. Bring me something that is actually verifiable and doesn't require me to "just believe" you.
Well i want you to explore and analyze it as a form of evidence - it happened. Why do you have nothing to say. This experience happened when you are suggesting such a thing cannot? Greetings.
IMO Buddhism teaches that there does exist a gestalt that many would identify as a "soul", e.g. consciousness, mind, will, volition, etc. However, in contrast to most other religions, we observe that this "soul" is something that is noteternal, and is therefore seen more as a "lifestream" than a "being". (If the soul is eternal, then it would not be subject to change; however, consciousness/mind/etc. does change, therefore it cannot be considered eternal.)
You made the statement that all religions make the same claims. Would you say this claim by a Buddhist is compatible with christianity?
To the evidence. As it stands, there seems to be the exact same kind of evidence for both. And that is "none". Evidence, is what makes the imaginary distinguishable from the real.
Lets consider my testimony, how do you show that it the same and how my testimony is useless? Need detail and depth, work at it my dear. Give me something good?
I'm not holding my breath.
I would hope so or else i could not have a discussion with you my friend