Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Why? What is it best for? Determining truth?
Personally, I believe when someone is attempting to convince you of a their beliefs....particularly religious beliefs....It's best to consider their stories with a generous dose of scepticism.
Why?
It seems that it would depend on the claim made. IOW, it would vary.I'll gladly answer this....once you let us all know your idea of what constitutes "good evidence".
Because religious claims have a poor track record.
It seems that it would depend on the claim made. IOW, it would vary.
Is this effectively saying that you will make no effort to objectively verify the truth of statements found in the bible, because they are found in the bible? If so, can you see how this might look like disconfirmation bias?
Son, I am disappoint. After all the time we've spent together here on CF, and this is your current opinion?God based religious claims are solely based on the belief that God created us personally and our observable reality.
Claims that are not based on a belief in God, such as atheistic scientific claims, are completely based on observations of our observable reality and completely ignore the personal aspects of humanity. (to me personally, it seems odd to ignore a significant part of our reality(ourselves) in order to determine the truth about our reality)
If we take a step back and look at this, then we'd realize that if God created us and our observable reality and all we're considering is the observable reality itself and not considering ourselves or God at all, then it stands to reason that we'll miss God entirely because of our lack of open mindedness to the possibility that God created us and our observable reality for a reason. Does this seem like a reasonable observation about reality?
Thankfully, the fact of the matter is that one can't observe our reality without considering God at some point in one's personal life(this includes all human scientists), but one can observe our reality and ignore the idea that God created everything we observe. Their justification for ignoring the idea that God created everything is that it seems like an extraordinary claim that should be backed by extraordinary evidence, while being fully willing to accept any other explanation about origins and give it the skepticism that it rightfully deserves. One cannot objectively consider the idea that God created everything, while not being openminded to this possibility.
What I think might be missing is the acknowledgement of the extraordinary evidence for the existence of God that is right in front of all us. This extraordinary evidence is ourselves(Which as I noted above is completely removed by atheistic scientists who are only focused on observable reality). The fact that we exist in the way that we do, is extraordinary evidence for the existence of God.
On the other hand, the extraordinary evidence of ourselves existing in the way that we do, is disregarded as soon as you take God out of the possibility. "Ourselves" mediately becomes a fluke of nature, as if we should never really exist in this way because it's too extraordinary. Well, what if there's a specific reason for why our existence is so extraordinary? Of course this points to God, which just isn't possible, right?
One question I have is: At what point does a human being reject all evidence that points to God, no matter how extraordinary? Are some people at this point in their personal life? How sad for them, if God turns out to be true. The realization that one has been deceived for so long, must be devastating, or liberating depending how you look at it.
I know all atheist look at everything I've said in a reverse way. They think that I am the one being deceived and when I finally come to realize God does not exist, I will be liberated from all religious deception. I will finally come to realize that the fact that I exist is not extraordinary at all, but rather just a fluke of nature that really never should have happened. The extraordinariness of my existence is simply deceiving me into thinking it's extraordinary. All the sudden we have a new question: What purpose does my existence have in deceiving me into believing my existence isn't extraordinary?
Again, it all come back to truth and deception, which consequently is what Jesus is all about straightening out for us.
Son, I am disappoint. After all the time we've spent together here on CF, and this is your current opinion?
I feel like such a failure.
The only thing I've "tried to convince" you of, is how to soundly reason. I have failed.Sorry, but this very comment is a contradiction. Your position as an atheist is "claimed" to not be a truth claim, yet you feel like a failure as if you've been trying to convince me of some "truth" and have failed.
The only thing I've "tried to convince" you of, is how to soundly reason. I have failed.
And I've repeatedly pointed out why that is a foolish way to reason, and you've ignored me every time.You can't convince me about sound reason. You can show me how you reason and I can either agree or reason in a different way.
The fundament difference between our reasoning is that you base your reasoning on assumptions, I base my reasoning on what I believe to be true.
We've been over this
You can't convince me about sound reason.
And I've repeatedly pointed out why that is a foolish way to reason, and you've ignored me every time.
An "accepted truth" is nothing more than an assumption, plain and simple.And I've repeatedly stated that we do not become self aware and immediately assume reality is real, we are not capable of making assumptions when we become self aware. Instead, when we become self-aware we subconsciously accept the truth that reality is real and begin making assumptions from there. Therefore, all reasoning is based on an accepted truth, not on assumptions.
An "accepted truth" is nothing more than an assumption, plain and simple.
Here, try this on for size:
We all accept the truth that reality exists.
We all accept the truth that we can learn some things about reality.
We all accept the truth falsifiable models with predictive capabilities work better than those without.
Does this make you feel better about your "accepted truths?"
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?