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.
No. I never even asked you to agree with me. I pointed out that you had said you would give zero weight to the testimony of transcendent experinces of billions. That's either stubborn or foolish. Either motivation would preclude your serving on a jury.
I am unaware of anyone who claims to have experientially verified the flatness of the earth, are you?
First of all, as I mentioned before, you need to realize most Christians are not like YOU. I realize approx 25% of the worlds population may consider themselves Christian, but most of these Christians dont take their religion seriously enough to pray, read their bibles, or even go to church on a regular basis; these Christians do not go around claiming to have actually experienced the God they believe in, they just believe and go on about their lives as if this God didnt even exist. Most of the people I work with (for example) would consider themselves Christian but only 1 or 2 take their religion seriously like you or the other Christian respondents on this forum; the rest are like the above mentioned.That is incorrect, unless the definition of "tiny" changed overnight.
Like what? What do you think is "wrong," for example, with Jimmy Carter?
...I pointed out that you had said you would give zero weight to the testimony of transcendent experinces of billions...
I would have thought the contradictions would have been obvious enough, I'm talking stuf like say..Contradiction? You don't even attempt to list one. I can ony assume your thinking goes something like this:
If a Methodist claims to have experienced the reality of Jesus Christ, it must have been a qualitatively different experience he is claiming, than one from a Baptist who claims the same.
I am unaware of anyone who claims to have scientifically verified the existence of your idea of God; are you?
I would have thought the contradictions would have been obvious enough, I'm talking stuf like say..
The people that 'experienced the reality of jesus' that claim hell is real.
And the people that experienced the same thing but say there is no hell.
How about the example of another world religion.
There are roughly 1 Billion people in the world who practice the Hindu faith. They claim to experience the real, transcendent power of dieties like Shiva, Vishnu etc. Many devote time and energy to temple ceremonies, meditation and pilgramages. Some devote their entire lives to their faith and live as ascetics, showing incredible devotion and self-denial, to a much greater extent then most christians.
So I ask, why discount the experiences of the world's 1 billion Hindus?
I find it interesting how when I was a christian I would look down on the adherents of other faiths, as if they were fooling themselves or misguided.
You may be sincere in your claims of what you think this deity of yours can do, or may be able to do IF it existed, but one should always consider parsimony when considering these claims.Well, even though you do not accept the reality of transcenedent experiences, you are hopefully smart enough to recognize this:
IF there is a transcendent God, this alleged God SHOULD be able to manifest his reality in a convincing manner to those to whom he does so, as opposed to those to whom he has not yet done so, e.g. you.
You claimed they were 'transcendent'. What does that mean?Indeed what? You're answering your own questions to me?
Wrong guy. I never tod you a thing about my experiences.
Here you said "I can't".And yet I can. You mean I haven't, I guess.
Relate, but not demonstrate. You deleted that bit, I see.What inability? I sure have the ability to relate my experiences to those whom I know would not automatically dismiss them with 100% certitude that they were deceptions. That would leave you out.
You claimed they were 'transcendent'. What does that mean?
Here you said "I can't".
Relate, but not demonstrate. You deleted that bit, I see.
If you have nothing, you leave me out of nothing.
They transcend the empirical realm. I thought that would be obvious.
Correct. It would be impossible (by definition) to be able to prove by empirical means that there is a reality that transcends the empirical.
If so, it hardly matters. Transcendent phenomena cannot (by definition) be "demonstrated" by empirical means.
?? I can't make sense out of that comment.
I fail to see how that is relevant. If I doubt the existence of Australia until six million people testify through having visited it, I will hardly be dissuaded if some call the Australians friendly, while some say they are rude.
How about the example of another world religion.
There are roughly 1 Billion people in the world who practice the Hindu faith. They claim to experience the real, transcendent power of dieties like Shiva, Vishnu etc. Many devote time and energy to temple ceremonies, meditation and pilgramages. Some devote their entire lives to their faith and live as ascetics, showing incredible devotion and self-denial, to a much greater extent then most christians.
So I ask, why discount the experiences of the world's 1 billion Hindus? Why is their experience of god any less real then that of christians?
I find it interesting how when I was a christian I would look down on the adherents of other faiths, as if they were fooling themselves or misguided. I assumed that their experiences were not as fulfilling or 'real' as my experiences of the Jesus.
Nobody say it is not real. Theirs are simply not powerful enough, and they will not be helpful at the end.
And I cannot make sense of yours.
What is the difference between 'transcendent' and 'non-existent'?
More like when some say the entire country of australia is a desert, and others say its covered in ice?
Thats the kind of difference you have between accounts.
You'd be well adviced to be atleast skeptical that
...to disregard a million accounts of a particular phenomenon simply because of of disparities within accounts, to disregard them as giving no weight whatsoever to even the remote possibility that they COULD be true, is irrational.
There is a world of difference between skepticism and complete dismissal.
I think most atheists will give weight to the idea that those people experienced something. We just disagree with the interpretations that christians have placed on those experiences.
My point is; just because millions believe something to be true, doesn't mean it should be given an ounce of credibility; especially when you consider the contridictions when it comes to the details of this belief.Since science deals with the empirical realm, it would be a strange thing indeed if empirical methods could be employed to verify the existence of that which by definition transcends the empirical.
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?