If every religion is confident in their respective correctness, then why should a neutral lab frighten any of them?

Funny how we never see a mix of a multitude of religions trying to settle who is right without violence or political violence. Funny how while some religious people claim to value science, and some try to say it points to their respective clubs, but we never see a collection of a mix of worldwide religions willing to find a neutral setting to settle who got it right. 

If a Buddhist and a Christian and a Muslim and Jew and a Hindu all think they got it right, wouldn't it be less violent to set up a neutral method and agree to a neutral lab to see who is right and who is wrong without all the tribalism?

I don't want to hear shit about legal rights, or human rights, I agree to those things regardless. But I am tired of my species shouting "I AM RIGHT' fine, all you fuckers think you got it right, ok, can you do it without all the tribalism and political violence and come up with a neutral setting?

If I read you right, you're advocating a series of unbiased experiments to determine the truth of particular religions? No offense, but that's the stupidest thing I've heard in yonks.

Boru

(April 26, 2016 at 3:56 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: If I read you right, you're advocating a series of unbiased experiments to determine the truth of particular religions?  No offense, but that's the stupidest thing I've heard in yonks.

Boru

Why is it stupid? If one goes around making statements about the nature of reality, and they are confident about their position, then being tested on that position in neutral conditions they cant control, should not frighten them. 

Now the point of this wasn't saying it will happen, but to demonstrate the insecurities of followers of any religion. They literally wont do it because it would destroy their illusions. They'd have to accept that their religions are not special to the planet or universe.

Of course you cant have unbiased experiments to determine which religion is correct, and that was the entire point of my OP. If you could all the bullshit divisions religions create could be settled without all the childish violence in the world. Humans love fantasy and that is why they wont do it.

It's stupid because the truth or falsity of religious propositions is not something that is experimentally testable (generally speaking). By way of example, consider the Catholic dogma of transubstantiation: When a Catholic takes part in the sacrament of the Eucharist, she believes that the bread and wine change their substance into the body and blood of Christ, but they don't change their elemental form - to any conceivable test, the remain bread and wine. What sort of experiment could you devise to test the claim that bread and wine become flesh and blood while remaining bread and wine?

Boru

(April 26, 2016 at 4:23 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: It's stupid because the truth or falsity of religious propositions is not something that is experimentally testable (generally speaking).  By way of example, consider the Catholic dogma of transubstantiation:  When a Catholic takes part in the sacrament of the Eucharist, she believes that the bread and wine change their substance into the body and blood of Christ, but they don't change their elemental form - to any conceivable test, the remain bread and wine.  What sort of experiment could you devise to test the claim that bread and wine become flesh and blood while remaining bread and wine?

Boru

DUH, the point was to them, not to those who know it would be pointless. OF COURSE IT IS POINTLESS, because they have nothing. 

Just like you could not get a Star Wars fan and Star Trek fan and Harry Potter fan in a lab, if they were treating that fiction as fact. DUH DUH DUH.

It IS pointless, I AGREE, and my point is if they had something they could actually put their money where their mouths were and not simply masturbate over their fantasies.

But the religious already KNOW that their beliefs are untestable. To even offer the challenge is what is stupid. You seem to think that because they would decline your stupid challenge this means they know that their beliefs are false. The opposite is actually the case.

Boru

(April 26, 2016 at 5:12 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: But the religious already KNOW that their beliefs are untestable.  To even offer the challenge is what is stupid.  You seem to think that because they would decline your stupid challenge this means they know that their beliefs are false.  The opposite is actually the case.

Boru

Yea, it is so stupid to challenge anything, that is why humans still think the earth is flat, and that the heart does the thinking and not the brain.

(April 26, 2016 at 3:56 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: If I read you right, you're advocating a series of unbiased experiments to determine the truth of particular religions?  No offense, but that's the stupidest thing I've heard in yonks.

Boru

 Lol yonks, It's been yonks since I heard that.

(April 26, 2016 at 5:51 pm)Expired Wrote:

(April 26, 2016 at 3:56 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: If I read you right, you're advocating a series of unbiased experiments to determine the truth of particular religions?  No offense, but that's the stupidest thing I've heard in yonks.

Boru

 Lol yonks, It's been yonks since I heard that.

What about "Zoinks" or "Bazinga"?

(April 26, 2016 at 5:54 pm)Brian37 Wrote:

(April 26, 2016 at 5:51 pm)Expired Wrote:  Lol yonks, It's been yonks since I heard that.

What about "Zoinks" or "Bazinga"?

Or Jinkies.