If/when the vast majority of the world becomes atheist, it would be far more reasonable to label anyone who claims to be communicating with God mentally ill. I agree that it's more like social conditioning right now.

Actually, here in England, you'd probably be considered that way by most people. I don't think I've met any religious people who make such claims, outside of genuinely ill people who will be displaying many other symptoms.

I wonder how a very outspoken hardcore religious person from America would cope if they were suddenly living in England. If they carried on in the same way, they'd be viewed as borderline crazy almost immediately. Would this cause them to scale things back? I bet that it would. Without the reinforcement from others, I expect it would all become rather subdued.

(March 8, 2018 at 3:31 am)robvalue Wrote: If/when the vast majority of the world becomes atheist, it would be far more reasonable to label anyone who claims to be communicating with God mentally ill. I agree that it's more like social conditioning right now.

Actually, here in England, you'd probably be considered that way by most people. I don't think I've met any religious people who make such claims, outside of genuinely ill people who will be displaying many other symptoms.

I wonder how a very outspoken hardcore religious person from America would cope if they were suddenly living in England. If they carried on in the same way, they'd be viewed as borderline crazy almost immediately. Would this cause them to scale things back? I bet that it would. Without the reinforcement from others, I expect it would all become rather subdued.

Did you ever hear from people in England talking and believing in second coming of King Arthur? Apparently this was big during WW2 when Brits expected King Arthur to return.

(March 8, 2018 at 3:47 am)Fake Messiah Wrote:

(March 8, 2018 at 3:31 am)robvalue Wrote: If/when the vast majority of the world becomes atheist, it would be far more reasonable to label anyone who claims to be communicating with God mentally ill. I agree that it's more like social conditioning right now.

Actually, here in England, you'd probably be considered that way by most people. I don't think I've met any religious people who make such claims, outside of genuinely ill people who will be displaying many other symptoms.

I wonder how a very outspoken hardcore religious person from America would cope if they were suddenly living in England. If they carried on in the same way, they'd be viewed as borderline crazy almost immediately. Would this cause them to scale things back? I bet that it would. Without the reinforcement from others, I expect it would all become rather subdued.

Did you ever hear from people in England talking and believing in second coming of King Arthur? Apparently this was big during WW2 when Brits expected King Arthur to return.

For real? No I've not heard about that!

People here do believe in loads of dumb shit though. Ghosts, crystals, spiritualism, psychics, and so on. I wish critical thinking was taught in schools. I'm not generally chastised for disbelief in these things, though.

(March 7, 2018 at 8:25 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(March 7, 2018 at 8:03 pm)Astreja Wrote: So how is your evidence different from the Norse evidence?  There are some old stories but no directly-observable deity.  Potato, potahto.

How about a photograph thoroughly vetted scientifically, along with eye witness testimony, and audio recordings of the same event?

That would be 3 pieces of corroborative evidence.

Can anyone provide the same for Odin? If not then it isn't exactly "potato, potaho" is it?

You'll have to clarify what is on the audio recording as I have not heard this claim before. Is it the voice of God? If not, it doesn't really add anything to the photograph and testimonies.

So you're claiming that an unexplained light spot on a photograph, and people's interpretations of that event are evidence for God. The problem is that you cannot directly connect the evidence to the claim/interpretation of the evidence. All you have is an unexplained light. That could, for all we know, be the workings of Loki once again, or a flaw in the film, or evidence of faulty processing in the dark room, or any of a million other explanations. It's like someone who sees an unexplained light in the sky and believes it is evidence that extra-terrestrials are visiting the planet. No. It's not. It's just an unexplained light. Just like your photograph. What people interpret it to be is not itself evidence of anything. So, no, the so-called evidence you present doesn't in any obvious way link up with the claim. Your "evidence" isn't commensurate with what you're claiming. This isn't so much evidence of God as it is mere wishful thinking.

I can provide audio recordings and photos "of Odin" if required, too. They will be thoroughly vetted by people whose believe Odin is real.

(March 8, 2018 at 5:00 am)robvalue Wrote: I can provide audio recordings and photos "of Odin" if required, too. They will be thoroughly vetted by people whose believe Odin is real.

Do it.

The photo has to be scientifically vetted by an expert in the field of photography.

I can't wait.

(March 8, 2018 at 6:24 am)Huggy74 Wrote: The photo has to be scientifically vetted by an expert in the field of photography.

That's quite a low standard.

(March 8, 2018 at 2:45 am)Succubus Wrote: Odin's holy water:

Mine too!

---

(March 8, 2018 at 2:24 am)Huggy74 Wrote:

(March 8, 2018 at 1:15 am)Astreja Wrote: Can we interrogate the eye witnesses directly?

Do you have a photograph of your god (and preferably a negative, to ensure it hasn't been retouched)?

And what audio recordings are these?  I'm reasonably sure there were no analog or digital audio recorders in Biblical times.

I don't give a rat's ass about the testimony, photos or audio recordings of believers.  That's at least third-hand evidence due to the passage of time, and in any event people believe a lot of weird things for not particularly good reasons..

You don't get it, the point is can you provide the same for Odin?

Btw if you were an eye witness then you'd have no choice but to be a believer... Isn't that what you guys say? If you saw evidence you'd believe?

All the stuff that’s not evidence of Yahweh (the Bible, pictures of light,
personal testimony ect.) adds up the same amount of evidence as we have for Odin, which is zero.  That is the point of the thread; that theists will reject the “evidence” for Odin, yet accept the same kind of “evidence” for Yahweh. Having more stuff that’s not evidence does not magically turn that stuff into evidence, and it does not increase the probably that your god is real over any other.

(March 8, 2018 at 3:55 am)robvalue Wrote:

(March 8, 2018 at 3:47 am)Fake Messiah Wrote: Did you ever hear from people in England talking and believing in second coming of King Arthur? Apparently this was big during WW2 when Brits expected King Arthur to return.

For real? No I've not heard about that!

People here do believe in loads of dumb shit though. Ghosts, crystals, spiritualism, psychics, and so on. I wish critical thinking was taught in schools. I'm not generally chastised for disbelief in these things, though.

Students are taught critical thinking skills. At least, that's the case in Scandinavia in my experience.

In literature, for example, students are taught not just explaining the literature they've read, but also to criticize sources and to interpret it. Critical thinking skills are sort of acquired by osmosis by this way. In mathematics, students are taught not just the various formulas, but even their proofs and how they are derived.

(March 8, 2018 at 6:38 am)Sal Wrote:

(March 8, 2018 at 3:55 am)robvalue Wrote: For real? No I've not heard about that!

People here do believe in loads of dumb shit though. Ghosts, crystals, spiritualism, psychics, and so on. I wish critical thinking was taught in schools. I'm not generally chastised for disbelief in these things, though.

Students are taught critical thinking skills. At least, that's the case in Scandinavia in my experience.

In literature, for example, students are taught not just explaining the literature they've read, but also to criticize sources and to interpret it. Critical thinking skills are sort of acquired by osmosis by this way. In mathematics, students are taught not just the various formulas, but even their proofs and how they are derived.

That's true, we were taught them a bit. I am wondering if a formal class on it could help. I mean, I'm a total anal logic-obsessed nerdy freakazoid, and even I realized my critical thinking was not totally up to scratch until I looked into it formally. I had to go back and correct some fallacious thinking I realized I was having.