(January 31, 2023 at 4:29 pm)Justin Case Wrote:

(January 31, 2023 at 3:45 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Why is it that you think religious belief is the result of the historic use of hallucinogens, but not belief in ghosts and other aspects of the paranormal?

We all know plenty of sincerely religious people who have never been personally exposed to hallucinogenic drugs. Why should their delusions be laid at the door of the use of mind-altering substances, but your own delusions regarding ghosts and EVP are ‘real’?

Boru

It's the (ready?) INTERPRETATIONS I'm dealing with.

Nice try.

Boru

Well, now that it's quieted down ...

Look, if you want to prove or disprove the existence of "GOD" you have to go into this via religious history. It took 2000 rounded years to go from the beginning of writing to the first monotheistic interpretation. The two cultures involved in the story after that, granted, have data problems because the original texts vanished and exact dating is impossible - but - the picture can still be seen and monotheism continued on from Egypt to the Zoroastrians and then to the Hebrews -  from there it has slowly come all the way to today. All this was from the start was a doctrinal change, where polytheism was simply replaced by the new version - monotheism. Until the day comes where someone can dispute the "historical" picture, there is no "GOD."

The next step from here would be to find defining answers for this other dimensional / spiritual world.

What the hell are you babbling about?

(February 1, 2023 at 12:44 pm)Justin Case Wrote: Well, now that it's quieted down ...

Look, if you want to prove or disprove the existence of "GOD" you have to go into this via religious history. It took 2000 rounded years to go from the beginning of writing to the first monotheistic interpretation. The two cultures involved in the story after that, granted, have data problems because the original texts vanished and exact dating is impossible - but - the picture can still be seen and monotheism continued on from Egypt to the Zoroastrians and then to the Hebrews -  from there it has slowly come all the way to today. All this was from the start was a doctrinal change, where polytheism was simply replaced by the new version - monotheism. Until the day comes where someone can dispute the "historical" picture, there is no "GOD."

The next step from here would be to find defining answers for this other dimensional / spiritual world.

How, exactly, would a study of history prove or disprove the existence of God?

Boru

(February 1, 2023 at 1:21 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(February 1, 2023 at 12:44 pm)Justin Case Wrote: Well, now that it's quieted down ...

Look, if you want to prove or disprove the existence of "GOD" you have to go into this via religious history. It took 2000 rounded years to go from the beginning of writing to the first monotheistic interpretation. The two cultures involved in the story after that, granted, have data problems because the original texts vanished and exact dating is impossible - but - the picture can still be seen and monotheism continued on from Egypt to the Zoroastrians and then to the Hebrews -  from there it has slowly come all the way to today. All this was from the start was a doctrinal change, where polytheism was simply replaced by the new version - monotheism. Until the day comes where someone can dispute the "historical" picture, there is no "GOD."

The next step from here would be to find defining answers for this other dimensional / spiritual world.

How, exactly, would a study of history prove or disprove the existence of God?

Boru

History: a chronological record of significant events often including an explanation of their causes.

It's a collection of facts regarding a particular subject that shows how that subject came together over time.
1) Monotheism NEVER EXISTED in history until ONE PERSON changed the rules of the religious game. He eliminated what was always believed, and replaced it with something never heard of before.
2) In the overall picture, there are three different "GODS" that pop up in three different cultures over time, with three different names and three different stories. If this "GOD" idea was in any respect true, all accounts would have the same name and the same story behind it. How different is the later Muslim "GOD?" People simply dismiss that one because they simply don't WANT to hear it. It's the SAME picture ... just more CHANGES for the none thinking followers.

What needs to be done here is to dispute the data and correct the picture if you think it's wrong. I'm only interested in hard data answers to disprove this so the picture can be straightened out if needed.

If that's what needs to be done, then you've got a bit of a problem trying to defend no1 - which isn't how monotheism arose at all. No2, likewise...difficult, as it's an explicit invocation of a logical fallacy.

(February 1, 2023 at 2:18 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: If that's what needs to be done, then you've got a bit of a problem trying to defend no1 - which isn't how monotheism arose at all.  No2, likewise...difficult, as it's an explicit invocation of a logical fallacy.

Then present your case.

(February 1, 2023 at 1:55 pm)Justin Case Wrote:

(February 1, 2023 at 1:21 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: How, exactly, would a study of history prove or disprove the existence of God?

Boru

History: a chronological record of significant events often including an explanation of their causes.

It's a collection of facts regarding a particular subject that shows how that subject came together over time.
1) Monotheism NEVER EXISTED in history until ONE PERSON changed the rules of the religious game. He eliminated what was always believed, and replaced it with something never heard of before.
2) In the overall picture, there are three different "GODS" that pop up in three different cultures over time, with three different names and three different stories. If this "GOD" idea was in any respect true, all accounts would have the same name and the same story behind it. How different is the later Muslim "GOD?" People simply dismiss that one because they simply don't WANT to hear it. It's the SAME picture ... just more CHANGES for the none thinking followers.

What needs to be done here is to dispute the data and correct the picture if you think it's wrong. I'm only interested in hard data answers to disprove this so the picture can be straightened out if needed.

Thank you for lecturing me on what history is - if it weren’t for you, I never would have known (despite having a degree in history).

None of the rest of your post answers my question.

Boru