RE: The real religion?
August 11, 2016 at 7:35 pm
(This post was last modified: August 11, 2016 at 7:37 pm by bennyboy.)
SteveII
Here's the core of your belief, and the failing of your belief, with regards to empiricism.
Empirical evidence is what can be experienced-- NOT the interpretations of experience. If we look at an apple, that is an apple for 100% of the people, whether they call it that or not. People can do stuff to apples, and consistently observe the effects of their interactions with apples.
This is not so with the "empirical" evidence for God. What you actually experience is a sense that someone is looking over you, or a sense of peace, or whatever. In fact, you listed many of these "empirical" feelings a few pages back, claiming that only Christianity could lead one to have some of these experiences, and implying that they are evidence for God.
Your problem is that these feelings have been variously interpreted by people. EVERYONE agrees that an apple is an apple, because it is so by definition. People across cultures have attributed their feelings to Krshna, to Buddha, to Allah, to Freya, to Mother Nature, to whatever.
There is no evidence for God. There is plenty of evidence for religious experiences and feelings. Your failure is that you happily draw a bridge between them, when you have no sensible means of doing so.
Here's the core of your belief, and the failing of your belief, with regards to empiricism.
Empirical evidence is what can be experienced-- NOT the interpretations of experience. If we look at an apple, that is an apple for 100% of the people, whether they call it that or not. People can do stuff to apples, and consistently observe the effects of their interactions with apples.
This is not so with the "empirical" evidence for God. What you actually experience is a sense that someone is looking over you, or a sense of peace, or whatever. In fact, you listed many of these "empirical" feelings a few pages back, claiming that only Christianity could lead one to have some of these experiences, and implying that they are evidence for God.
Your problem is that these feelings have been variously interpreted by people. EVERYONE agrees that an apple is an apple, because it is so by definition. People across cultures have attributed their feelings to Krshna, to Buddha, to Allah, to Freya, to Mother Nature, to whatever.
There is no evidence for God. There is plenty of evidence for religious experiences and feelings. Your failure is that you happily draw a bridge between them, when you have no sensible means of doing so.
