RE: How may one refute the religious stonewall argument "all is one"?
December 21, 2020 at 3:33 pm
(October 5, 2020 at 6:07 pm)Osopatata Wrote: This is a tactic that some have used when discussing religion with me: They say they have had a meditative experience and realized all is one, or otherwise postulate that all is one for some other reason. That oneness for no logical reason is extrapolated to be a magical, mystical thing that validates religious views.
It becomes a stone wall when one may try to question the validity of a religious view, but it is explained by something beyond normal understanding like "all is one." So the conversation is blocked off completely unless one can refute this position and demonstrate that it is utterly untenable, and so the opponent must then defend their religious views in terms that do not go into realms of illogical postulations.
Seems to me there are some seriously fatal flaws in the logic of such a position as "all is one". However I am far from a logician. Could anyone offer some refutations that invalidate such a view?
An agnostic is a God believing atheist. The difference between an agnostic and an atheist is the statement. I believe in God, everything else is practically the same, i even got atheists that called God a s***head, to pray for me. They cursed and swore at God but said "Joshua i prayed for you last night"
I do not need to defend anything, its all clockwork and interpretation is incredibly easy to see and understand. It all depends on what we choose to look out for, and how hardened our hearts are, and how the persons mind thinks and understands. I always say the land of Israel is there today with all the sites.
