Atheism

[RoadRunner79]

Set the pudding pop man free!

Again not comparable . So kindly stop trying to play up eyewitness testimony to protect your sacred cult texts . It has not worked for you on all the other threads it won't now

Is it because he's black? Because it seems that you are saying that there is no evidence and therefore no reason to convict him.

[Amarok]

Again not comparable . So kindly stop trying to play up eyewitness testimony to protect your sacred cult texts . It has not worked for you on all the other threads it won't now

Is it because he's black?   Because it seems that you are saying that there is no evidence and therefore no reason to convict him.

What the hell are you on about

[Mystic]

If a person takes their time to prove something, and there is many arguments for existence of God, before dismissing God and proofs for him, there needs to be some level of sincerity to the truth and not coming simply to reject.

And just like it's not good enough to assert God to existence, it's not good enough to simply deny proofs of God as proofs, with showing no rational reason why the proofs don't stand to reason.

I remember when a person to reject an argument even said it's not objective that torturing an innocent soul like a baby for eternity for no crime it has committed, to be objectively evil in all possible worlds.

And people think by denying such a premise, they can do away with an argument proving God. Goodness and God go together, you can't separate the two, neither can you separate God from his Messengers.

There are proofs and layers of the proofs, and insights and layers of insights that prove and manifest God.

What I conclude with every culture in the world having proofs of God, is Atheists are either too apathetic or rebellious to acknowledge God.

[Amarok]

If a person takes their time to prove something, and there is many arguments for existence of God,  before dismissing God and proofs for him,  there needs to be some level of sincerity to the truth and not coming simply to reject.

And just like it's not good enough to assert God to existence, it's not good enough to simply deny proofs of God as proofs, with showing no rational reason why the proofs don't stand to reason.

I remember when a person to reject an argument even said it's not objective that torturing an innocent soul like a baby for eternity for no crime it has committed, to be objectively evil in all possible worlds.

And people think by denying such a premise, they can do away with an argument proving God.  Goodness and God go together, you can't separate the two, neither can you separate God from his Messengers.

There are proofs and layers of the proofs, and insights and layers of insights that prove and manifest God.  

What I conclude with every culture in the world having proofs of God, is Atheists are either too apathetic or rebellious to acknowledge God.

Lol keep telling yourself that

[SteveII]

In context, I can a be reasonably certain. Additionally, confidence in your experiences are not in a vacuum -- every individual has a slightly different cumulative case undergirding their beliefs.

Context actually often tells us how divine experiences aren't actually divine at all. For example, it's interesting how people's religious experiences reflect the religious culture that they are already immersed in. My 'religious experience' where I heard a demonic voice behind my head just as I was getting to sleep mirrored the role playing experience I had that same evening.

Point is, people are using the same brain to determine what is a response to a sensory input, a religious experience or a momentary imbalance of function. The brain is very active and dynamical system with different parts very finely balanced. You cannot trust the same brain to tell the difference. This is why we require impartial observers.

I disagree. A dream can be dismissed by the "dreamer" very quickly as additional facts become available. The human mind, when functioning correctly, is capable of distinguishing what is a dream and what a Christian claims: that the presence of God is felt daily, evidenced by strength, support, peace, hope, and gentle guidance on living one's life. 

Your theory depends on the normal functioning mind to make regular, lasting mistakes that are not self corrected. That seems to only apply to religious-leaning people, and if so, that is simple question-begging: Religions people don't have religious experience because religious people don't have religious experiences.

[Mister Agenda]

Again not comparable . So kindly stop trying to play up eyewitness testimony to protect your sacred cult texts . It has not worked for you on all the other threads it won't now

Is it because he's black?   Because it seems that you are saying that there is no evidence and therefore no reason to convict him.

Apparently it only seems he is saying that to you. Is that because Bill Cosby is black?

---

Your theory depends on the normal functioning mind to make regular, lasting mistakes that are not self corrected. That seems to only apply to religious-leaning people, and if so, that is simple question-begging: Religions people don't have religious experience because religious people don't have religious experiences.

People can certainly have one-off experiences that seem real and never re-occur, and never stop seeming to have been real. My uncle had a conversation with a leprechaun when he was in the hospital. He always maintained that the leprechaun seemed as real to him as anyone else. I don't believe he was lying...but I don't believe in the leprechaun either. Non-religious people can have so-called 'religious experiences', and many have. They are just more likely to interpret them as something happening in their brains than actually being touched by a disembodied mind. No one denies that the experiences happen, the dispute is about their nature.

[I_am_not_mafia]

I disagree. A dream can be dismissed by the "dreamer" very quickly as additional facts become available. The human mind, when functioning correctly, is capable of distinguishing what is a dream and what a Christian claims: that the presence of God is felt daily, evidenced by strength, support, peace, hope, and gentle guidance on living one's life. 

Your theory depends on the normal functioning mind to make regular, lasting mistakes that are not self corrected. That seems to only apply to religious-leaning people, and if so, that is simple question-begging: Religions people don't have religious experience because religious people don't have religious experiences.

Why do you think that propaganda works?

This is religious binary thinking again. This time assuming True and False exist. When in reality no one is omnipotent. We are all given a subset of facts and perspectives and this can be manipulated in corectly functioning minds. No one is 100% correct or incorrect.

Then there are the brains which are not working properly. These are more suspectible to religious experience.

If all you know is religion then you will see the world through the eyes of the religious. But it's not as effective as relying on the minds and written and reproducible impartial observations of hundreds of thousands of scientists who are each looking out for the flaws in their own hypotheses and those of others.

[Angrboda]

Context actually often tells us how divine experiences aren't actually divine at all. For example, it's interesting how people's religious experiences reflect the religious culture that they are already immersed in. My 'religious experience' where I heard a demonic voice behind my head just as I was getting to sleep mirrored the role playing experience I had that same evening.

Point is, people are using the same brain to determine what is a response to a sensory input, a religious experience or a momentary imbalance of function. The brain is very active and dynamical system with different parts very finely balanced. You cannot trust the same brain to tell the difference. This is why we require impartial observers.

I disagree. A dream can be dismissed by the "dreamer" very quickly as additional facts become available. The human mind, when functioning correctly, is capable of distinguishing what is a dream and what a Christian claims: that the presence of God is felt daily, evidenced by strength, support, peace, hope, and gentle guidance on living one's life. 

Your theory depends on the normal functioning mind to make regular, lasting mistakes that are not self corrected. That seems to only apply to religious-leaning people, and if so, that is simple question-begging: Religions people don't have religious experience because religious people don't have religious experiences.

Not to judge Mathilda's experience, but her demonic voices would typically be described as a hypnopompic hallucination. Likening them to a dream is probably misleading. People mistake hypnogogic and hypnopompic hallucinations for reality quite frequently.

[RoadRunner79]

[Amarok]

A wall of text that symbolizes nothing. Essentially shitting all over hard work .