Atheism

[Simon Moon]

Religious experiences are a supernatural phenomenon.

So, back on my post number 184 of this thread, I responded to you, and posed a question (which you conveniently ignored).

Here it is again,

I have a friend (an old surfing buddy) that became addicted to alcohol and drugs, was living on the street and doing petty crimes.

One day he walked into a Hindu temple in Los Angeles, and he claims he had a religious experience where he saw Hindu gods, and they communicated with him (the god told him to clean up his life, and that he was hurting his loved ones).

He literally quit alcohol and drugs that day. Cleaned up his life, and now owns a small business, and has a great family. He is still Hindu.

So, what do you think is more likely, he had a real experience with the Hindu god, that caused him to clean up his life, or, he had a real experience, like a change in mental states, that he misinterpreted as communication with Hindu gods?

I'd still like to get your take on this.

[Amarok]

Religious experiences are a supernatural phenomenon.

And your accusing us of question begging

[RoadRunner79]

Also it is not energy to separate supernatural from natural to say that they are separate categories or that they are different. A category error is About imposing a category incorrectly.  

@Lady The question still remains about what you are indicating is a category error

I’m a stay at home mom with 4 year old and 18 month old boys; give me a break, will ya? ?  I’m gettin’ to it, just as soon as I have a few minutes to be alone with my brain. ?

Ok no problem.... I just wanted to clarify that their is the issue of what the category error is, and why it’s wrong. Or if you want to change your mind on that statement that’s fine too.

Edit: didn’t mean to sound like I was rushing you.

[Angrboda]

[Amarok]

[I_am_not_mafia]

[Crossless2.0]

Experience --------> Interpretation ---------> Claim


For some reason, the second part keeps getting glossed over. I can't imagine why.

[Succubus]

[Minimalist]

Carrier's On The Historicity of Jesus should be required reading for atheists and agnostics.  It would be wasted on religitards like Stevie.

I just really despise the Bayes Theorem shit but that's probably just me and math.

[I_am_not_mafia]

Carrier's On The Historicity of Jesus should be required reading for atheists and agnostics.  It would be wasted on religitards like Stevie.

I just really despise the Bayes Theorem shit but that's probably just me and math.

Thanks. I was recently wondering what to read about the historicity of Jesus. I had to stay away from subject when arguing with my religionist brother.