[Serious] Opinions on paganism?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

You know there's no proof of such an experience other than the reporting party, yes?

Yeah, why would that matter?

Because any idiot can make shit up. You, for example.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

By definition, supernatural object or entities are not part of the natural world. That means that not being subject to natural laws, they should not be able to interact with natural phenomena. They wouldn’t reflect light, or emit sound, or be affected magnetism, gravity, radiation, or any of the thousands of other aspects of the natural world.

It seems that anything detectable would be part of the natural world. If something was truly supernatural, how could it be detected?

Boru

We don't detect things, we recognize the interaction between things and other things.  Nothing about the supernatural prevents it from interacting with other things, your claim notwithstanding.  When Jesus healed the leper, the supernatural was interacting with the natural world, in spite of your claim which contradicts most prior accounts of the supernatural.

It would appear that there IS something which prevents the supernatural from interacting with the natural - the name. Most definitions of supernatural make reference to ‘beyond the laws of nature’. I’m not sure how we could recognize any interaction between the two (but I’m open to suggestions).

Jesus never healed a leper.

‘Prior accounts of the supernatural’? Come on.

Boru

[Ahriman]

Yeah, why would that matter?

Because any idiot  can make shit up. You, for example.

Well I mean, if I experience something that can't be explained by any natural cause, and it seems real to me, then I'm not really just "making shit up" when I say I had the experience, it was as good as real to me, whether or not it was actually "supernatural" is immaterial, it might as well have been supernatural because that's what it seemed like.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Because any idiot  can make shit up. You, for example.

Well I mean, if I experience something that can't be explained by any natural cause, and it seems real to me, then I'm not really just "making shit up" when I say I had the experience, it was as good as real to me, whether or not it was actually "supernatural" is immaterial, it might as well have been supernatural because that's what it seemed like.

Psychosis is like that.

[Bucky Ball]

Because any idiot  can make shit up. You, for example.

Well I mean, if I experience something that can't be explained by any natural cause, and it seems real to me, then I'm not really just "making shit up" when I say I had the experience, it was as good as real to me, whether or not it was actually "supernatural" is immaterial, it might as well have been supernatural because that's what it seemed like.

But you may (by ignorance, or any other reason) may have simply misinterpreted it.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Well I mean, if I experience something that can't be explained by any natural cause, and it seems real to me, then I'm not really just "making shit up" when I say I had the experience, it was as good as real to me, whether or not it was actually "supernatural" is immaterial, it might as well have been supernatural because that's what it seemed like.

But you may (by ignorance, or any other reason) may have simply misinterpreted it.

People make shit up all the time. Unsupported shit gets no credence. Religion is purely unsupported shit. Your opinion may vary but is completely irrelevant. Be less of an idiot.

[Ahriman]

But you may (by ignorance, or any other reason) may have simply misinterpreted it.

People make shit up all the time. Unsupported shit gets no credence. Religion is purely unsupported shit. Your opinion may vary but is completely irrelevant. Be less of an idiot.

You're too stuck on the idea of needing hard evidence to consider possibilities beyond your limited scope of knowledge and understanding, i.e. you're just small-minded.

[Silver]

*Infinite Facepalm*

[Gawdzilla Sama]

People make shit up all the time. Unsupported shit gets no credence. Religion is purely unsupported shit. Your opinion may vary but is completely irrelevant. Be less of an idiot.

You're too stuck on the idea of needing hard evidence to consider possibilities beyond your limited scope of knowledge and understanding, i.e. you're just small-minded.

And you're a fool who thinks we're fools. That's not a good idea here. Be less stupid.

[Angrboda]

We don't detect things, we recognize the interaction between things and other things.  Nothing about the supernatural prevents it from interacting with other things, your claim notwithstanding.  When Jesus healed the leper, the supernatural was interacting with the natural world, in spite of your claim which contradicts most prior accounts of the supernatural.

It would appear that there IS something which prevents the supernatural from interacting with the natural - the name. Most definitions of supernatural make reference to ‘beyond the laws of nature’. I’m not sure how we could recognize any interaction between the two (but I’m open to suggestions).

How do you interpret beyond the laws of science? It doesn't even seem relevant. The natural doesn't determine the supernatural, but that doesn't mean that the supernatural doesn't determine the natural.

Jesus never healed a leper.

‘Prior accounts of the supernatural’? Come on.

If you say so. However, these are common examples of the supernatural in history. Even if they didn't happen, they establish the usage of the term supernatural according to English speakers and embody a conception of the supernatural which includes interaction with the natural world. Now perhaps your understanding is contrary to this, and your private dictionary has a different concept of the supernatural, in which case you're no longer communicating and you're just talking to yourself.