Prove me wrong

[ChristineES]

Why should I care about what some other gods to say to other people? I'm only interested in what my gods say to me. But if they're pushing it on people, then there's going to be a fight.

I, personally, wouldn't waste my time fighting with someone about it. I've let people preach in my face on a few occasions, and a few times I just said I didn't want to discuss it and if they didn't stop, I just walk away.

 

[mystic64]

Argumentum ad populum.

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or most people believe it. In other words, the basic idea of the argument is: "If many believe so, it is so."

This type of argument is known by several names,[1] including appeal to the masses, appeal to belief, appeal to the majority, appeal to democracy, appeal to popularity, argument by consensus, consensus fallacy, authority of the many, and bandwagon fallacy, and in Latin as argumentum ad numerum ("appeal to the number"), and consensus gentium ("agreement of the clans"). It is also the basis of a number of social phenomena, including communal reinforcement and the bandwagon effect.

, very well said! The problem is that people in large numbers are "power" ecconomically, politically, and physically. And if "power" says that it is so, then it is so, until another greater "power" says that it is not so with the understanding that the greater "Power" may actually be in the hands of a small group of people.

You are right that it is a fallacy on one hand, but on the other hand if a large group of people say that it is so, then it can become so, thus making the numbers a threat if one dissagrees with the thoughts or direction of those numbers. There is "power" in numbers and the more followers that you have the more you have to be taken seriously even though intellectually the numbers- do not make you right.

 

[Muffled]

Let's try something.

Let's say that I tell you that I heard from the one and only true god. He gave me a list of laws and religious rites that are to be performed, and had me write everything he told me down in a book. God told me that all other religions are wrong, and have been sent to deceive people. I convince some of my friends and family that this is true, and they begin to follow me and the religion that I have created. Let's say that some of them even claim to have had some kind of experience that backs up my claim to have heard from god, such as me having performed miracles. Now, I take my religion out to the masses, and proclaim it as true, attempting to convert people to it.

Now, how can I be proven wrong? And how does this scenario differ from other "revealed" religions?

I believe if this revealed religion varies from what God tells me then I know one of us is wrong and since I have always found God to be faithful to me I would be inclined to believe it was the new revelation.

I tend also to rely on logic to an extent. For instance if someone said they found green earth then logically I could believe it because copper when it oxidizes becomes green. Obviously if a person has never encountered oxidized copper that person would have to take it on faith in the testimonies of those who have seen it.

 

[Hawkins]

Let's try something.

Let's say that I tell you that I heard from the one and only true god. He gave me a list of laws and religious rites that are to be performed, and had me write everything he told me down in a book. God told me that all other religions are wrong, and have been sent to deceive people. I convince some of my friends and family that this is true, and they begin to follow me and the religion that I have created. Let's say that some of them even claim to have had some kind of experience that backs up my claim to have heard from god, such as me having performed miracles. Now, I take my religion out to the masses, and proclaim it as true, attempting to convert people to it.

Now, how can I be proven wrong? And how does this scenario differ from other "revealed" religions?

If 10 out of 12 friends of yours are willing to die for what they said (i.e. about your miracles), then it can be treated as a credible source. Moreover, your miracles should include one that you are nailed on a cross, died and raised, whether it's your hoax or not. You need to do so and they are willing to die to testify this (i.e. your hoax).

 

[Sees]

If 10 out of 12 friends of yours are willing to die for what they said (i.e. about your miracles), then it can be treated as a credible source. Moreover, your miracles should include one that you are nailed on a cross, died and raised, whether it's your hoax or not. You need to do so and they are willing to die to testify this (i.e. your hoax).

Or that said friends have a strong belief in an afterlife that is better than this world/life which is evil/devil-ruled and they are perhaps somewhat anxious to "clock-out"

 

[Hawkins]

Or that said friends have a strong belief in an afterlife that is better than this world/life which is evil/devil-ruled and they are perhaps somewhat anxious to "clock-out"

Then you need even stronger faith than the Christian faith to believe it is so!

 

[9Westy9]

If 10 out of 12 friends of yours are willing to die for what they said (i.e. about your miracles), then it can be treated as a credible source. Moreover, your miracles should include one that you are nailed on a cross, died and raised, whether it's your hoax or not. You need to do so and they are willing to die to testify this (i.e. your hoax).

Why do the miracles need to match those of the Christian religion?

 

[Thief]

Let's try something.

Let's say that I tell you that I heard from the one and only true god. He gave me a list of laws and religious rites that are to be performed, and had me write everything he told me down in a book. God told me that all other religions are wrong, and have been sent to deceive people. I convince some of my friends and family that this is true, and they begin to follow me and the religion that I have created. Let's say that some of them even claim to have had some kind of experience that backs up my claim to have heard from god, such as me having performed miracles. Now, I take my religion out to the masses, and proclaim it as true, attempting to convert people to it.

Now, how can I be proven wrong? And how does this scenario differ from other "revealed" religions?

Just a note.....most prophets breaking into the scene.....die badly.

So...I suppose we know for sure.....when you're dead.

 

[mystic64]

Why do the miracles need to match those of the Christian religion?

I suppose that one would follow the person that performs the miracle that helps the most people. The miracle of "ascension" is no big deal because a lot of folks have done it. But the fellow that the Christians follow died for the sins of his followers first before he ascended. To my knowledge nobody has ever done that before or since. Of course Islam claims that this fellow hid in a cave and that someone else was crusified and not the one that the Christians follow. Both of the religions do agree though that the fellow that the Christians follow did ascend.

 

[NobodyYouKnow]

Let's try something.

Let's say that I tell you that I heard from the one and only true god. He gave me a list of laws and religious rites that are to be performed, and had me write everything he told me down in a book. God told me that all other religions are wrong, and have been sent to deceive people. I convince some of my friends and family that this is true, and they begin to follow me and the religion that I have created. Let's say that some of them even claim to have had some kind of experience that backs up my claim to have heard from god, such as me having performed miracles. Now, I take my religion out to the masses, and proclaim it as true, attempting to convert people to it.

Now, how can I be proven wrong? And how does this scenario differ from other "revealed" religions?

The question also is, 'can you be proven right'?

It depends on the level of expectations that you and your own have in getting the 'masses' to believe in exactly the same thing you do, and why should it matter to you or your 'religion' if they do or not?

The scenario is no different, except that other 'religions' have had more time to do it (and they cannot be proven 'wrong' either).

 

[McBell]

If 10 out of 12 friends of yours are willing to die for what they said (i.e. about your miracles), then it can be treated as a credible source. Moreover, your miracles should include one that you are nailed on a cross, died and raised, whether it's your hoax or not. You need to do so and they are willing to die to testify this (i.e. your hoax).

Um...
Actually, no it doesn't.
At least not for me.
I need much more than unsubstantiated claims in support of an unsubstantiated claim.

 

[9Westy9]

I suppose that one would follow the person that performs the miracle that helps the most people. The miracle of "ascension" is no big deal because a lot of folks have done it. But the fellow that the Christians follow died for the sins of his followers first before he ascended. To my knowledge nobody has ever done that before or since. Of course Islam claims that this fellow hid in a cave and that someone else was crusified and not the one that the Christians follow. Both of the religions do agree though that the fellow that the Christians follow did ascend.

Still, why specifically does the person have to be crucified? There are several other ways of dying, many more painful. Also he mentions 12 disciples. Dyana didn't mention how many followers he would have in this scenario. Only that they were close family members and friends.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I always thought the burden of proof was moved in position of the claimer (cutting down on people wondering about disproof, except increasing trolls doing it).

 

[Awkward Fingers]

Still, why specifically does the person have to be crucified? There are several other ways of dying, many more painful. Also he mentions 12 disciples. Dyana didn't mention how many followers he would have in this scenario. Only that they were close family members and friends.

To be fair, a good stage magician trying to copy this would probably be thankful for crucifixion...
Think how much harder immolation would be to come back from!

 

[9Westy9]

To be fair, a good stage magician trying to copy this would probably be thankful for crucifixion...
Think how much harder immolation would be to come back from!

or something that requires body parts to be removed such as a beheading

 

[mystic64]

I suppose that one would follow the person that performs the miracle that helps the most people. The miracle of "ascension" is no big deal because a lot of folks have done it. But the fellow that the Christians follow died for the sins of his followers first before he ascended. To my knowledge nobody has ever done that before or since. Of course Islam claims that this fellow hid in a cave and that someone else was crusified and not the one that the Christians follow. Both of the religions do agree though that the fellow that the Christians follow did ascend.

Still, why specifically does the person have to be crucified? There are several other ways of dying, many more painful. Also he mentions 12 disciples. Dyana didn't mention how many followers he would have in this scenario. Only that they were close family members and friends.

Sorry sir about the ineptness of my post. There does seem to be some obscure record of a few folks that died in various ways that came back to life and then ascended. But none of those folks claimed to be a human scarifice for the sins of their followers so that their followers could apprach their God sin free. I don't think that they have to die in any certain way unless they are fulfilling some kind of prophecy which the prophet that the Christians follow claimed He was doing. His death on the cross was given validity because He was supposedly fulfilling prophecy. And there are and were a lot of folks in the religion that He was from that disagree that He actually fulfilled prophecy along with a lot of folks in Islam that claim that He was not even crucified. Anyway, in my opinion I do not think it matters how a person dies if they can come back to life and then visit with their family and friends before they ascend. And things may or may not also be interesting if the person tells their family and friends what is going to happen before it happens, as the prophet that the Christians follow is recorded to have done.

 

[Muffled]

To be fair, a good stage magician trying to copy this would probably be thankful for crucifixion...
Think how much harder immolation would be to come back from!

I believe for a creator it is a piece of cake and it would be more difficult to say the body just resuscitated.