sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
I'm free on the 7th...at 7!I think we have to make it a date Soj. :yes:
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I'm free on the 7th...at 7!I think we have to make it a date Soj. :yes:
I found myself thinking the same thing. I know Michel and I have both stated that we don't believe in the "supernatural" per se and view it as something that is perfectly natural. What dawned on my pea brain was it doesn't matter how I personally look at it, if I start talking about different aspects of my experience, that IS exactly how people will likely interpret what I am saying. "Ohhh, he's one of those noodnicks!"lunamoth said:Yes, I see a lot of overlap between the second and third categories.
Well, if supernatural is something More than can (ever) be objectively measured, I also accept the supernatural. I think the God of the gaps is a rather bankrupt idea, but the idea that there is Something More...that I can get into.YmirGF said:I found myself thinking the same thing. I know Michel and I have both stated that we don't believe in the "supernatural" per se and view it as something that is perfectly natural. What dawned on my pea brain was it doesn't matter how I personally look at it, if I start talking about different aspects of my experience, that IS exactly how people will likely interpret what I am saying. "Ohhh, he's one of those noodnicks!"
*sigh*
Mind you, I always did think that Casper, the friendly ghost, was a pretty cool guy.
Haha I didn't even notice that.Moon Woman said:Well I see I voted wrong. I would have voted Supernatural experience, but it said superNATIONAL so was confused and went with personal/psychological which really is not the same thing.
While I too believe that is true, it's not the question that was asked in the poll.Buttercup said:To me, there is no objective evidence as to the existence of deity. It all boils down to personal belief.
I understood that but it's still not how I chose my religion when I had one. The idea of objectivity didn't even enter my mind at the time.....It was more, which story I liked best and how the whole thing worked. Christianity fit the bill for me. I hope that answer helps the author of the OP more.Willamena said:While I too believe that is true, it's not the question that was asked in the poll.
The question asked was "most objective," which offers an out that allows you to compare the options presented and choose one.
Okay, I'm being pedantic again. Will stop.
Radio Frequency X said:Of these three, which do you feel offers the most objective evidence for the existence of divinity, and which of these three have played the largest role in your own religious experience.
May I ask how this is evidence for deity? Remember that prior to the middle ages humans were positive the earth was flat. Did the fact that millions of humans believed that to be true make it true?comprehend said:I should have voted none of the above. I think the best objective evidence is easily that so many people and societies around the world and throughout recorded history have believed that divinity exists.
I don't think that's a fair comparison. The issue is the existence of God, not the character of God. The flat earth issue already assumes the existence of the earth...it merely claims a knowledge of earth's characteristics.Buttercup said:May I ask how this is evidence for deity? Remember that prior to the middle ages humans were positive the earth was flat. Did the fact that millions of humans believed that to be true make it true?
I agree. While I still don't think that objective evidence is at all in play in religious belief, the best objective evidence would have to be socio/cultural experience.comprehend said:I should have voted none of the above. I think the best objective evidence is easily that so many people and societies around the world and throughout recorded history have believed that divinity exists. While I do not think this is the best personal evidence, if you are looking for outwardly verifiable recordable measurable evidence that a divine something exists, I think it must be that belief in one has been so universal.
Buttercup said:May I ask how this is evidence for deity? Remember that prior to the middle ages humans were positive the earth was flat. Did the fact that millions of humans believed that to be true make it true?
I can say the same thing about UFO's though. Certainly you can agree that the many recorded instances of alien abduction make aliens more likely to exist right?comprehend said:evidence is not proof, evidence makes a thing more or less likely to be true. Certainly you would agree that the long history of belief in diety along with its thousands of recorded instances of divine interaction would tend to make the existance of a God more likely.
Buttercup said:I can say the same thing about UFO's though. Certainly you can agree that the many recorded instances of alien abduction make aliens more likely to exist right?
It will come as no surprise Rhonda, but I wholeheartedly agree. This is largely why I tell people that I will just hold out until my vision of god tells me that sin and evil exist. So far I haven't seen any direct evidence myself.Buttercup said:But, still the problem for me is that these divince interactions didn't happen to ME. Why should I have to base MY beliefs and MY salvation on what other's see? How is that fair? Why should I believe what someone saw 1,000 years ago? Or 2,000 years ago? I didn't even know them nor could know them. How do I know they weren't crazy like David Koresh?
Buttercup said:I can say the same thing about UFO's though. Certainly you can agree that the many recorded instances of alien abduction make aliens more likely to exist right?
But, still the problem for me is that these divine interactions didn't happen to ME. Why should I have to base MY beliefs and MY salvation on what other's see? How is that fair? Why should I believe what someone saw 1,000 years ago? Or 2,000 years ago? I didn't even know them nor could know them. How do I know they weren't crazy like David Koresh?
No, I'm not being defensive....merely questioning.Moon Woman said:Why should you? You sound defensive here, maybe just my imagination though.
If you believe in a God that has a book to go along with him you ARE told what to believe....with threats issued if you don't believe in that particular book. Has God visited you personally? If not, and you ascribe to a religion, you are taking the word/s of those that went before you.No one expects you to, least of all God (who created your magnificent rational brain and gave you a thirst for truth and curiosity about your universe).
What do you mean lack of interest? Anyone who is a member of this forum is curious about God, religion or the hereafter. Some people have merely figured out their path or worry about the here and now because that's known. The hereafter is all speculation.It's some people's lack of interest or curiosity that I can't understand. Some people seem not to even care what happens when they die, or why people exist, or anything which to me is very weird. But that's just me.