What evidence would be required for you to abandon your religious belief

[Milton Platt]

What are infallible are "the thoughts" of the higher mind.

"Jesus" operates within you and is not a physical literal guy.

Supporting evidence???

 

[Milton Platt]

So it is true what they say, the truth(Jesus) is what sets one free.

The truth will set one free. Truth: that which IS, in accordance with what is fact and reality.

And when the truth(Jesus) is within ones mind and heart, Jesus(the truth) is IN YOU.

Then there is no outward deity or outward religion necessary, as the truth and it's potential is found hidden within ones heart and mind. Inside of their body. The truth is pierced within ones mind and heart.

Your life was totally changed by the force active within your body. Through truth and a way of living... Not an external deity.

How can you support the assertion that what you say is "true"? If you have evidence that will substantiate your statements, I would like to know where to find it. If you are going on faith, rather than evidence, then I get that concept. I prefer evidence.
Your statement about Jesus is within you is nonsensical to others. That being said, I am not trying to start a debate here, they are all over this message board.

 

[Milton Platt]

I would say the outward "Christian" would have to reconstruct/rebuild their own temple(mind) and become aware that their physical body made of blood and flesh is the church/house of "God" rather than focusing on man's created temple buildings as the house of "God" which instills doctrine/dogma that poisons the cisterns in their brains through fear and control. That would take great courage and faith that there is another side that doesn't involve so much divide. Humbling oneself and ridding of what one thinks they know or have been conditioned to believe. It's like a black hole, some have reached the point of no return and some can escape and be set free. But they have to escape themselves as their own worst enemy. Too many are trying to sell their religion and doctrine/dogma as opposed to helping others become more aware of themselves, more aware of truth, more awareness for a peaceful earth and peaceful mind. The internal values of religion have been made more about external religion, and all sorts of deities. Doing things for rewards, money, a name for themselves, to impress and please others all in vain. Everyone has a label and sect, why can't everyone just be a human being? Ironically, one must do what the bible tells them to do, overcome and defeat their animal mind and animal nature(the ego mind.) But the beast is always external with doctrine, lacking self-realization that the beast is them and internal. Using metaphysical and internal(spiritual) text by using the mind to take it literally, historically, and fundamentally.

sounds like you are just constructing another religion.

 

[Milton Platt]

What are infallible are "the thoughts" of the higher mind.

"Jesus" operates within you and is not a physical literal guy.

where can the higher mind be found and how can we test it?

 

[Milton Platt]

Yes. A person should be thankful for the truth, and for the life god has given to us.

Thanks

Every religion has it's own "truths", many of which conflict with each other.

 

[Lyndon]

What do you care?? You're an atheist, I suggest you leave his religion to him and worry about yourself.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Since I am an atheist Hindu, appearance of the any Sky-daddy (we have many and Mothers too) before me is the only reason which can force me to change my views.

 

[Milton Platt]

What do you care?? You're an atheist, I suggest you leave his religion to him and worry about yourself.

It's my thread and my question.

 

[Riverwolf]

False equals not true

I don't think you understand my question.

What does it mean for a religion to be "true" or "not true"?

 

[dust1n]

What evidence would you need to be personally convinced that your religion was false?

I suspect there would be a possible evidence, if evidence were ever a consideration in religious belief.

 

[Unification]

where can the higher mind be found and how can we test it?

You have a brain and a mind; they are inside of you, not external to you. You can test your own self out.

 

[Unification]

How can you support the assertion that what you say is "true"? If you have evidence that will substantiate your statements, I would like to know where to find it. If you are going on faith, rather than evidence, then I get that concept. I prefer evidence.
Your statement about Jesus is within you is nonsensical to others. That being said, I am not trying to start a debate here, they are all over this message board.

May I suggest that the topic of this thread suggests to the potential to have faith that there is a different or alternative approach. All change happens by neurological restructuring. All reasoning occurs by planting mind seeds(mind children) into others minds. The change and desire to seek such first requires a change in mind. Faith within oneself. Faith in self to change. Faith that there is a better way to know an alternative. What one's mind can't see or is aware of now, what it will take to change ones religious belief is faith that 1) there is a way to know, and 2) there is alternative to ones already held "religious" belief. The evidence comes itself, and the only evidence to anyone exists inside of someone's brain and mind, not outside of them.

 

[Milton Platt]

I don't think you understand my question.

What does it mean for a religion to be "true" or "not true"?

You are correct, I do not understand your question. Would you prefer I said correct or incorrect?

You have a brain and a mind; they are inside of you, not external to you. You can test your own self out.

So you may have to explain to me how multiple minds exist within one brain and detail the scientific methodology whereby I may test myself. How do I set up a control with a sampling of 1?

 

[Milton Platt]

I suspect there would be a possible evidence, if evidence were ever a consideration in religious belief.

Certainly so. The reason I started this thread was to find out what evidence a religious person would accept since scientific evidence is usuall rejected when it does not support what they wish to be true. I noticed that so far, I have received two ad hominem attack and no attempt at answering my question. Sorta says it all.

 

[Unification]

You are correct, I do not understand your question. Would you prefer I said correct or incorrect?


So you may have to explain to me how multiple minds exist within one brain and detail the scientific methodology whereby I may test myself. How do I set up a control with a sampling of 1?

Sounds like you have already set up something that controls you with a sampling of 1 by giving up your freedom to a systematic box of thinking. Learn how to expand. Get to know the knower a bit better. How do you? Set up a control with a sampling of 1 that removes that control with a sampling of 1 and increase the ram in your brain.

What evidence would it take to abandon your own religious belief?

 

[Lyndon]

It's my thread and my question.

Sorry but people around here don't own threads, they start a thread and then participate or not.

 

[Aupmanyav]

What does it mean for a religion to be "true" or "not true"?

Doing righteous deeds and refraining from evil deeds being common to all religions (being an appropriation of social rules), I will judge a religion by whether it goes with science or contradicts it. If it contradicts science, then it is false/not true.

 

[Lyndon]

Certainly so. The reason I started this thread was to find out what evidence a religious person would accept since scientific evidence is usuall rejected when it does not support what they wish to be true. I noticed that so far, I have received two ad hominem attack and no attempt at answering my question. Sorta says it all.

Largely because you have been attacking beliefs that disagree with yours rather than just asking your question and appreciating the answers, in other words your whole OP question is just a set up to have an excuse to attack other people's beliefs, that's called proselytizing and is against forum rules.

 

[Unification]

Largely because you have been attacking beliefs that disagree with yours rather than just asking your question and appreciating the answers, in other words your whole OP question is just a set up to have an excuse to attack other people's beliefs, that's called proselytizing and is against forum rules.

Yes, when ones intent is clear... It becomes obvious that they have faulty programming, and I don't even think they know what they do because they don't know themselves.

 

[Riverwolf]

You are correct, I do not understand your question. Would you prefer I said correct or incorrect?

That doesn't change the overall concept you're communicating, and so would get us nowhere.

Perhaps you could describe what it would look like if a religion were true?

Doing righteous deeds and refraining from evil deeds being common to all religions (being an appropriation of social rules), I will judge a religion by whether it goes with science or contradicts it. If it contradicts science, then it is false/not true.

I'm not sure that's a good reason to broadly apply the terms "true/false" to a religion. You could apply them to specific claims made by religious people that contradict the scientific consensus, but religions as larger wholes involve a lot more than just claims about the physical world. Many religions don't even bother with such claims, instead focusing on other aspects.

The reason this is confusing me is because... well, it's like asking if fandoms are false. It makes no sense.