Why do you believe?

[jmn]

But I never said I was providing any.
You did that since you had the compulsive desire to respond to this post and try to refute a theist. Thus proving your militant desires .
Atheism can lead to extreme violence no different then theism. Or have you not forgot about communism and the effects of Stalin, Mao, Pol-pot and Kim-il Sung and their desire to stamp out religion and create secular anthropolotry.
Atheism is fine but like all things it will have a couple of bad eggs and bad eggs with no sense of restriction is all the more worse. Religious extremist never demand worship, unguided strife and boundaryless deeds.

These are excessively blind and outlandish statements.

What i was proposing is backed by evidence, but what your saying is simply fallacious.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

These are excessively blind and outlandish statements.

What i was proposing is backed by evidence, but what your saying is simply fallacious.

That was a little rude. We can only tell you why we believe. We're not telling you to believe.

 

[jmn]

The only thing evident here is that you are making assumptions about others that you cannot possibly have any real knowledge about.

Knowing the individual is going to give me confirmation.

 

[jmn]

There is something strangely wrong about denying another person's experience. It reminds me of the odd parent who tells their child "You're not sad," when the kid is bawling their head off.

I am certainly not denying anyone's experience. I am only giving my logical explanation.

 

[Draka]

Knowing the individual is going to give me confirmation.

And that is ridiculously egotistical and presumptuous to think as well. You think if you know the person it will only prove you right? What if you were proven wrong? What then?

 

[Draka]

I am certainly not denying anyone's experience. I am only giving my logical explanation.

What you are denying is their intellectual capability to reason their experiences out for themselves. By doing so you are implying them deficient in some mental capacity. What you are doing is giving ONE possible explanation for having an experience one may qualify as "spiritual". You have not, however, given the only one. You are not leaving open the possibility that a spiritual experience is exactly what it is, simply because, it plainly appears, you cannot accept that possibility yourself.

 

[jmn]

Can I ask what you mean by "Rapid brain fluctuations?"

A Sometimes temporary irregularity in brain chemistry.

And can I ask why you would ask others to elaborate on what they mean by "experiences," then come back with what really sounds like a dismissing judgment on the first description of "experiences" that you got in response to your request?

Would like to hear first hand from individuals here. I have listened to others in the past.

 

[jmn]

What if you were proven wrong? What then?

If you could prove anything, than you would have already done it by now.

We all would know about it.

 

[jmn]

You are not leaving open the possibility that a spiritual experience is exactly what it is,

I am, but it will take some evidence.

 

[Draka]

If you could prove anything, than you would have already done it by now.

We all would know about it.

Not me, not right now, (as if that sort of thing can be proven over the internet :areyoucra ) I mean in person with someone having an experience. If you could find that they were not having any hallucinations or delusions or the like. If what they were experiencing was real, that is, not some trick of their mind. If you even experienced it along with them for yourself. If you found yourself wrong, what then?

 

[Draka]

I am, but it will take some evidence.

Yet to those who say they've received their evidence you basically say "no you haven't, you imagined it, neener neener". So why don't I believe you?

 

[jmn]

If what they were experiencing was real

What do you mean by real?

 

[ChristineES]

If you could prove anything, than you would have already done it by now.

We all would know about it.

Faith in God is just that: Faith. It has and never has had anything to do with proof. If there was any scientific proof, then everyone would know and there would be no faith.
What we are trying to say is that we already believe, we need no proof for us or we have our own proof- which we could not use to prove to anyone else. And nothing I could do could prove it to you- I would think.

 

[Draka]

What do you mean by real?

As in experiencing something originating outside of this physical world; supernatural, paranormal, "spiritual".

 

[jmn]

As in experiencing something originating outside of this physical world; supernatural, paranormal, "spiritual".

By definition what your saying is unreal.

 

[Draka]

By definition what your saying is unreal.

How do you know that? Their experience of it wouldn't be imaginary if it wasn't hallucinatory or delusion or anything else triggered by some brain fault. So their experience of it would be a real experience.

 

[jmn]

How do you know that? Their experience of it wouldn't be imaginary if it wasn't hallucinatory or delusion or anything else triggered by some brain fault. So their experience of it would be a real experience.

I only use what is reasonable, logical, and understood fact.

 

[Vinayaka]

jm, do you believe in pheromones?

 

[jmn]

jm, do you believe in pheromones?

Yes, but they seem to have there limits

 

[Vinayaka]

Yes, but they seem to have there limits

How so?