You say that there is a god...

[Orbit]

@Sgt. Pepper,

I see you thumbed up @Orbit's post accusing me of being arrogant. Did you read the quote from @It Aint Necessarily So where he, himself said he misunderstood his own experience? See below:

You are ignoring the meaning of his post.

 

[dybmh]

You are ignoring the meaning of his post.

He meant that he "misunderstood his own experience. it was a product of his mind." I said: "If you have a history of misunderstanding yourself and your own experiences"

What did I ignore?

@Sgt. Pepper , you're still thumbing up stuff. What did I ignore?

 

[nPeace]

It's pretty arrogant of you to tell someone that their experience of their own experience is wrong.

Where did he do that?

 

[nPeace]

@Sgt. Pepper,

I see you thumbed up @Orbit's post accusing me of being arrogant. Did you read the quote from @It Aint Necessarily So where he, himself, said he misunderstood his own experience? I didn't say it. HE said it. See below:

Pay it no mind. What you say hardly matter. Clapping atheists on the back is just a tactic.
In the army, the enemy tries their best tactics to demoralize the opposition. It happens here all the time. The worst and most meaningless comments get a Like, and Winner.

 

[nPeace]

You are ignoring the meaning of his post.

I think the response hit so hard, it shook his companions. He didn't ignore anything. His arrow was on target. Seems it struck a few nerves too.

 

[Aupmanyav]

How does that help me understand the answer to my question?

I wrote: "Evidence points to there being just one thing at the time of 'inflation', and that was 'physical energy'."
If "physical energy" was the only thing existing and resulted in whatever exists today, then there is no need to postulate the existence of any God.

 

[Aupmanyav]

It's pretty arrogant of you to tell someone that their experience of their own experience is wrong.

I think the response hit so hard, it shook his companions. He didn't ignore anything. His arrow was on target. Seems it struck a few nerves too.

It is correct only for themselves. Later, they may change what they think of the experience as in case of @It Aint Necessarily So. Nothing bars them from doing so. I do not see any problem in this. I too changed my views about things. We do it all the time. "Should I vote for Biden or Trump?" "Coca Cola or Pepsi?" Etc.

 

[lukethethird]

LOL. Wow. OK. Please tell the how an absolutely infinite God created a universe of material multiplicty.

I have no idea how since claims never come with coherent and unambiguous explanations, religious claims are hollow, rendering them void of any real meaning. There are no facts concerning Gods, if there were you or anyone else would have presented them by now.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Correct. The falsehood and absence of evidence in religion gave rise to atheism.

Yeah, but a general skeptic you are not. In effect you are a believer in evidence.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I have no idea how since claims never come with coherent and unambiguous explanations, religious claims are hollow, rendering them void of any real meaning. There are no facts concerning Gods, if there were you or anyone else would have presented them by now.

Well, there is nothing real absent your belief in real. And meaning is in your head, like the rest of us.

 

[lukethethird]

Well, there is nothing real absent your belief in real. And meaning is in your head, like the rest of us.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what what you are saying.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yeah, but a general skeptic you are not. In effect you are a believer in evidence.

True. I do not subscribe to solipsism.
Yeah, Mikkel is not always easy to understand.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I'm sorry, I don't understand what what you are saying.

E.g. point to the screen in front of you and descibe it. Now point to real in front of you and descibe it. You can't as real is an abstract concept in your mind just like God.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

True. I do not subscribe to solipsism.
Yeah, Mikkel is not always easy to understand.

Well, I am not a metaphysical solipsist. Epistemological and methodological, yeah sort off when we play evidence.

 

[TLK Valentine]

So long as we agree that those question that cannot be answered scientifically, are answered philosophically... in science.

Science and philosophy working together. Methodological naturalism provides the justification for using the scientific method.
The consistent results generated from the scientific method support the belief in methodological naturalism.

What do you understand religion to be?

An interactive mythological paradigm where humans can interact with and potentially influence the supernatural through a combination of proper behavior and proper worship.

It is. Yes.

Isn't it always... and how does one spot a "True" Christian?

Everything has a place in this vast universe. We just need to recognize where each fits.

Many people already do.

 

[lukethethird]

E.g. point to the screen in front of you and descibe it. Now point to real in front of you and descibe it. You can't as real is an abstract concept in your mind just like God.

Solipsism is not my thing.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Solipsism is not my thing.

Neither for me. I have faith that the universe is real, orderly and knowable. What is your faith? Or do you have evvidence/proof?

 

[lukethethird]

Neither for me. I have faith that the universe is real, orderly and knowable. What is your faith? Or do you have evvidence/proof?

My faith is the everyday kind of faith, trust that the car will start, that sort of thing.

 

[Muffled]

What you choose to think is true.

Do you think you are infallible ?

I believe I have the infallible God in me.

 

[lukethethird]

I believe I have the infallible God in me.

Is that what makes you so smart?