You say that there is a god...

[Muffled]

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

Having had car problems this week I believe your faith is misplaced. I once thought God being with me meant He would give me anything I wanted but found that was a misplaced faith as well.

 

[Muffled]

Is that what makes you so smart?

I believe it helps a great deal to have an intelligence so far above mine available.

 

[lukethethird]

Having had car problems this week I believe your faith is misplaced. I once thought God being with me meant He would give me anything I wanted but found that was a misplaced faith as well.

When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me.

Emo Philips

 

[Audie]

I believe I have the infallible God in me.

As I've noted with others, it's not God you
believe in, its yourself.

 

[dybmh]

When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me.

Emo Philips

That's the criminal mindset. Is that what you were taught to do as a Christian? Is that what's in your Bible?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

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

So you have evidence or proof of what the universe is as such?

 

[lukethethird]

I believe it helps a great deal to have an intelligence so far above mine available.

So a belief in an all knowing God makes you smart.

 

[lukethethird]

So you have evidence or proof of what the universe is as such?

???

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

???

You don't know if the universe is material/physical/natural or from God or what ever you think or claim to know?

 

[dybmh]

So a belief in an all knowing God makes you smart?

No, no, no.... it's having access to something/someone smarter, wiser, and more patient than any human teacher.

 

[lukethethird]

You don't know if the universe is material/physical/natural or from God or what ever you think or claim to know?

I don't know anything about any God if that is what you mean, so far all claims of God are hollow and definitions of God are incoherent and ambiguous rendering them meaningless.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I don't know anything about any God if that is what you mean, so far all claims of God are hollow and definitions of God are incoherent and ambiguous rendering them meaningless.

No, do you know what the universe is as per natural/physical/material or what ever?

 

[lukethethird]

No, do you know what the universe is as per natural/physical/material or what ever?

I have a rudimentary understanding of physics, why, is there a point to this line of questioning?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I have a rudimentary understanding of physics, why, is there a point to this line of questioning?

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.

You use a word, namely real. Thus you seem to know how something is real. Then give evidence for that and we will end at if you know what the universe is.
Real has no physical referent and belongs in philsophy as per epistemology, i.e. how to know.

 

[lukethethird]

You use a word, namely real. Thus you seem to know how something is real. Then give evidence for that and we will end at if you know what the universe is.
Real has no physical referent and belongs in philsophy as per epistemology, i.e. how to know.

Solipsism, not interested.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Don't project your experience onto others. Don't project your misunderstanding onto others.

They're making the same error I made. That's the easy part. I wouldn't expect agreement unless one had the open-mindedness to see what I saw - confirmation biases tend to filter that kind of awareness out - and the and critical thinking skills to understand its significance. That's the hard part. We have essentially the same experience and we once interpreted it the same when calling it a direct experience of God. The difference is in the interpretation of that experience - what it signifies. We no longer agree. I understand people resenting others thinking that they have erred about gods and attempting to discredit such opinions, but it remains my opinion and I'm pretty sure its correct, and nobody has refuted it.

I have further evidence that these people are only experiencing their own minds and mistaking it for a god. No two describe the same god. When one is wondering whether others are seeing something they claim to see or not, we survey them and compare their answers. Let me share the parable of the color-blind boy.

He's been told all his life that that what he sees as a kind of gray color is actually either of two colors, red or green - that he's colorblind - and he believes it, until one day he remembers all of the other collective pranks pulled on him like the Santa Claus and Tooth Fairy stories. And then there was that day snipe hunting. So, he wants to test whether people are really seeing something he can't see or not.

To do this, he buys a few dozen pairs of red socks and green socks, numbers them, and has somebody who claims to see these colors tell him whether #1 is red or green, #2 next, and so on, until he has a list of sock numbers and alleged colors. Then, he has several people who claim to see red and green identify the sock colors separately and without prior collaboration. If their answers are the same, he knows they see something not visible to him, and if the answers are all over the place, he knows he's being pranked.

Same with this. Tell me what you think you see, Mr. Theist, and I'll tell you whether you are really seeing it or not.

If you claim that someone robbed you, and pointed out the person, but cannot produce one shred of evidence of what the person robbed you of, that person does not need to pay you any mind. Case dismissed... Regardless of what you have in your mind.

Agreed. You probably think that's an apt analogy to our situation, but I don't. I said that two of us claimed to never have seen the science you claim you provided in support of your god belief when it was requested, and you said that we were incorrect, that you have provided it. Your claim was rejected, and the matter is resolved. I don't think you're a lair, but I think you're wrong and I don't believe you. You've refused to support your claim with a link. I'm pretty sure I know why. What are the logical possibilities here and their relative likelihood?

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

They're all correct that it was I who told them that, but not in those exact words. What I told them is that I don't believe that they are seeing a god, but rather, their own minds. I told them that I believe that they are interpreting their experience incorrectly. And you've seen much of my argument why. Nobody's given me a reason to think differently.

 

[nPeace]

That's the criminal mindset. Is that what you were taught to do as a Christian? Is that what's in your Bible?

Also shows total selfishness, and thinking God didn't see that.
People grow up believing God is a genie in a bottle, Or one that can be brought, or bribed.

 

[nPeace]

They're making the same error I made. That's the easy part. I wouldn't expect agreement unless one had the open-mindedness to see what I saw - confirmation biases tend to filter that kind of awareness out - and the and critical thinking skills to understand its significance. That's the hard part. We have essentially the same experience and we once interpreted it the same when calling it a direct experience of God. The difference is in the interpretation of that experience - what it signifies. We no longer agree. I understand people resenting others thinking that they have erred about gods and attempting to discredit such opinions, but it remains my opinion and I'm pretty sure its correct, and nobody has refuted it.

I have further evidence that these people are only experiencing their own minds and mistaking it for a god. No two describe the same god. When one is wondering whether others are seeing something they claim to see or not, we survey them and compare their answers. Let me share the parable of the color-blind boy.

@dybmh I guess you wasted your breath. You might as well had

Agreed. You probably think that's an apt analogy to our situation, but I don't. I said that two of us claimed to never have seen the science you claim you provided in support of your god belief when it was requested, and you said that we were incorrect, that you have provided it. Your claim was rejected, and the matter is resolved. I don't think you're a lair, but I think you're wrong and I don't believe you. You've refused to support your claim with a link. I'm pretty sure I know why. What are the logical possibilities here and their relative likelihood?

They're all correct that it was I who told them that, but not in those exact words. What I told them is that I don't believe that they are seeing a god, but rather, their own minds. I told them that I believe that they are interpreting their experience incorrectly. And you've seen much of my argument why. Nobody's given me a reason to think differently

Why are atheists always making up stuff, and twisting things from what they began with?
Please show me where I claimed I provided the science in support of a god belief.

 

[dybmh]

They're making the same error I made.

LOL. You don't know what's happening in each person's heart mind and life experiences.

That's the easy part.

Easy for an arrogant to person to assume.

I wouldn't expect agreement unless one had the open-mindedness to see what I saw

Ironic because you seem to be completely closed-minded. Double-standard.

it remains my opinion and I'm pretty sure its correct, and nobody has refuted it.

Assumming something is true, unless it's proven false is a religious mindset.

I have further evidence that these people are only experiencing their own minds and mistaking it for a god. No two describe the same god. When one is wondering whether others are seeing something they claim to see or not, we survey them and compare their answers. Let me share the parable of the color-blind boy.

Oh boy... this only works if a person claims to be literally "seeing". You said you weren't raised religious, so, perhaps it's good for you put down whatever cartoonish literal meaning to "seeing" that you're assuming is happening when a religious person uses those words in a religious context.

Same with this. Tell me what you think you see, Mr. Theist, and I'll tell you whether you are really seeing it or not.

A religious vision is like a dream. They aren't going to be identical one person to the next by defintion. Since you weren't raised religious, and seem not to have ever rec'd any real religious education, and you only had some fun trying on Christianity in the military. It's probaby good to accept your ignorance on these matters.

 

[nPeace]

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.

Just clarifying... You are saying they don't use philosophy?

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

Where did you get that idea... Is it your own?

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

Get an accurate definition of Christian first, then go to work.

Many people already do.

Yes.