How much proof is enough?

[onlookerofmayhem]

15 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

it is about whether you have the capacity to accept, in faith, that a god exists.

Why should I accept anything on Faith? 

Is there a position I could not accept on Faith alone?

16 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

You assume belief is illogical, because you have no evidences upon which to believe

Belief can be both logical and illogical. 

"I believe because I have sufficient reasons to." - logical

This still may not make a position objectively true due to strength or weakness of "sufficient reasons."

"I believe because I faith it's the truth." - illogical

Belief with Faith alone is illogical. 

To me faith is employed when there is not sufficient evidence/reasoning to accept a position.

You claim you have met God/a god and that is your proof. I have not, that I'm aware of. So I cannot take it on faith that god exists.

For the record, because it's kind of fuzzy to me, what is your definition of god? What attributes does it have? Omnipotence? Etc?

 

[Habitat]

1 minute ago, hereticspl said:

Easy to say when your the 95 percent buddy. You can tell that to the kids who were raped by cardinal Pell. It's ok because you were just a minority. You try being something other than a Christian in this country see how free you feel. 

I get that you are on the lookout for anything that can bad-mouth religions, but again, your concern is for yourself.

[SHaYap]

On 3/27/2019 at 7:10 AM, Mr Walker said:

Actually the grammar was perfect; the spelling a result of typing, rather than poor spelling, but moving on.

Perfect ?

As perfect only as for someone with dubious claims to a higher education of your level I guess ...

~

On 3/27/2019 at 7:10 AM, Mr Walker said:

Of course you disbelieve such reports (i admit I tend to believe them due to what i know about what is possible with  modern science and the nature of the Chinese govt)

I included confirmation from the govt  and that the scientist was being punished 

This tends to the argument that the research  and experimentation was real (and probably sanctioned by the govt) but was denied when the publicity turned unfavourable

There are laws all over the world against this type of medicine which are needed only BECAUSE it i quite scientifically possible. 

Again your claims to some higher level of intelligence failed you, the so called 'scientist' was reprimanded because he broke that cardinal rule pertaining to all things science and research, 'proof' , verifiable and demonstrably true as fact.

~

[Piney]

13 minutes ago, Habitat said:

That is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. ChrLzs is battling to convince himself there is no baby in the bathwater, I know he's wrong. The advertising industry basically tells people what they want to hear, some people must want to hear about "woo", if they did not, there would be no market, but like general advertising blurb, it ain't necessarily false.

My brother rabidly hates religion. He's a pediatrician who did time in the trenches with poor Indian children and in really bad places.  He's a director of a clinic that deals with the terminally ill and severely handicap. He hates it when people give credit to God or Jesus for his work and hates them both. He hates Shamanism

 Everybody has reasons for their beliefs. His is because he was surround by children who were in constant pain or dying. I give him this. 

 

[hereticspl]

17 minutes ago, Habitat said:

I get that you are on the lookout for anything that can bad-mouth religions, but again, your concern is for yourself.

I am a straight white Male in a white Male dominated society. Your religion poses no threat to me at all. But still I'm still willing to risk ridicule and hate to stand up for people who are under threat. I could keep my mouth shut and just be a sheep like the rest of them but I dont. Why do you think that is?

[Habitat]

1 minute ago, Piney said:

My brother rabidly hates religion. He's a pediatrician who did time in the trenches with poor Indian children and in really bad places.  He's a director of a clinic that deals with the terminally ill and severely handicap. He hates it when people give credit to God or Jesus for his work and hates them both. He hates Shamanism

 Everybody has reasons for their beliefs. His is because he was surround by children who were in constant pain or dying. I give him this. 

 

There is a genre of people who expect a benefit to be conferred on them for "believing", and if they see those they care about being seemingly denied that benefit, they stop believing. That has everything to do with human motivations and thinking, not so much any God.

[Habitat]

7 minutes ago, hereticspl said:

I am a straight white Male in a white Male dominated society. Your religion poses no threat to me at all. But still I'm still willing to risk ridicule and hate to stand up for people who are under threat. I could keep my mouth shut and just be a sheep like the rest of them but I dont. Why do you think that is?

I'd say you have a history of being indoctrinated with some religious dogma. You do understand that your rejection of that, does not have any bearing on there being a God or not ?

[Piney]

2 minutes ago, Habitat said:

There is a genre of people who expect a benefit to be conferred on them for "believing", and if they see those they care about being seemingly denied that benefit, they stop believing. That has everything to do with human motivations and thinking, not so much any God.

No, he was raised Non-Theistic Quaker. Like me. Basically a Deist with a religious affiliation. 

The difference is he had no desire to have anything to do with our Traditions. Just help our people. He'd say "Well, I'm just a quarter breed".

We don't share the same father. His was a non-traditionalist who was embarrassed to be half Indian.   

[hereticspl]

13 minutes ago, Habitat said:

I'd say you have a history of being indoctrinated with some religious dogma. You do understand that your rejection of that, does not have any bearing on there being a God or not ?

My rejection of dogma despite what's convenient is a testament to the fact I'm willing to do what is right even when it's not easy. Do you understand your trying to dodge my question?

[psyche101]

19 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Is it instantaneous across distance?  if it is, then my points apply 

No they don't. Try reading the examples again and comprehending them this time. 

Quote

I spent several days getting a full psychiatric assessment the first time something weird happened to me. The same as i get a full physical check up when anything physically weird happens 
The results were clear and  agreed upon 

The experiences I had were real but inexplicable  Of the three peole involved one was anatehist one a believer and one unknown  

it was not matter of believing what i said (for them)  but whether I could demonstrate a rational approach,  understanding of  and  the process around, WHAT happened 

For such an extensive evaluation, it strikes me they realised the experiences could not be real. 

Quote

I talked through with them my own  use of reality checkers my past history, and i did a number of "tests".   All showed i was grounded in reality had no issues of either a physiological or psychological   nature 

I had a very high and unusual self awareness and knowledge of my mind my environment and the processes of perception observation etc   i had already done most of my psychology curse and so could speak with them in a professional language. i also was practicing Cognitive behaviour therapy as a constructive psychological form of empowerment and had been doing so fr over a decade  

There was nothing at all to indicate i was hallucinating, deluded, or mistaken in my perceptions 

The y may not have agreed with my  interpretations but they accepted the events as being real 

I have said I don't know if you are lying or deluded. If the latter, then you could well believe that the delusions are real. 

Just what did they agree on? 

Quote

They said the y encounter such things quite often 

That sounds like delusion then, doesn't it. 

Quote

Unlike yourself even the atheist did not allow her personal disbelief to cause her to think i MUST be in error She probably saw it in non religious terms and i was also able to do that.  

I can't see her accepting your claims at face value either. 

 

So what was the point in all that talk about yourself? It changes nothing. Your claims aren't in the least bit believable. Not even Hab takes your claims at face value. 

[psyche101]

4 hours ago, Will Due said:

Could it be as simple as that? 

Yep. 

4 hours ago, Will Due said:

That all of it, is just a matter of want?

Yep. 

4 hours ago, Will Due said:

That if you really want evidence (or proof for that matter) all you need to do is to decide that it's something you want?

You do exactly that. You have provided countless examples. 

4 hours ago, Will Due said:

When a person desires something that's in accordance with God's will (like the desire to find him most certainly is) then what one who is true desires and God wills IS.

Its just a want too. 

[psyche101]

3 hours ago, Habitat said:

I doubt that, more than somewhat. It may be true in private conversations, though. I don't come from a position of certitude based on faith, but direct observation. However, my case is more to flesh out why people are defensive about arguing a negative so strongly. I don't argue that lucky horseshoes aren't lucky, because I am satisfied they are not. But it is obvious that for many here, something personal hinges on quashing "woo".

You really don't see your own aggressive approach as contributing to the attention you get? 

You always claim to know that there's an afterlife. Why can't people who understand the sciences better than you 'know' that your evaluations are misguided and wrong? 

[Habitat]

1 hour ago, hereticspl said:

My rejection of dogma despite what's convenient is a testament to the fact I'm willing to do what is right even when it's not easy. Do you understand your trying to dodge my question?

You need to better explain.

[Habitat]

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

Why can't people who understand the sciences better than you 'know' that your evaluations are misguided and wrong? 

No, my evaluations are not misguided or wrong, but some are very invested in the idea that they be so !

[ChrLzs]

1 minute ago, Habitat said:

No, my evaluations are not misguided or wrong

Oh yes they absolutely are.  See how easy it is to wave your arms around?

 

1 minute ago, Habitat said:

but some are very invested in the idea that they be so !

If only you were invested in simply posting the best proof you have... or is it your very own story that is the best?

[hereticspl]

10 minutes ago, Habitat said:

You need to better explain.

No i do not

[Mr Walker]

5 hours ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

@Jodie.Lynne

Y'all just wanna sin!

But seriously, @Will Due, how do you explain people that believed in god for years/decades and gave up their faith when they realized they had no good reason to have said faith? Why would God be so convincing to some and yet completely hidden to others? Are you saying that people who don't believe in god are self-deluding themselves?

If the first commandment is about not having any other gods, why do people on earth believe in thousands of different gods instead of the one "true god"? Why isn't god mad about this? It's the first rule he gave!

Some people see proof of god everywhere and some see none. Why the ambiguity? 

Not saying you, or anyone for that matter, should have an answer to those questions. Just me throwing them out there.

As Jodie has explained in one way or another, if God cares if we believe in him, there should be incontrovertible, definitive and ample reason to do so. There simply is not.

Matt Dillahunty is a great example. He spent years searching for god, thought he had found him and ultimately gave up his faith. He now is one of the most ardent atheists in the world. A quote from him :

"I was raised in a loving, Southern Baptist home and was a fundamentalist Christian for over 20 years. After 8 years in the Navy and several years in the hi-tech game, I set out to re-affirm my faith with designs on attending seminary and continuing with a life in the ministry. What began as an attempt to bolster my faith became a continuing investigation into more topics than I ever suspected I'd enjoy.

After the first couple of years, reason forced me to acknowledge that my faith had not only been weakened by my studies - it had been utterly destroyed. The thoughts, writings and wisdom of people like; Robert Ingersoll, Voltaire, Dan Barker, Richard Dawkins, Farrell Till and many others, helped free my mind from the shackles of religion without a single moment of despair. I continue to study philosophy, religion, science, history and the many other topics which have helped me to understand reality and enjoy my life.

Having spent the majority of my life compartmentalizing my religious beliefs to keep them safe from skepticism, it's thrilling to leave the critical, investigative, hungry portion of my brain turned "on". While my own pursuit of knowledge is a powerful driving force in my life, I'd also like to prevent others from wasting another day on irrational beliefs. Education is the key ...and if my work manages to educate even one person, I'm satisfied."

 

First every mind is different and thus every mind will see and perceive a god in a different way just as we all see a dog or a woman differently

Every  mind has different psychological needs and thus constructs concepts which best meet those needs

You and Jodie miss one critical logical point 
if a god wants us to believe in it then it CANNOT reveal itself.

Once it does, not only is disbelief impossible but belief is also  impossibly

  It is possible a god wants us to believe via faith ie this is a requirement for a relationship with it . 

Or it is possible our mind uses faith to build a god construct   

In either case, KNOWING destroys our abilty to chose to believe, using faith 

FAITH is the driver and motivator of believers.

Knowledge doesn't work any where as well. 

 

[Mr Walker]

3 hours ago, Piney said:

Did you take a poll or did SpaceGod give you a list? 

Took a poll, but also researched world wide polls. 

eg world wide about 90% of humans believe in gods but only about 40 or 50% claim a physical interaction (such as a miracle) with one

Go out and talk to any group of people you do not normally associate with. You will find a similar spread 

Because we always have more people "like us" as associates friends and family,  it doesn't work as accurately if you just use friends, associates etc,  

[+Sherapy]

6 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

First every mind is different and thus every mind will see and perceive a god in a different way just as we all see a dog or a woman differently

Every  mind has different psychological needs and thus constructs concepts which best meet those needs

You and Jodie miss one critical logical point 
if a god wants us to believe in it then it CANNOT reveal itself.

Once it does, not only is disbelief impossible but belief is also  impossibly

  It is possible a god wants us to believe via faith ie this is a requirement for a relationship with it . 

Or it is possible our mind uses faith to build a god construct   

In either case, KNOWING destroys our abilty to chose to believe, using faith 

FAITH is the driver and motivator of believers.

Knowledge doesn't work any where as well. 

 

This doesn’t make any sense. 

Clearly you have built your own god construct in your head. 

How do we know this because you cannot evidence your god claims.

A claim is only as viable as the evidence it has to support it. 

 

[+Sherapy]

5 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Took a poll, but also researched world wide polls. 

eg world wide about 90% of humans believe in gods but only about 40 or 50% claim a physical interaction (such as a miracle) with one

Go out and talk to any group of people you do not normally associate with. You will find a similar spread 

Because we always have more people "like us" as associates friends and family,  it doesn't work as accurately if you just use friends, associates etc,  

So, you believe in god cuz lots of people do?

 

[Mr Walker]

3 hours ago, Piney said:

In all seriousness. This is the complete opposite of what a Shaman of my caliber would tell somebody.

  This is something that would be said by a sociopath trying to start a cult

As above

About 90% of modern humans believe in gods about 30-40% claim direct contact with them or their agents like angels  (based on world wide surveys and interveies) 

You are correct A shaman  could make a direct connection and might even be able to train others to do so 

BUT for most westerners, the y will never meet a shaman 

In your circle, shamans are a part of family and friends, but this is rare.

So, while YOU see many people making direct connections, this is less common among most of us 

[Mr Walker]

Just now, Sherapy said:

So, you believe in god cuz lots of people do?

 

Having difficulty with reading comprehension, again, Sherapy  Your comment has NO conection to anything i said 

[+Sherapy]

2 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Having difficulty with reading comprehension, again, Sherapy  Your comment has NO conection to anything i said 

What are you claiming then?

[Habitat]

32 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Oh yes they absolutely are.  See how easy it is to wave your arms around?

 

If only you were invested in simply posting the best proof you have... or is it your very own story that is the best?

Don't keep saying silly things, you guess (wrongly, as it turns out) that I am either deluded or lying. Is there a limit per customer with guesses, I wonder ? As for proof, it is never available except to the witness(es). Occasionally people do witness and refuse to believe their own senses. I tell you earnestly, the spook knew that be the case, before it happened. It is a water-tight system, laugh as much as you like.

[Mr Walker]

5 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

This doesn’t make any sense. 

Clearly you have built your own god construct in your head. 

How do we know this because you cannot evidence your god claims.

A claim is only as viable as the evidence it has to support it. 

 

I have interpreted the entity i connect tom in my mind, i also do this for my wife and our dogs. i even do it with  you.You ca call this a god construct if oyu like it is like my wife construct and dog constructs.

The fact i cant evidence to you my experiences does not make them untrue or unreal.

Thus it does NOT mean that this entity only exists in my mind as a construct 

You know this

A claim is true or false 

Evidences are only relevant if one desires to prove ones experience's were real, to another 

I have no such desire but i can prove, using evidences, that the y were real, to myself