A Quantum Hologram of Christ's Resurrection?

Signal said:
I agree!

Believing something on the grounds of evidence is only as lasting as the evidence - which may be of very short duration.
Click to expand...
The strengthening can be of much greater duration. For instance. God spoke to me once very briefly and quietly - a single statement, but the strength derived from it has lasted for years.

Signal said:
Much of the evidence that theists claim to be evidence of God is actually indirect, circumstantial - a matter of interpretation.
Click to expand...
Surely. But then the same can be said for the claims of atheists.

Signal said:
I'm calling you a No True Scotsman on this one, for the time being.
Click to expand...
Well since I am a Filipino who never claimed to be a Scotsman of any type...I guess I have no opinion in this comment...

Signal said:
There is no consensus on what "a true seeker" is.
Click to expand...
As I use the term, I am speaking of those who are open minded in their seeking. We meet many who question our beliefs, but not so much to seek greater understanding but rather to reenforce their own, already hardened, conclusions.
 
@MOM --

But then the same can be said for the claims of atheists.
Click to expand...

What claims would those be? That it's very unlikely that a god exists? That claim is supported by the very lack of evidence you possess, a lack which is very damning considering you theists have had nearly ten thousand years to find some.

Well since I am a Filipino who never claimed to be a Scotsman of any type...I guess I have no opinion in this comment...
Click to expand...

And logic fail.

As I use the term, I am speaking of those who are open minded in their seeking.
Click to expand...

Hence why Signal is right in calling a no true Scotsman. However I highly doubt if you would recognize open mindedness if you saw it. Would you consider me open minded?
 
Dywyddyr said:
How do you know it was god?

:shrug:
Click to expand...
I knew it was God because of the specific situation, what was said, and what I felt in my heart upon hearing it - Something that stemmed from such an overwhelming Love and peace that it actually startled me.

Now this may not be an explanation that fits with what some consider "evidence", and indeed it is not something that can be "explained" in any sort of scientific way, but believe me, when it happens, the person of faith, or the seeker of faith, knows it...
 
@MOM --

So when the schizophrenic feels in his heart of hearts that he's hearing the voice of god or the voices of angels telling him to go and mow down a crowed of pedestrians we really have no reason to say that he's wrong?

Now this may not be an explanation that fits with what some consider "evidence"
Click to expand...

Personal testimony, in and of itself, is never considered evidence, not even in a court of law.

and indeed it is not something that can be "explained" in any sort of scientific way,
Click to expand...

Oh it's easily explained by science. You had an auditory hallucination, simple.

but believe me, when it happens, the person of faith, or the seeker of faith, knows it...
Click to expand...

I'm a seeker of truth, but unlike you I know better than to trust my senses completely, especially when they give me data that doesn't correspond to reality or would require a complete break of the laws of nature.
 
Mind Over Matter said:
I knew it was God because of the specific situation, what was said, and what I felt in my heart upon hearing it
Click to expand...
In other words you don't know it was god, you just decided it must be.

Now this may not be an explanation that fits with what some consider "evidence", and indeed it is not something that can be "explained" in any sort of scientific way
Click to expand...
Ya think?
People have been having delusions/ visions for centuries. And science can give pretty good explanations now.

but believe me, when it happens, the person of faith, or the seeker of faith, knows it...
Click to expand...
You mean they assume. Based on a pre-existing belief.
 
Dywyddyr said:
In other words you don't know it was god, you just decided it must be.


Ya think?
People have been having delusions/ visions for centuries. And science can give pretty good explanations now.


You mean they assume. Based on a pre-existing belief.
Click to expand...
I say I know - You say I assume... :shrug:

What is my "evidence" is to you nothing at all...That's free will...
 
Dywyddyr said:
Correct.
Because you don't know, you assume and believe.


It's not evidence.
Click to expand...
It's fine that you believe this...It is of no import to me or to my faith.

My initial comment had to so with the effects of "evidence" existing longer than the evidence itself.

Suppose instead of using God speaking to me, I were to use another - non religious example. Say you are walking along a street and come to an intersection, you aren't absent minded, but not paying any great attention either when you step off the curb to cross (with the light). Just as you step off, a Car comes flying around the corner narrowly missing you. You jump back shocked and amazed at your good fortune to not have been injured or killed.
The evidence of this event lasts but a few minutes. The car is long gone, you perhaps sit a minute to catch your breath, your pulse returns to normal and within an hour all evidence of the event has vanished - except your memory of it.
For months afterward, when you approach a corner you are more alert, and when you approach THAT particular corner, you are even more alert.
The evidence of the event is long gone but the effect is still with you and the memory may stick with your for the rest of your life.

Thus I can say that the effects of the evidence can far outlast the evidence itself.
 
If a security camera on a business had recorded the incident, that would be evidence that persists.
 
Mind Over Matter said:
It's fine that you believe this.[/qiote]
Nope, it's not belief on my part.

It is of no import to me or to my faith.
Click to expand...
Yep, that's the typical theist approach: If reality is inconvenient, dismiss it.

Thus I can say that the effects of the evidence can far outlast the evidence itself.
Click to expand...
Nothing to do with MY question though.
I asked about your claim:
Mind Over Matter said:
God spoke to me once very briefly and quietly
Click to expand...
That's all.
Click to expand...
 
AlexG said:
The History channel is basically a bunch of bullshit.

They're the ones who do shows on 'Ancient Aliens'.

As a source, they're nonsense, pandering to whatever audience gives them the highest ratings.
Click to expand...

Certain shows yes, especially the ones that are clearly labeled as such (i.e. ghost hunters, bigfoot diaries, Ancient Aliens) but not all.
 
Arioch said:
@NM --

I don't know what you think an atheist is, but both Spidergoat and I are atheists and all we ask for from the theists is some fraking evidence.
Click to expand...
you don't want evidence..you want the theist to shut up, so you find the best argument you can to that end..
case in point, when one realizes that the 'prove it' argument doesn't work they(the anit-theists more than the atheist) move the goal posts and come up with questions like this:

If people believe in God on faith, why is this alleged evidence so important to them? I think that's a more interesting question.
Click to expand...

but the question is more for Atheists, why is it so important for you to have evidence of God?
and consider this, if you(you personally) had empirical evidence for the existence of God, wouldn't you feel that you now have NO choice but to follow and believe?


We've only been asking for about ten thousand years, and now that the theists have finally stopped killing us we think that it's about time that they produced some. Sadly, we've been disappointed at every turn.
Click to expand...
that is because they are still human and as such are just as screwed up as the rest of us..(see rant about making promises they can't keep)


Personal testimony, in and of itself, is never considered evidence, not even in a court of law.
Click to expand...
Testimonies IS evidence when it comes to God.
 
AlexG said:
Testimony is only evidence of belief. Not actuality.
Click to expand...

testimony is communication of what convinced one to believe..

to dismiss the testimony is to dismiss the person as a valid source..(so why the hell are you asking us if you don't think we are a valid source???)
 
to dismiss the testimony is to dismiss the person as a valid source..
Click to expand...

It's a valid source of what the person believes. But belief is not evidence of actuality. My granddaughter believes in the tooth fairy. I don't accept that as evidence that the tooth fairy exists.
 
@NM --

you don't want evidence..you want the theist to shut up, so you find the best argument you can to that end..
Click to expand...

That's quite arrogant of you, but we all know that theists are by necessity more arrogant than atheists are, it's built into the very mindset that tells you that the supreme being which created everything is intimately interested and involved in your personal life, including who you diddle with and why and when. Yeah, quite arrogant.

Not only was this unbelievably arrogant of you but it's also demonstrably wrong. When have I told anyone to just shut up? When have I done anything but demand evidence and rebut fallacious arguments(like this one)? Oh that's right...never.

So, I suggest you take your arrogant and inaccurate assertions and shove them up your ass. That's just what I think you should do with them anyways.

when one realizes that the 'prove it' argument doesn't work they(the anit-theists more than the atheist) move the goal posts and come up with questions like this:
Click to expand...

1. That wasn't my argument.
2. So when the theist responds to the demand for evidence with "evidence isn't what matters, faith is what's important" then going to the "well if it's faith then why do you always reach for evidence" question isn't appropriate? Damn, because it's such a good way to highlight the cognitive disconnect, now I'll have to find another. Oh wait no I won't because it is an appropriate response.

but the question is more for Atheists, why is it so important for you to have evidence of God?
Click to expand...

Because I want to know, and if it exists there should be evidence of it. Sorry, that's just the scientist in me poking it's head out.

and consider this, if you(you personally) had empirical evidence for the existence of God, wouldn't you feel that you now have NO choice but to follow and believe?
Click to expand...

Nope, I could engage in delusion just like anyone else. Besides, even if he is real and if I ever do find proof, I still wouldn't be forced to follow. It might be the smart thing to do, but then the christian god has never really shown any desire for intelligence in his sheep.

Besides, this is all irrelevant, nothing more than a red herring which is a logical fallacy(if you don't know what that is, GFE).

that is because they are still human and as such are just as screwed up as the rest of us..
Click to expand...

If we can go from finding DNA to being able to stitch together a completely synthetic genome in just fifty years, I'm pretty sure that ten thousand years is more than long enough to find even one measly scrap of evidence for god. But then, it's not about evidence with you lot is it?

Testimonies IS evidence when it comes to God.
Click to expand...

How do you solve the problem of conflicting testimonies then? Surely the fact that for every testimony which acts as "evidence" for your god, there's at least one acting as "evidence" for every other god that's still worshiped. How do you solve this without resorting to, wait for it, evidence?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top