"And no religion, too"

[Sky Dancer]

Logic has to be based on far more than a single anecdotal personal experience. Such an experience can legitimately raise questions as to facts within the big picture, but cannot be used as a logical conclusion that everybody shares the same experience.

I have a personal relationship with Christ/God that at one time I tried hard to dismiss and deny but it is real for me. Once you have experienced that relationship there is no question in your own mind of its validity. I also believe that it can be real for everybody who wants it, but I cannot prove it to anybody else because it must be experienced. It is not logical to hold my experience up as the way it is or will be for everybody. I can testify to what I have experienced as millions of others have done, but in the end, just as the taste of chocolate or strawberries must be experienced to fully know what they taste like, each person has to experience God for himself or herself.

I do think, given such a great cloud of witneses, however, that those who dismiss the testimony of so many are not being logical. It is illogical to disbelieve something simply because we do not wish to believe it.

I guess you missed the part where I had a relationship with Christ for many years, and didn't wish to stop believing. But, thanks for playing.

This is the shit that gets annoying with you people. You are so busy parroting back your paradigms that you simply don't listen.

Trying to be gentle here. You either had a relationship with Christ or you didn't. If you did, you can't just make that going away by deciding you don't believe in Christ any more than you can make me go away by deciding you don't believe I exist in any form or you can make whatever relationship you have had with a spouse or children or friends or relatives or coworkers or even a casual acquaintance go away just because you decide they don't exist any more.

You can see how illogical it is to say you had a relationship with Christ but that he doesn't exist? Obviously, if you believe he doesn't exist, you never had a relationship at all. You were simply going through the motions and 'doing Church' and stuff.

Who are you to judge who had a relationship with God and who didn't? What arrogance! Unbelieveable. This is how you act when you're "trying to be gentle"?

 

[Lokiate]

You can't hardly get two Baptists to agree on anything. You may like to pretend there's a vast religious conspiracy, but there isn't.

Can't tell if srs.

Am.

Then you fail.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Logic has to be based on far more than a single anecdotal personal experience. Such an experience can legitimately raise questions as to facts within the big picture, but cannot be used as a logical conclusion that everybody shares the same experience.

I have a personal relationship with Christ/God that at one time I tried hard to dismiss and deny but it is real for me. Once you have experienced that relationship there is no question in your own mind of its validity. I also believe that it can be real for everybody who wants it, but I cannot prove it to anybody else because it must be experienced. It is not logical to hold my experience up as the way it is or will be for everybody. I can testify to what I have experienced as millions of others have done, but in the end, just as the taste of chocolate or strawberries must be experienced to fully know what they taste like, each person has to experience God for himself or herself.

I do think, given such a great cloud of witneses, however, that those who dismiss the testimony of so many are not being logical. It is illogical to disbelieve something simply because we do not wish to believe it.

100% false. There's witnesses of different religions all over the place, not sure why you think I should believe you and witnesses like you rather than witnesses from other religions.

Me not believing in a god or gods has nothing to do with what I want, I don't believe in the concept of a god or gods because there's zero scientific proof for it.

If the Bible is ever proven factual by science, I have no problem with becoming a chrsitian.

 

[Foxfyre]

Logic has to be based on far more than a single anecdotal personal experience. Such an experience can legitimately raise questions as to facts within the big picture, but cannot be used as a logical conclusion that everybody shares the same experience.

I have a personal relationship with Christ/God that at one time I tried hard to dismiss and deny but it is real for me. Once you have experienced that relationship there is no question in your own mind of its validity. I also believe that it can be real for everybody who wants it, but I cannot prove it to anybody else because it must be experienced. It is not logical to hold my experience up as the way it is or will be for everybody. I can testify to what I have experienced as millions of others have done, but in the end, just as the taste of chocolate or strawberries must be experienced to fully know what they taste like, each person has to experience God for himself or herself.

I do think, given such a great cloud of witneses, however, that those who dismiss the testimony of so many are not being logical. It is illogical to disbelieve something simply because we do not wish to believe it.

100% false. There's witnesses of different religions all over the place, not sure why you think I should believe you and witnesses like you rather than witnesses from other religions.

Me not believing in a god or gods has nothing to do with what I want, I don't believe in the concept of a god or gods because there's zero scientific proof for it.

If the Bible is ever proven factual by science, I have no problem with becoming a chrsitian.

I didn't say you should believe anything. I said it was illogical to state that something doesn't exist just because you don't want it to exist or because you haven't experienced it yourself.

If more than a million people reported seeing a bright red elephant, would it not be illogical to assume such a thing did not exist simply because you had not seen one? Would it be logical for the totally color blind man to deny that color exists because he can't see it? For the deaf to deny that great music has been performed because he can't hear it? To believe that all the science that exists has already been discovered and there is no more because nobody is teaching it?

If you go outside and see your shadow on a cloudy day, you know what you saw. You probably won't convince many others who are unable to replicate your experience and I would not be illogical in disbelieving you. But if a dozen unrelated people report the phenomenon, it would be illogical to assume that there was not some unusual phenomenon at work even though not a single one has any means to prove what they saw.

Likewise, when you have not had the experience, it is logical to have questions about a relationship with the Christ reported by hundreds/thousands/millions. It is illogical to dismiss their reported experience as something that is not real for them.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Logic has to be based on far more than a single anecdotal personal experience. Such an experience can legitimately raise questions as to facts within the big picture, but cannot be used as a logical conclusion that everybody shares the same experience.

I have a personal relationship with Christ/God that at one time I tried hard to dismiss and deny but it is real for me. Once you have experienced that relationship there is no question in your own mind of its validity. I also believe that it can be real for everybody who wants it, but I cannot prove it to anybody else because it must be experienced. It is not logical to hold my experience up as the way it is or will be for everybody. I can testify to what I have experienced as millions of others have done, but in the end, just as the taste of chocolate or strawberries must be experienced to fully know what they taste like, each person has to experience God for himself or herself.

I do think, given such a great cloud of witneses, however, that those who dismiss the testimony of so many are not being logical. It is illogical to disbelieve something simply because we do not wish to believe it.

100% false. There's witnesses of different religions all over the place, not sure why you think I should believe you and witnesses like you rather than witnesses from other religions.

Me not believing in a god or gods has nothing to do with what I want, I don't believe in the concept of a god or gods because there's zero scientific proof for it.

If the Bible is ever proven factual by science, I have no problem with becoming a chrsitian.

I didn't say you should believe anything. I said it was illogical to state that something doesn't exist just because you don't want it to exist or because you haven't experienced it yourself.

If more than a million people reported seeing a bright red elephant, would it not be illogical to assume such a thing did not exist simply because you had not seen one? Would it be logical for the totally color blind man to deny that color exists because he can't see it? For the deaf to deny that great music has been performed because he can't hear it? To believe that all the science that exists has already been discovered and there is no more because nobody is teaching it?

If you go outside and see your shadow on a cloudy day, you know what you saw. You probably won't convince many others who are unable to replicate your experience and I would not be illogical in disbelieving you. But if a dozen unrelated people report the phenomenon, it would be illogical to assume that there was not some unusual phenomenon at work even though not a single one has any means to prove what they saw.

Likewise, when you have not had the experience, it is logical to have questions about a relationship with the Christ reported by hundreds/thousands/millions. It is illogical to dismiss their reported experience as something that is not real for them.

Thanks for the explanation, I may have read your post wrong, but this one was very helpful.

 

[Sky Dancer]

So wonderful that we have our own resident judge of who has an authentic relationship with God, or not, Foxfyre.

 

[Foxfyre]

100% false. There's witnesses of different religions all over the place, not sure why you think I should believe you and witnesses like you rather than witnesses from other religions.

Me not believing in a god or gods has nothing to do with what I want, I don't believe in the concept of a god or gods because there's zero scientific proof for it.

If the Bible is ever proven factual by science, I have no problem with becoming a chrsitian.

I didn't say you should believe anything. I said it was illogical to state that something doesn't exist just because you don't want it to exist or because you haven't experienced it yourself.

If more than a million people reported seeing a bright red elephant, would it not be illogical to assume such a thing did not exist simply because you had not seen one? Would it be logical for the totally color blind man to deny that color exists because he can't see it? For the deaf to deny that great music has been performed because he can't hear it? To believe that all the science that exists has already been discovered and there is no more because nobody is teaching it?

If you go outside and see your shadow on a cloudy day, you know what you saw. You probably won't convince many others who are unable to replicate your experience and I would not be illogical in disbelieving you. But if a dozen unrelated people report the phenomenon, it would be illogical to assume that there was not some unusual phenomenon at work even though not a single one has any means to prove what they saw.

Likewise, when you have not had the experience, it is logical to have questions about a relationship with the Christ reported by hundreds/thousands/millions. It is illogical to dismiss their reported experience as something that is not real for them.

Thanks for the explanation, I may have read your post wrong, but this one was very helpful.

Thank you. I am always amused at why some people dismiss an experience with God just because nobody can prove they had one--some would even call it 'illogical' to believe what cannot be proved--and yet we all believe we saw or heard or experienced all sorts of things that we cannot prove to anybody else.

 

[Unkotare]

Me not believing in a god or gods has nothing to do with what I want, I don't believe in the concept of a god or gods because there's zero scientific proof for it..

And now we're back to you being half a man.

 

[hortysir]

I know. How dare I ask that faith be addressed in a logical fashion. The horror.

Virtually impossible, Catz.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Me not believing in a god or gods has nothing to do with what I want, I don't believe in the concept of a god or gods because there's zero scientific proof for it..

And now we're back to you being half a man.

Lol whatever you need to feel about people different than you to alleviate your daily insecurity issues.

 

[Unkotare]

Me not believing in a god or gods has nothing to do with what I want, I don't believe in the concept of a god or gods because there's zero scientific proof for it..

And now we're back to you being half a man.

Lol whatever you need to feel about people different than you to alleviate your daily insecurity issues.

Not about what I "feel," it's about your unfortunate shortcomings.

 

[Dr.Drock]

And now we're back to you being half a man.

Lol whatever you need to feel about people different than you to alleviate your daily insecurity issues.

Not about what I "feel," it's about your unfortunate shortcomings.

Again, man's main shortcoming as a species is the immoral principle of bigotry, something you're very VERY obviously stricken with.


I hope for your sake and others you can make yourself a better person in this area.

 

[Unkotare]

Lol whatever you need to feel about people different than you to alleviate your daily insecurity issues.

Not about what I "feel," it's about your unfortunate shortcomings.

Again, man's main shortcoming as a species .

I'm not talking about the species, or a people, culture, group, or community. I'm talking about you, and the shortcomings that make YOU only half a man.

 

[catzmeow]

[Trying to be gentle here. You either had a relationship with Christ or you didn't. If you did, you can't just make that going away by deciding you don't believe in Christ any more than you can make me go away by deciding you don't believe I exist in any form or you can make whatever relationship you have had with a spouse or children or friends or relatives or coworkers or even a casual acquaintance go away just because you decide they don't exist any more.

You can see how illogical it is to say you had a relationship with Christ but that he doesn't exist? Obviously, if you believe he doesn't exist, you never had a relationship at all. You were simply going through the motions and 'doing Church' and stuff.

I know that this is your belief, but you're incorrect. I understand that your paradigm is predicated on these views, but you're positing a false dichotomy. The OP is about the fact that many people have ecstatic religious experiences, in a variety of settings, with a variety of deities, and that this is a reflection of a condition within our brain, and not an external entity. You are willing to recognize only those ecstatic experiences which occur within your own paradigms. I would say that they are all the same.

In my experience, I realized that the religion (Christianity) was illogical, that there was zero evidence for it, and that it wasn't morally or intellectually coherent. I lost faith in the religion, and I lost faith in the existence of a savior.

However, since losing faith in the architecture of the religion itself, I've subsequently and often repeated the feelings of connection to a "higher power." I had those feelings at a rock concert, I've had them in my backyard, and I often have them on my drive to work. In short, the emotional connection that you routinely experience with "christ" is something I experience all the time, in spite of my loss of belief in the existence of Christ. I still feel connected to a higher power, I still have those feelings all the time, but I have zero confidence in the doctrines of the Christian religion.

That "relationship" is not predicated on believing in Christ, the Christian religion, or the Christian dogmas and doctrines, in spite of your views.

I'm not an atheist, though. I'm simply non-religious. I exercise that personal connection to the divine all the time, but I have zero interest in church or imaginary religious figures like Jesus Christ.

p.s. There's a huge, obvious difference between real living people and invisible deities. I'm going to hope that you're able to see it.

 

[FuelRod]

More people have been killed in the name of God in world history than any other reason.
This isn't God's fault.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Not about what I "feel," it's about your unfortunate shortcomings.

Again, man's main shortcoming as a species .

I'm not talking about the species, or a people, culture, group, or community. I'm talking about you, and the shortcomings that make YOU only half a man.

Because I don't believe in a god, a view shared by hundreds of millions of people, who you know very few of yet have zero moral issue with categorically making a negative stereotype about them.

Hence you being a sick, disgusting, bigot, and my hope is you can better yourself.

 

[Unkotare]

More people have been killed in the name of God in world history than any other reason..

Proof?

 

[FuelRod]

More people have been killed in the name of God in world history than any other reason..

Proof?

I don't have time to google every War in history, the Crusades, Terrorist attack, etc.
Do your own homework.

 

[Unkotare]

Again, man's main shortcoming as a species .

I'm not talking about the species, or a people, culture, group, or community. I'm talking about you, and the shortcomings that make YOU only half a man.

Because I don't believe in a god, a view shared by hundreds of millions of people, who you know very few of yet have zero moral issue with categorically making a negative stereotype about them.

I didn't mention "a god," and I believe I told you before that I know many people who don't believe in God. Are you being a liar again? I guess that's what liars do...

 

[Unkotare]

More people have been killed in the name of God in world history than any other reason..

Proof?

I don't have time to google every War in history, the Crusades, Terrorist attack, etc.
Do your own homework.

I'm sorry, did you say you were completely full of shit? Ok, got it.