Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Christian conversion experience: descriptions/analysis/links: input invited
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 76 of 199 (215628)
06-09-2005 12:12 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by Phat
06-09-2005 4:12 AM


Re: Explaining the phenomena
I simply can't grasp any connection between anything you said in that post and what I said about the efficacy of scientific studies of mental/spiritual phenomena, sorry.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Phat, posted 06-09-2005 4:12 AM Phat has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 77 of 199 (215633)
06-09-2005 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by arachnophilia
06-08-2005 8:01 PM


Re: charismatic experiences
Oh I don't think they are alien abductions, but I think it's possible they are some kind of demonic deception.
=====
i fail to see the difference. why should one mythology be accepted over the other? it has a perfectly rational explanation, and more importantly can be replicated in a laboratory setting.
You know perfectly well that you cannot replicate such things in a laboratory setting. What nonsense. The best you can do is stimulate some kind of mental phenomena, but the scenarios in question, no. Really what you are doing is concluding without evidence that both ideas are mythological. If you decide in advance it's all mythological end of discussion and certainly end to all pretense that anything truly scientific is going on.
I don't doubt those cases myself. There it's individuals coming in many years after the fact, as adults, not the same thing I'm thinking of.
=====
actually, it is. most of the people in the satanic ritual abuse witchhunt were adults, although some were children. it seemed to make no difference, really. it was all about the religious and/or psychological atmosphere.
What the..? You aren't making any sense. Where's the opportunity for a mass delusion to have been developed in the case of individuals bringing charges against priests long after the fact?
Yes, that's the point. They were seeing this apparition, which the people following them couldn't see.
=====
yes, but as far as i know, they don't accept it with the same degree of reality people in christendom do. they percieve a disjoint between spiritual and physical. and that the physical is fake.
Who is "they?" And if the physical is fake then the apparition of Mary is real? What are you trying to say here?
i'm not really arguing with your point though.
OK
It's a matter of what the Bible says. God told them they would die if they ate of that fruit and they died. Paul simply emphasizes that when he says in Romans 5:12 "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned...."
===
paul says all have sinned. he's talking about the concept i am: we can't escape our nature. not that we are punished for adam's sin.
If we die after Adam's sin that implies we wouldn't have before it. Death then becomes our nature, but it's hard to deny that its occurrence as a result of sin was punishment for it.
paul's also wrong. according to the bible, there are people without sin.
According to the Bible there is only one man without sin, Jesus Christ.
But now in these last few statements you are not even pretending to follow the Bible, not even interpreting, you are simply making up what you want it to mean.
=====
look up the orthodox jewish position on the matter. i bet you'll find it says the same thing. and they're dealing with the same exact text paul is - genesis 3. paul is interpretation, and you quote him as scripture.
Paul is scripture. Jesus appointed him personally. Jesus is God. Paul is no less scripture than the prophets of the OT.
You just throw out those parts you don't like.
===
when the pieces don't fit, some of them have to be from the wrong puzzle.
They fit fine for the rest of us. Just because you can't solve the puzzle doesn't mean others can't. I don't intend to be insulting here, just illustrating the problem. You find a wrong fit where others have no problem whatever. There is such a thing as not being able to solve a puzzle others can solve.
Same with your speculations about the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. You are simply pondering it from your own feelings rather than what the Bible actually says.
=====
look up the orthodox jewish interpretation on that too, while you're at it. i bet you'll find that says the same thing too. wonder what they're basing it on?
I have discussions very frequently with an orthodox Jew about this sort of thing. They interpret the Bible to deny the Christian interpretation. If you trust their views then you give up on the Christian view. That's your choice, but what they have to say is only of use when it agrees with Christian interpretations from my point of view.
but here, we'll follow logic for a second. did god want jesus's sacrifice to happen?
This whole post is very puzzling to me. Maybe I lost track of the context since at first I thought it was off topic and wasn't going to answer it, but now I don't know what it's about any more.
Uh yeah God wanted Jesus' sacrifice to happen. That's only THE major belief of Christianity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by arachnophilia, posted 06-08-2005 8:01 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by arachnophilia, posted 06-09-2005 7:37 PM Faith has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 78 of 199 (215662)
06-09-2005 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by Gilgamesh
06-09-2005 1:51 AM


Re: charismatic experiences
Feel free arachnophilia.
eh, no it's ok i'll pass for now. the original sin/"why i don't like paul" debate is a long and arduous one, and REALLY out of place here. as it is, i have to get back to faith's post a little later (gotta go out).

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Gilgamesh, posted 06-09-2005 1:51 AM Gilgamesh has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 79 of 199 (215733)
06-09-2005 7:37 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Faith
06-09-2005 12:33 PM


Re: charismatic experiences
You know perfectly well that you cannot replicate such things in a laboratory setting. What nonsense.
and yet you can. alien abductions have absolutely been replicated in a laboratory setting, during sleep paralysis research. also during other forms of sleep research. for instance, they found that a small electomagnetic field equivalent to about that created by a hair-dryer was enough to make the brain produce images of gray waxy distorted beings, with big heads.
Really what you are doing is concluding without evidence that both ideas are mythological.
well, my question was this. we know exactly what causes these things. for instance, i know that if i stay up for more than about 36 hours, and then crash in my clothes i'm especially prone to sleep paralysis. i have a friend who suffers it really badly from time to time, under the same conditions. it's a well studied and explained phenominon.
what makes "demons" more acceptable than "space aliens," exactly? they're both contradicted (in most cases, at least) by the rational scientific explanation. both are tied to a sort of cultural mythology. why is one set of myth better than the other, in the face of a much better rational explanation?
What the..? You aren't making any sense. Where's the opportunity for a mass delusion to have been developed in the case of individuals bringing charges against priests long after the fact?
maybe in the provocation of the parents? this is the sort of thing that SPREAD when news broke out. of course, if it was really happening, you'd be likely to see the same thing. i dunno, it was just a thought.
Who is "they?" And if the physical is fake then the apparition of Mary is real? What are you trying to say here?
in hinduism [from the third eye thing you brought up] they hold that "real" world as illusion hiding a greater spiritual truth.
If we die after Adam's sin that implies we wouldn't have before it. Death then becomes our nature, but it's hard to deny that its occurrence as a result of sin was punishment for it.
there had to have been death before it. nature (or gardens for that matter) don't operate without death. when god kicks adam and eve out of the garden, he does it because if adam eats of the tree of life, he'll live forever and be like god. the implication of that statement is that adam had NOT eaten of the tree of life before, and was indeed mortal.
death did not enter into the equation, just because god THREATENED to kill them. and the fact that god made such a threat, and adam understood it, is evidence that adam would have been familiar with what death was.
According to the Bible there is only one man without sin, Jesus Chris
and enoch. and job.
Paul is scripture.
no more so than the talmud or midrashim. that's what paul's letters are, interpretation of the law. not the law itself. why is his view more special than anyone else's? which leads to:
Jesus appointed him personally.
through, well, a vision. and that's what we're talking about here, isn't it? follow this line of thought for a second: if some of these visions in the christian church could be just in our head, aliens, or even demons... what's to say paul's is actually valid?
Jesus is God.
jesus was flesh and blood, at least half man. which means he was made in the image of god. and worship of an image of god is idolatry. jesus also demonstrates his separation from god repeatedly in the bible. he claims he is the way TO god, but not god himself. this rift is most poignant in the garden of gethsemane. why would god beg and plead with himself?
christians routinely claim that jesus is separated from god, when it fits their needs. for instance, no christian would argue that jesus was not separated from god on the cross. there, he was said to have taken on our burdens, our sins, and born the full weight of all of our separation from god, so we would never have to. there, the separation is key.
you can'y be separate from something you are.
Paul is no less scripture than the prophets of the OT.
is paul a prophet? that sounds like a new thread. jesus certainly was, but was paul?
They fit fine for the rest of us. Just because you can't solve the puzzle doesn't mean others can't. I don't intend to be insulting here, just illustrating the problem. You find a wrong fit where others have no problem whatever. There is such a thing as not being able to solve a puzzle others can solve.
yes, well. you're using the brute-force method: put all the pieces into a blender, and make abstract art out of it. i'm trying to figure out where each piece originally went. a lot are missing, and some seem to be made of different cardboard. you're just squinting your eyes and thinking you see a picture.
I have discussions very frequently with an orthodox Jew about this sort of thing. They interpret the Bible to deny the Christian interpretation. If you trust their views then you give up on the Christian view. That's your choice, but what they have to say is only of use when it agrees with Christian interpretations from my point of view.
well, that's the very definition of no use. if you only listen to people that agree with you, why bother asking for opinions?
and they do a lot of stuff just to piss off christians. but i gaurantee you that there actual beliefs and faiths are not part of that. remember, in this case, they've been telling this story a lot longer than christians have. why would their opinion on what they think it means be invalid? they wrote it.
Uh yeah God wanted Jesus' sacrifice to happen. That's only THE major belief of Christianity.
alright. would christ's sacrifice have happened without sin?

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Faith, posted 06-09-2005 12:33 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Faith, posted 06-10-2005 12:10 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 80 of 199 (215771)
06-10-2005 12:10 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by arachnophilia
06-09-2005 7:37 PM


Re: charismatic experiences
You know perfectly well that you cannot replicate such things in a laboratory setting. What nonsense.
=====
and yet you can. alien abductions have absolutely been replicated in a laboratory setting, during sleep paralysis research. also during other forms of sleep research. for instance, they found that a small electomagnetic field equivalent to about that created by a hair-dryer was enough to make the brain produce images of gray waxy distorted beings, with big heads.
OK, I've got to see this evidence. Reference please?
Really what you are doing is concluding without evidence that both ideas are mythological.
=====
well, my question was this. we know exactly what causes these things. for instance, i know that if i stay up for more than about 36 hours, and then crash in my clothes i'm especially prone to sleep paralysis. i have a friend who suffers it really badly from time to time, under the same conditions. it's a well studied and explained phenominon.
I'm not denying the phenomenon of sleep paralysis. I've experienced it myself. I'm simply doubting that it is enough to explain these complicated scenarios people report.
What makes "demons" more acceptable than "space aliens," exactly? they're both contradicted (in most cases, at least) by the rational scientific explanation.
=====
They are contradicted by the scientific PREJUDICES, or ASSUMPTIONS is how I would put it. It hasn't been proved that the supernatural does not exist.
What makes demons more acceptable? I reason from the Biblical revelation myself of course, and I find demons to be the more plausible explanation. I'd point to the Bible reports of demons and the worldwide reports of experiences of demonic type beings, add to that the Biblical hint that their main design is to deceive, point you to some books by Christians about experiences with such phenomena, and also a particular book about UFOs by a UFO expert who is a nonChristian and thinks the phenomena are {EDIT: real but} not physical. Something Vallee is his name? I'd have to look it up. Read it a long time ago. Very interesting book.
Roughly the idea is that demons would have a stake in leading people to believe in UFOs (or the "gods" and other beings the human race has believed in over the millennia) rather than in demons.
both are tied to a sort of cultural mythology. why is one set of myth better than the other, in the face of a much better rational explanation?
The rational explanation isn't better. You just like it better. Nobody has disproved the supernatural.
What the..? You aren't making any sense. Where's the opportunity for a mass delusion to have been developed in the case of individuals bringing charges against priests long after the fact?
======
maybe in the provocation of the parents? this is the sort of thing that SPREAD when news broke out. of course, if it was really happening, you'd be likely to see the same thing. i dunno, it was just a thought.
My impression is that parents didn't even know about it, and that the victims themselves decided to come forward.
Who is "they?" And if the physical is fake then the apparition of Mary is real? What are you trying to say here?
=====
in hinduism [from the third eye thing you brought up] they hold that "real" world as illusion hiding a greater spiritual truth.
They also acknowledge various apparitions, which the Mary apparitions fit.
If we die after Adam's sin that implies we wouldn't have before it. Death then becomes our nature, but it's hard to deny that its occurrence as a result of sin was punishment for it.
=======
there had to have been death before it. nature (or gardens for that matter) don't operate without death. when god kicks adam and eve out of the garden, he does it because if adam eats of the tree of life, he'll live forever and be like god.
No, the *serpent* said if they ate of the *tree of the knowledge of good and evil* they'd be like God, not the tree of life. God said they would die if they ate of the tree of the knoweldge of good and evil and they DIED, they immediately died in the spirit to communion with God and eventually they died physically. Why do you believe the serpent? They DID die. Did they become as gods?
the implication of that statement is that adam had NOT eaten of the tree of life before, and was indeed mortal.
You haven't accounted for "you shall surely die" and Paul's acknowledgment that death came through one man which shows that Adam was immortal before his disobedience.
death did not enter into the equation, just because god THREATENED to kill them.
YOu have little faith in God to think he'd make a threat and not follow through on it.
and the fact that god made such a threat, and adam understood it, is evidence that adam would have been familiar with what death was.
Not necessarily. He may have had a vague idea but it wasn't until he saw actual death he really understood it.
According to the Bible there is only one man without sin, Jesus Chris
and enoch. and job.
No, not even the righteous Enoch and Job. Job died, which is the proof he wasn't sinless as the "wages of sin is death." If you sin you die, if you die it's proof you're a sinner. Even Elijah is said to be a man like all of us though he and Enoch didn't die but were translated.
Paul is scripture.
no more so than the talmud or midrashim. that's what paul's letters are, interpretation of the law. not the law itself. why is his view more special than anyone else's? which leads to:
======
Jesus appointed him personally.
======
through, well, a vision. and that's what we're talking about here, isn't it? follow this line of thought for a second: if some of these visions in the christian church could be just in our head, aliens, or even demons... what's to say paul's is actually valid?
=====
Jesus is God.
=====
jesus was flesh and blood, at least half man. which means he was made in the image of god. and worship of an image of god is idolatry. jesus also demonstrates his separation from god repeatedly in the bible. he claims he is the way TO god, but not god himself. this rift is most poignant in the garden of gethsemane. why would god beg and plead with himself?
I'm not going to get into this. YOu deny all Christian theology here. Jesus is FULL GOD AND FULL MAN according to all the creeds of the Church back to the beginning.
christians routinely claim that jesus is separated from god, when it fits their needs. for instance, no christian would argue that jesus was not separated from god on the cross. there, he was said to have taken on our burdens, our sins, and born the full weight of all of our separation from god, so we would never have to. there, the separation is key.
Yes. He was both God and Man and he suffered in our place.
you can'y be separate from something you are.
You need to study up on the Trinity. You have a false view of it. Three persons in one God.
Paul is no less scripture than the prophets of the OT.
=======
is paul a prophet? that sounds like a new thread. jesus certainly was, but was paul?
I didn't call him a prophet. I've never heard him referred to as a prophet. I said his writings are scripture. But in a way, since he spoke directly with the risen Christ, perhaps he could be called a prophet.
They fit fine for the rest of us. Just because you can't solve the puzzle doesn't mean others can't. I don't intend to be insulting here, just illustrating the problem. You find a wrong fit where others have no problem whatever. There is such a thing as not being able to solve a puzzle others can solve.
========
yes, well. you're using the brute-force method: put all the pieces into a blender, and make abstract art out of it. i'm trying to figure out where each piece originally went. a lot are missing, and some seem to be made of different cardboard. you're just squinting your eyes and thinking you see a picture.
Whatever. This argument isn't going to go anywhere.
I have discussions very frequently with an orthodox Jew about this sort of thing. They interpret the Bible to deny the Christian interpretation. If you trust their views then you give up on the Christian view. That's your choice, but what they have to say is only of use when it agrees with Christian interpretations from my point of view.
=====
well, that's the very definition of no use. if you only listen to people that agree with you, why bother asking for opinions?
It helps me to know what I think and to understand Christian theology better to debate it.
and they do a lot of stuff just to piss off christians. but i gaurantee you that there actual beliefs and faiths are not part of that. remember, in this case, they've been telling this story a lot longer than christians have. why would their opinion on what they think it means be invalid? they wrote it.
God wrote it. God chose them, they didn't choose God. The Jews who recognized Jesus as the Messiah are part of the True Israel, hundreds of thousands of them in the time of Jesus. The OT is very clear that only a "remnant" are God's. Paul says "not all Israel is Israel" and "blindness has happened to them in part" for the sake of the Gentiles. Jesus teaches that the Pharisees got it all wrong. You seem to believe the Pharisees instead of Jesus.
Uh yeah God wanted Jesus' sacrifice to happen. That's only THE major belief of Christianity.
=====
alright. would christ's sacrifice have happened without sin?
Of course not. Sin is the reason for the sacrfice of Christ as it was the reason for ALL the sacrifices in the Bible and in human history. He was sinless, but He died BECAUSE of our sin, to save us from our sin. That's the whole point. Come on, Arach, that's what the New Testament SAYS.
This message has been edited by Faith, 06-10-2005 01:04 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by arachnophilia, posted 06-09-2005 7:37 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Gilgamesh, posted 06-10-2005 4:26 AM Faith has replied
 Message 84 by arachnophilia, posted 06-10-2005 7:21 AM Faith has not replied

  
Gilgamesh
Inactive Member


Message 81 of 199 (215805)
06-10-2005 4:26 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by Faith
06-10-2005 12:10 AM


Re: charismatic experiences
Faith wrote:
I'm not denying the phenomenon of sleep paralysis. I've experienced it myself. I'm simply doubting that it is enough to explain these complicated scenarios people report.
I remember when you described this in another thread, and it read like textbook sleep paralysis, but yet you considered it personal proof of demons nevertheless. You can surely understand why we reject this assessment.
As I stated above, one of the greatest steps you can make towards determining if something is real or not, is to acknowlegde that quite often your own subjective interpretation of reality can be very, very flawed.
An essential part of developing critical thinking skills is to never take anything dogmatically. Always be prepared to revise your views/knowledge in light of new and better evidence. For example, like everyone else I have very strong recollection of my adolescent years, but I can envision a scenario whereby it might be demonstrated to me through compelling evidence that my memories were entirely manufactured as a result of a trauma. I would then have to re-assess my entire subjective recollection of these memories that I previously took as fact and be prepared to discard them.
IMO many theists take their knowledge completely dogmatically. Many, such as those from the Institue of Creation Research (ICR) state that any evidence contrary to their beliefs would never prevail. That is dogma, and because of the approach taken, most likely to be false dogma.
Your own subjective appraisal of being assailed by demons was most likely wrong, because we understand exactly what causes these experience and we can even reproduce them. This is a situation where you can use critical thinking skills to acknowledge that your subjective interpretation was wrong, or you can hold you own opinion dogmatically in the face of contrary evidence. Whatever you chose you must understand your opnion of the event is totally uncompelling and for the rest of us paints just part of the picture that is your unconvincing faith, er, Faith.
It hasn't been proved that the supernatural does not exist.
And it hasn't been proved that it does exist.
What makes demons more acceptable? I reason from the Biblical revelation myself of course, and I find demons to be the more plausible explanation.
Well you can take advice from a 2000+ year old book written pre science, by superstitious, primitive bronze age goat herders who knwo very little of the world or human physchology, or you can accpet the assessment of modern day science. Who do you think got it right? The same people who thought epilepsy is caused by demons or the scientists who believe it is a medical condition and can cure it?
UFO expert who is a nonChristian and thinks the phenomena are {EDIT: real but} not physical
In many cases they are probably not physical: optical illusions etc. Some are physical: misidentified aircraft. Why do you think UFO's aren't big in the media anymore? Why do you think they began and peaked after the advent of aviation?
Roughly the idea is that demons would have a stake in leading people to believe in UFOs (or the "gods" and other beings the human race has believed in over the millennia) rather than in demons.
So what are they working on now that UFOs are old hat. Crop circles? (although they are old hat now too).
The rational explanation isn't better. You just like it better. Nobody has disproved the supernatural.
Of course it is better: it has greater explanatory power. Once again, no-body has proven the supernatural.
But we can disprove supernatural claims where we can test them. Want to have a go at the power of prayer?
Definition of test:
1. A procedure for critical evaluation; a means of determining the presence, quality, or truth of something; a trial:
Don't you want to evaluate the presence, quality or truth of the evidence of your faith? I did: I tested all of your conversion experiences. They were very real world natural events or phenomena.
Test Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Faith, posted 06-10-2005 12:10 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Faith, posted 06-10-2005 6:05 AM Gilgamesh has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 82 of 199 (215812)
06-10-2005 6:05 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by Gilgamesh
06-10-2005 4:26 AM


paranormal phenomena etc.
I'm not denying the phenomenon of sleep paralysis. I've experienced it myself. I'm simply doubting that it is enough to explain these complicated scenarios people report.
I remember when you described this in another thread, and it read like textbook sleep paralysis, but yet you considered it personal proof of demons nevertheless. You can surely understand why we reject this assessment.
I really need to see the evidence of this. I simply do not believe you have anything like the evidence you claim you have for the complicated scenarios people report.
As I stated above, one of the greatest steps you can make towards determining if something is real or not, is to acknowlegde that quite often your own subjective interpretation of reality can be very, very flawed.
You have to understand that I STARTED out where you are. I now understand that what you think it is and I used to think it is is very possibly NOT what you think it is. I can still misinterpret experiences, of course, and once you start experiencing this stuff you are likely to have all kinds of wild interpretations that need to settle down, but no way will I ever go back to the blinkered materialistic tunnel vision.
An essential part of developing critical thinking skills is to never take anything dogmatically. Always be prepared to revise your views/knowledge in light of new and better evidence. For example, like everyone else I have very strong recollection of my adolescent years, but I can envision a scenario whereby it might be demonstrated to me through compelling evidence that my memories were entirely manufactured as a result of a trauma. I would then have to re-assess my entire subjective recollection of these memories that I previously took as fact and be prepared to discard them.
That's fine, but I'd have a wary eye on that "compelling evidence" myself.
IMO many theists take their knowledge completely dogmatically. Many, such as those from the Institue of Creation Research (ICR) state that any evidence contrary to their beliefs would never prevail. That is dogma, and because of the approach taken, most likely to be false dogma.
Dogma is simply the codification of established knowledge, and when the knowledge is revelation by God it is simply not open to discussion. Scientists have their dogmas too. Everyone does.
However, EXPERIENCE is something else. This is not about dogma, this is about possibilities. The materialistic science mentality will not countenance the supernatural for half an instant. If you have read many of my posts you may have run across the one where I say I used to subscribe to Skeptical Inquirer which focuses on the paranormal. As I recall, every article claimed to disprove this or that phenomenon under investigation and give a naturalistic interpretation. While I was quite willing to accept their conclusions, I wanted to be able to follow the reasoning and be really convinced. Unfortunately there were many times when I found the logic of a particular study to be hard to follow, confused and inconclusive even though they claimed they'd proved their point, and my overall feeling was frustration that many of these questions remained unanswered. There are always frauds and there are of course misinterpretations, but there are ALSO phenomena that remain unexplained even though it is believed they have been explained.
Your own subjective appraisal of being assailed by demons was most likely wrong, because we understand exactly what causes these experience and we can even reproduce them.
I never said "assailed" by demons. And again, SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE. You do NOT understand "exactly" what causes these experiences.
This is a situation where you can use critical thinking skills to acknowledge that your subjective interpretation was wrong, or you can hold you own opinion dogmatically in the face of contrary evidence.
My critical thinking skills have always been superior, and I'm as prone to dismissing such experiences on naturalistic terms as you are, only now I know better. The easiest thing to do is to rationalize strange experiences as "coincidences" or the result of too little sleep or overwork or stress or whatever. Sorry, I know things you do not know. And again, instead of merely asserting that you have the evidence, I need to see it.
Whatever you chose you must understand your opnion of the event is totally uncompelling and for the rest of us paints just part of the picture that is your unconvincing faith, er, Faith.c
Your loss.
It hasn't been proved that the supernatural does not exist.
=====
And it hasn't been proved that it does exist.
That's because you dismiss the testimony of millions of witnesses of all cultures over the millennia. You reinterpret it by "modern" standards and so blind yourself to what it really is.
What makes demons more acceptable? I reason from the Biblical revelation myself of course, and I find demons to be the more plausible explanation.
Well you can take advice from a 2000+ year old book written pre science, by superstitious, primitive bronze age goat herders who knwo very little of the world or human physchology, or you can accpet the assessment of modern day science. Who do you think got it right? The same people who thought epilepsy is caused by demons or the scientists who believe it is a medical condition and can cure it?
Science is out of bounds when it leaves its proper place of understanding the physical world. When it gets into society and personality and spirituality and history it is just an arrogant fool. Not that it doesn't give some useful information about some things, but overall the "goat herders" got it right. The mere characterization of these people as superstitious and primitive shows you are no judge of character, but in thrall to the god of modernity.
UFO expert who is a nonChristian and thinks the phenomena are {EDIT: real but} not physical
In many cases they are probably not physical: optical illusions etc. Some are physical: misidentified aircraft. Why do you think UFO's aren't big in the media anymore? Why do you think they began and peaked after the advent of aviation?
Because the demons change their tactics with the times. Sure there are misinterpretations, maybe most of them, I don't know. I looked up the book on UFOs I half remembered. UFOs never interested me in the slightest, but Jacques Vallee's Messengers of Deception raises new possibilities. After years of study and believing in the reality of aliens he concludes that they aren't really aliens but some kind of deceptive phenomenon. He suggests a similarity to fairies and ghouls and that sort of thing as I recall, and offered the idea that they change their tactics with the times. I googled him and there's info out there but I'm not patient enough to read it right now.
Roughly the idea is that demons would have a stake in leading people to believe in UFOs (or the "gods" and other beings the human race has believed in over the millennia) rather than in demons.
So what are they working on now that UFOs are old hat. Crop circles? (although they are old hat now too).
New Age religions, channeling are big. Oracles. Near-death experiences. Out-of-body experiences. Wait and see I'd say.
The rational explanation isn't better. You just like it better. Nobody has disproved the supernatural.
Of course it is better: it has greater explanatory power. Once again, no-body has proven the supernatural.
I guess we're going to get into an "is too - is not" thing here if we don't watch it.
But we can disprove supernatural claims where we can test them. Want to have a go at the power of prayer?
I've had many many prayers answered.
Definition of test:
1. A procedure for critical evaluation; a means of determining the presence, quality, or truth of something; a trial:
Don't you want to evaluate the presence, quality or truth of the evidence of your faith? I did: I tested all of your conversion experiences. They were very real world natural events or phenomena.
Test Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com
Here's a test for you. Take the Chinese oracle the I Ching and ask it thousands of questions -- you think the question and throw coins to get the answer -- philosophical questions, who it is, what it thinks about such and such, or anything you like. Write down the question before you throw the coins and note the number combination and the answer and any impression you have about the seeming "coincidence" of the answers. I had the impression that the numbers fall within probability but the answers were about 90% uncannily appropriate as to MEANING. But I'm sure it's possible to explain away anything too. AND if there ARE demons controlling these things they may not see fit to play along with you anyway
Here's another test. Get half a dozen astrologers with lots of experience and good reputation (there are frauds among these too, and some who rely on "psychic power" -- try to screen those out and go for the ones who simply read the chart). Prepare the birth horoscopes (there are websites that will draw them for you -- don't bother with the "readings" offered there) of a dozen or so people who have their birth certificates so the exact time and place of birth is known. They have to be roughly the same age -- within a few years would be ideal -- because the position of the "heavy" or slow-moving planets (Pluto, Uranus, Neptune) will give away who's in what generation. Give the charts to the astrologers and let them study them. Then let the people be interviewed one at a time in some depth by the astrologers all gathered together for the purpose, taking care to avoid anything that might give away age or birthday. If the astrologers are good they should be able to match the person with his/her horoscope with much greater than probability.
{EDIT: Of course the charts are "blind" - with no names or identifying information on them, just the charts themselves with the positions of the planets drawn on the zodiac circle with the angles between them marked in. Nothing else. You'll need your own system for identifying which chart belongs to which subject.
{EDIT: A Christian may not have anything to do with either of the above. This is from my pre-Christian occultic experience. It is forbidden by God to consult oracles and they are associated with demonic activity in the Bible, so even recommending such a study to you is possibly very wrong of me. I hope I don't regret it.
This message has been edited by Faith, 06-10-2005 06:26 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Gilgamesh, posted 06-10-2005 4:26 AM Gilgamesh has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Gilgamesh, posted 06-11-2005 7:28 AM Faith has replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 415 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 83 of 199 (215815)
06-10-2005 7:03 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Gilgamesh
06-02-2005 11:15 PM


Conversion?
Well, I read a few pages, and this thread certainly stirs up some emotion. I will try not to get emotional. My emotional response is more or less being pissed at all the deception in the world, and lack of understanding of a true conversion experience.
I also agree with most of what’s being said, but it seems that everyone is lacking just a little thing or 2 here and there.
Let's clear some things up first, so you know where I am coming from.
#1 I am a born again Christian.
#2 I have been baptized, twice, once as a child catholic, and once by my own free will.
#3 I have been baptized in the Holy Spirit.
#4 I do not fall down, and get very upset if someone tries to push me over, while being prayed for. I do see people fall down without even being pushed though.
#5 I have never spoke in tongues, or do I feel that I will. The bible clearly states that it is one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and that not all gifts are for everyone. So I do not believe that you must speak in tongues to prove to a congregation that you are converted. 1 Corinthians defines this:
quote:
4There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. 6There are different kinds of working, but the same God works all of them in all men.
7Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. 8To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, 9to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, 10to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues. 11All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines.
#6 I do not feel any church has the power to convert anyone, this is a process that the individual must go through by his own experience, in his/her own time. You do not pray a prayer and get converted, that is a lie. You can pray a prayer to Jesus, and accept him as Lord, and be saved. This does not make you born again, or does it produce a manifestation of the Holy Spirit in you. Being saved is a continuous process. Once you accept Jesus, you must repent of your sins. That is the hard part.
#7 My conversion process: I accepted Jesus as my saviour 7 years ago. I felt nothing. I did not go to church, I did not repent. But I think Jesus started working on me. 7 years later, I get called by 3 complete strangers to be a spiritual leader of my family. Then my friends wife tells me about a church. This happens over the course of 3 days, in 2 countries. I go to the church, and listen to the "worship team" who are playing rock and roll, and worshiping God. I get slammed with the spirit, but do not fall over. It feels like being plugged into an electric socket, but in a good way. It rivals an orgasm, rush, being drunk, being stoned, and probably a few other things that I do not know about, without all the heaviness or repercussions of doing those things. It is a pure feeling, and you feel God's pureness through it. It is a cleansing healing feeling also.
Then for the next 2 weeks, I started felling this "Holy Spirit" and started listening to Christian music, and praying/talking to God about what it was I was feeling. I was asking him if it was real, and am I cracking up? 1 week had gone by, and I then realized something. I wasn't really sinning, and lost all my desire to sin. I lost all my desire to smoke pot or drink (I wasn't doing either heavy at all, and I had never felt like it was wrong). I did not want anything to interrupt this feeling of pureness, and closeness to God that I was experiencing.
Then I was driving down the NYS Thruway, doing about 65, when all of a sudden God started speaking to me in my thoughts. He told me that things were going to be a little different here on out, that he created me, he created the earth for us to exist in, that we screwed it up, and it's not as pure as it should be, he told me that no-one would ever be able to fool me, or lie to me, as long as I had the Holy Spirit close to me (I did not feel like I was lied to any more than the next person, or did I have a childhood problem with it), that some things were going to get tougher, and some things were going to get easier, but that he would be with me. The power of his Holy Spirit was so overwhelming that I had to pull over, and acll up my wife, who is a Christian since she was 12, and ask, what the heck is going on?
After that, the trees seemed greener, the air seemed fresher, and life seem to have a true meaning.
Keep in mind, that I already love the outdoors, and the woods, and did not think the trees could get any greener or more beautiful, and I certainly did not think that our polluted atmosphere could seem any fresher. It was at that precise moment, that my spirit was born, and then I could understand what the words "born again" mean. Even though I thought I was born again, because I had accepted Christ, I was not until that experience.
From that point you are called. The bible says many are called, but few are chosen. 1.5 years later, I can see why. I do not know if I am chosen or not, I hope that I will be.
Also keep in mind, that just before that point, I was relatively happy with my life. I have 5 kids, a beautiful log cabin on a lake, boats, cars, toys to play with. I feel so fortunate that I did not have to hit rock bottom to then "find God". I did have some what of a rough childhood, but compared to most people in this world, it was a piece of cake, and I always felt fortunate for my life.
I had gone to many churches, but they all felt so fake to me. I feel so lucky that I have found a church where the people in it, are so full of love, and seem to be very down to earth. I also did not feel like this was missing in my life.
The church I go, wouldn't throw you out, if you said the "f" word, or do they demand that you tithe. The do ask that if you are a member, to try tithing, and then judge for yourself if God pours out his blessings on you, as he promises in the bible. I liked this, because it puts it in Gods hands.
The church constantly tries to break tradition, but I guess no matter how hard you try, there will always be some tradition. They try to operate in a for-runner spirit, but remain true to scripture. This is not easy to do.
I am an assistant worship leader, and play keyboards for the church. There are times, that they let me play whatever I want. We can even mix secular music into if we want, as long as the words fit.
I regularly get blasted by the Holy Spirit, during many things in my life. Sometimes, when I least expect it too. I get it while using my gifts for Gods purpose, and sometimes I feel like I am about to fall down, I have not as of yet.
That was my experience, and I know it is exclusive to me. What other people go through is not for me to judge. Or is it for me to judge if they choose not to follow through on their experience, and then stop believing. Who knows, I may do the same thing myself, I hope not at this point.
I have personally developed a detailed rationalization of the conversion process (and am completely immune to it) and have summarized my thoughts in posts on this forum, quoted some time ago.
Again I tell you, no-one can make this conversion process happen, except God. You can immunize yourself from it, extremely easy. There is no pride in doing that.
For starters, I am familiar with (and have submitted to) the following types of Christian conversion experiences:
- Full immersion baptism
- Reciting of doctrine in front of congregation, with requisite declaration of faith
- "Touch" conversion (where recipient is required to fall backwards)
I am sorry if I offend you, but these are not "conversion experiences" They are empty rituals, that have no meaning, unless it comes from your heart. Not a single one will get you to know God, without your consent. You make it sound like a candy store experience, and maybe that’s what it was for you. Congratulations on knowing that what you went through was not real.
I have more to say, but I said enough for now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Gilgamesh, posted 06-02-2005 11:15 PM Gilgamesh has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 84 of 199 (215817)
06-10-2005 7:21 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by Faith
06-10-2005 12:10 AM


Re: charismatic experiences
OK, I've got to see this evidence. Reference please?
that might take me a while to find. it was something i read about long ago. might be this study:
Takeuchi, T., Miyasita, A., Inugami, M., Sasaki, Y., & Fukuda, K. (1994). Laboratory-documented hallucination during sleep-onset REM period in a normal subject. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 78, 979-985.
if not, it's one very similar. they do a lot of laboratory research on sleep paralysis in japan. i'll look a little harder tomorrow.
I'm not denying the phenomenon of sleep paralysis. I've experienced it myself. I'm simply doubting that it is enough to explain these complicated scenarios people report.
well, like i said. it doesn't explain the betty/barney hill story. it sure doesn't acount for all of them. but if it starts out with you in your bed, unable to move, that's sleep paralysis. gilgamesh is right, btw. the thing you describe months ago was textbook sleep paralysis.
They are contradicted by the scientific PREJUDICES, or ASSUMPTIONS is how I would put it. It hasn't been proved that the supernatural does not exist.
or aliens for that matter. in fact, large fields of science are rather hopeful that aliens DO exist: seti for instance. this isn't a case of "let's disprove those wacky christians!" it's a case of the most logical explanation. and sleep paralysis explains MOST of these cases. if not all.
What makes demons more acceptable? I reason from the Biblical revelation myself of course, and I find demons to be the more plausible explanation.
well, that's your assumption, and your prejudice now, isn't it? what if the reports of demons from the bible are nothing more exciting than what we're talking about now? sleep paralysis, and various psychological disorders passed off as possession. imagine, for instance, how tourette's syndrome would have been accepted in biblical times.
I'd point to the Bible reports of demons and the worldwide reports of experiences of demonic type beings, add to that the Biblical hint that their main design is to deceive,
what if the biggest deception is that they exist? personally, i believe in a god that has things a little more under control than that.
point you to some books by Christians about experiences with such phenomena
i've hundreds, maybe thousands of books on near death experiences. always written by people who fervently believe, and had their life changed by it.
but strap yourself into a g-force simulating centrifuge, and you can have one too. turns out the visions produced are just what happens when your brains runs out of oxygenated blood. so when people are dying -- ie: their brains are being deprived of oxygen -- and they experience the same exact thing... why should we think it's anything else than a natural product of our own brains?
same with sleep paralysis. if we know the brain produces certain types of hallucinations/dreams under certain circumstances, and then people report the same sorts of visions, under the same circumstances, why should we think they're anything else than products of our own brains?
and also a particular book about UFOs by a UFO expert who is a nonChristian and thinks the phenomena are {EDIT: real but} not physical. Something Vallee is his name? I'd have to look it up. Read it a long time ago. Very interesting book.
i've read a lot of stuff on ufo's. 99% of it is crackpot. there is a theory going round involving slow-moving geological electrical discharges (similar to ball-lightning) to explain exterio abduction experiences, like in "fire in the sky." apparently, the brain produces certain visions, along with memory loss, when you run high amounts of electricity through it. which is not suprising, really. but uh, as for the ideas about slow-moving ball lightning... i'm not so sure.
The rational explanation isn't better. You just like it better. Nobody has disproved the supernatural.
we can reproduce the rational. in fact, having had one such experience myself recently, and rationally understanding what it was, i was able to control it and bring myself out of it. many people who suffer the disorder more commonly have reported the same exact thing.
if it's demons, well, i killed one with my mind. which makes me pretty bad-ass.
My impression is that parents didn't even know about it, and that the victims themselves decided to come forward.
yes, but to whom?
psychology is a strange field. it requires tests to be double-blind very frequently, because of something called operator bias. it means that participants' views will often be tailored to the questioner's, whether or not either party means it to. and so the people actually performing the tests usually don't know what the test IS.
they've found that leading questions and suggestible states (like hypnosis. or childhood) can lead to false memories. but, like i said. just a thought.
They also acknowledge various apparitions, which the Mary apparitions fit.
well, no, that's still backwards. they hold the physical to be the apparition. visions themselves are considered peek-throughs to the other side. in a manner of speaking.
No, the *serpent* said if they ate of the *tree of the knowledge of good and evil* they'd be like God, not the tree of life.
actually, i was refering to what god said (which backs the snake, btw)
quote:
Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
see? god says they're like god. they only thing god has that they don't is eternal life. so god doesn't condemn them to die, specifically. he just removes the opportunity to have eternal life. which implies that they didn't have it before.
God said they would die if they ate of the tree of the knoweldge of good and evil and they DIED, they immediately died in the spirit to communion with God and eventually they died physically.
but that's not what god said, is it? god said they'd die, as in literally. he even emphasizes that he really means death. there's non of this "died in the spirit" bit in genesis, is there? as for separation from god, well, that's only when they got kicked out of the garden. where was god when they were eating? right before they ate? when they were talking to the serpent?
the direct consequence is revealed by the text: they realize they're naked, and they hide. so their "separation from god" at that point is self-imposed. and then god doles out their various punishments. farming, childbirth, and no legs. then they're kicked out.
Why do you believe the serpent?
because he was right.
according to god, anyways. god says "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil." is that not what the serpent said would happen?
They DID die. Did they become as gods?
according to god, yes. you either believe the story, or you don't. this bit where you're changing the ending doesn't really work.
You haven't accounted for "you shall surely die"
sure i did. i mentioned recently, although i think in another thread, that it was empty or exagerated thread designed as a deterent. it's like threatening to kill your kids if they something wrong. you're not REALLY going to kill them. you're just trying to scare them into not doing it. because you care about them.
and Paul's acknowledgment that death came through one man
so did life. every human being is descended for adam, right?
but to say that adam created life would be blasphemy. adam didn't create life; god did. neither did adam create death. god created that too. it's no real suprise that adam was the first to die.
which shows that Adam was immortal before his disobedience.
doesn't follow. paul stating his interpretation does not change the word of god to say what he means in genesis. genesis records god as saying that adam would not live forever without the tree of life. which means that adam was not created immortal, but there was a three there to make him immortal.
YOu have little faith in God to think he'd make a threat and not follow through on it.
no, i'm quite thankful that he didn't. and the text is plainly evident that he didn't. he says that when adam eats, he will die. the statement is causal. not die at some future time. when he eats.
you must have very little faith in god to have to move the goalposts in order for your god to score a touchdown. all i'm saying is that he deliberately missed, and the gesture of kindness and caring disappears if you make him score that last point.
Not necessarily. He may have had a vague idea but it wasn't until he saw actual death he really understood it.
would he have understood it from abel's? or only his own? now, i'm all for adam being seen as stupid. (because he is. who blames god for his own misdeeds?) but we never see the snake and eve arguing over the semantics of what god meant by death.
it's pretty clear that adam and eve thought it meant DEATH. not "spiritual" death. non of this "in a manner of speaking" stuff.
No, not even the righteous Enoch and Job. Job died, which is the proof he wasn't sinless
hate to point this out, but enoch's got a leg up here. jesus died. enoch, however, did not. (also, i can't find the bit about job dying in the bible...)
as the "wages of sin is death." If you sin you die, if you die it's proof you're a sinner.
jesus promised us we wouldn't. why do we still die if our sins have been removed by him?
paul is also wrong, btw. the wages of sin are not death. the wages of sin are repetance and atonement. only specific and grievous sins required sacrifice under the levitical standard. the price of most sins was a ritual, and feeding the levites with bread and oil. read leviticus if you don't believe me.
Jesus is FULL GOD AND FULL MAN according to all the creeds of the Church back to the beginning.
alright, but as a full man he is not allowed to be worshipped.
Yes. He was both God and Man and he suffered in our place.
how can he be separate from something he is?
You need to study up on the Trinity. You have a false view of it. Three persons in one God.
studied it alot. it doesn't make any kind of sense for those of us who've read the bible. it's another non-biblical dogmatic holdover from catholicism. like i said. if jesus is to be a sacrifice, and take our separation from god, he cannot himself be god. another god, sure. but there is only one god.
a SON of god, however....
I didn't call him a prophet. I've never heard him referred to as a prophet. I said his writings are scripture. But in a way, since he spoke directly with the risen Christ, perhaps he could be called a prophet.
well, you did equate him to one. prophets can also be false, though, mind you. god gives pretty clear instructions on how to tell the false ones. if they speak in the name of anyone other than yahweh, or their prophecies fail to come true. since paul does not speak of the future, all we can test him on is who he speaks for.
mind also the fact that when the israelites made the golden calf, the said it was the same god.
It helps me to know what I think and to understand Christian theology better to debate it.
you argue for it, not debate it. i debate it. if you weren't somewhat open to disagreement, i suspect you wouldn't be here. all i'm asking is that you examine these things a little more closely, instead of just accepting everything. some of this stuff really doesn't make sense at all when you start examining it.
God wrote it. God chose them, they didn't choose God. The Jews who recognized Jesus as the Messiah are part of the True Israel, hundreds of thousands of them in the time of Jesus. The OT is very clear that only a "remnant" are God's. Paul says "not all Israel is Israel" and "blindness has happened to them in part" for the sake of the Gentiles.
i spoke before of god failing to follow through on a thread. you're speaking of god failing to follow through on a promise. and so is paul. and that's just anti-biblical, and anti-god, isn't it? saying that god revoked his promise, like that?
Jesus teaches that the Pharisees got it all wrong. You seem to believe the Pharisees instead of Jesus.
jesus taught that the pharisees had forsaken their tradition. what jesus preached (aside from the getting to heaven bits) was STRONGLY jewish reformationist stuff.
what paal preached was something entirely different: a whole new religion. i'm arguing closer to jesus: most of my views line up pretty squarely with reform judaism.
Of course not. Sin is the reason for the sacrfice of Christ as it was the reason for ALL the sacrifices in the Bible and in human history. He was sinless, but He died BECAUSE of our sin, to save us from our sin. That's the whole point. Come on, Arach, that's what the New Testament SAYS.
ok. let's recap:
christ's sacrifice = god's will.
if sin had not entered the world, there would have been no need or reason for the sacrifice.
so.
why do you think sin entered the world?

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Faith, posted 06-10-2005 12:10 AM Faith has not replied

  
Gilgamesh
Inactive Member


Message 85 of 199 (216104)
06-11-2005 7:28 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by Faith
06-10-2005 6:05 AM


Re: paranormal phenomena etc.
Faith wrote:
You have to understand that I STARTED out where you are. I can still misinterpret experiences, of course, and once you start experiencing this stuff you are likely to have all kinds of wild interpretations that need to settle down, but no way will I ever go back to the blinkered materialistic tunnel vision.
And you have since made a leap of faith and have thrown rational thought out the window. You now have too much emotional investment in your new found faith to consider contrary evidence. We witness this on every thread you participate in on this board.
Dogma is simply the codification of established knowledge, and when the knowledge is revelation by God it is simply not open to discussion. Scientists have their dogmas too. Everyone does.
Dogma:
1. A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church.
2. An authoritative principle, belief, or statement of ideas or opinion, especially one considered to be absolutely true
Dogma Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com
When you can unambigiously prove that you have received a revelation from a God, then we will be in a position to consider whether such revelation is worthy of discussion. Until that moment, dogma merely comes from the minds of men often acting in their own selfish interest.
Science has mechanisms in place to limit the effect of subjectively held opinions or dogma. That's why scientists can be people of many faiths and philosophical persuasions but yet still come to the same conclusions.
However, EXPERIENCE is something else.
It's subjective and can be very flawed.
The materialistic science mentality will not countenance the supernatural for half an instant.
It already has. It has driven the supernatural from our understanding of the universe back to merely the realm of philosophy, religion and quackery.
If you have read many of my posts you may have run across the one where I say I used to subscribe to Skeptical Inquirer which focuses on the paranormal. As I recall, every article claimed to disprove this or that phenomenon under investigation and give a naturalistic interpretation.
I am that confident that the Skeptical Inquirer does a consistent job of debunking the paranormal that I will provide a link to it for those out there that aren't insanely credulous and still retain critical thinking skills:
HTML Meta Tag
My critical thinking skills have always been superior, and I'm as prone to dismissing such experiences on naturalistic terms as you are, only now I know better.
But you are happy to consider purely subjective experiences, that are arguably caused by physchological episodes or schizophrenia, as evidence of the supernatural that no-one else can see. How is that a superior form of critical thinking? You could be living in a fantasy world of your own making and you would have no way of knowing.
Sorry, I know things you do not know.
Agree. You "know" a lot of stuff that is very likely to be totally untrue. Don't apologise. I prefer reality.
That's because you dismiss the testimony of millions of witnesses of all cultures over the millennia. You reinterpret it by "modern" standards and so blind yourself to what it really is.
That you can't see the flaw in this logic is clear evidence of the emotional investment that you have in your religious interpretation of reality.
Sure, throughout history many many people believed in the supernatural. That's because we didn't understand the natural. Now we do. The ancient Gods of the elements, planets, and animals have all given way. We no longer need to invoke supernatural explanations and our Gods have receded to the heavens, out of sight, but not out of mind because of evolutionary need for religiousity still remains.
Study history. Our forefathers got it wrong. Science has provided us with a tool to get a considerable amount of stuff right. And by living in this modern world, sitting at the computer in front of you, you cannot possibly disagree.
Science is out of bounds when it leaves its proper place of understanding the physical world.
Agree to an extent. Most like to emphasise that science answers the how and religion answers the why. But where religion makes claims of supernatural powers affecting the material world, we can use science to investigate those claims.
When it gets into society and personality and spirituality and history it is just an arrogant fool.
You're only saying that because you are uncomfortable with the findings of science when it delves within those realms. IMO it is performing a very valuable sevice as it is a tool to depower the destructive influence of religious extremism. It is doing a fine job of re-assessing Christian history outside of the churche's yoke, and a fine job of reducing religiousity to a very real world concept that can be studied and analysed.
Prepare to become increasingly uncomfortable as science progresses.
Not that it doesn't give some useful information about some things, but overall the "goat herders" got it right.
Er, nope. Medicine, nup. Age of the earth, nup. Origins of the universe, stars and planets, nup. Shape of the earth, nup. Spacial organisation of the solar system, nup. Origins and evolution of life, nup. They pretty much well got nothing right.
The mere characterization of these people as superstitious and primitive shows you are no judge of character, but in thrall to the god of modernity.
I have been impressed by their philosophical insights, and accordingly have been studying more ancient history to get a context. We often forget that there were many great philosophical thinkers around the times the Old Testament was written. Science, as we know it, didn't exist, so it is hardly surprising that they got many concepts wrong. They generally just copied even older supertitious beliefs anyway.
channeling are big. Oracles. Near-death experiences. Out-of-body experiences. Wait and see I'd say.
Channellers just used hot or cold reading to derive their guesses. Oracles? NDE's are oxygen debt: see arachnophilia's post above. Out of body are temporal lobe experiences. Look at that: a whole swath of your demons dispelled in one blow.
You are too credulous, Faith.
James Randi regularly deals with all of the this stuff:
JREF - Home
I guess we're going to get into an "is too - is not" thing here if we don't watch it.
No we wont! History has shown us that supernatural explanations have always given way to natural explanations. The only situations where they haven't is where we have insufficient evidence and can no longer investigate the claim.
Provide one example of of a scenario (that can be re-examined) wherein a supernatural explanation has greater explanatory power.
I've had many many prayers answered.
Care to test your power of prayer?
. Take the Chinese oracle the I Ching and ask it thousands of questions -- you think the question and throw coins to get the answer -- philosophical questions, who it is, what it thinks about such and such, or anything you like. Write down the question before you throw the coins and note the number combination and the answer and any impression you have about the seeming "coincidence" of the answers. I had the impression that the numbers fall within probability but the answers were about 90% uncannily appropriate as to MEANING. But I'm sure it's possible to explain away anything too. AND if there ARE demons controlling these things they may not see fit to play along with you anyway
Ok, if you believe that this test solicits results above probability, submit you test to James Randi and score yourself a million dollars.
Here's another test. Get half a dozen astrologers with lots of experience and good reputation (there are frauds among these too, and some who rely on "psychic power" -- try to screen those out and go for the ones who simply read the chart). Prepare the birth horoscopes (there are websites that will draw them for you -- don't bother with the "readings" offered there) of a dozen or so people who have their birth certificates so the exact time and place of birth is known. They have to be roughly the same age -- within a few years would be ideal -- because the position of the "heavy" or slow-moving planets (Pluto, Uranus, Neptune) will give away who's in what generation. Give the charts to the astrologers and let them study them. Then let the people be interviewed one at a time in some depth by the astrologers all gathered together for the purpose, taking care to avoid anything that might give away age or birthday. If the astrologers are good they should be able to match the person with his/her horoscope with much greater than probability.
Oh God, astrology?
Done. Failed. NEXT!
What do you mean, test astrology? - Skeptico
You really are too credulous.
EDIT: A Christian may not have anything to do with either of the above. This is from my pre-Christian occultic experience. It is forbidden by God to consult oracles and they are associated with demonic activity in the Bible, so even recommending such a study to you is possibly very wrong of me. I hope I don't regret it.
Christians you need not waste you time investigating superntural claims that have already been debunked. Please be very, very careful receiving spiritual advice by people who hold their views dogmatically, do not utilise critical thinking, value their own subjective appraisal of reality above those of others, have visions of mythical creatures and believe they communicate directly with God. History has repeatedly shown us that these people are very, very dangerous.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Faith, posted 06-10-2005 6:05 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Faith, posted 06-11-2005 11:37 AM Gilgamesh has not replied
 Message 87 by Phat, posted 06-11-2005 12:12 PM Gilgamesh has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 86 of 199 (216141)
06-11-2005 11:37 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by Gilgamesh
06-11-2005 7:28 AM


Re: paranormal phenomena etc.
Wow you certainly feel free to make outrageously rude intrusive statements about my personal motives that are hardly warranted by anything I've said. Where do you get the right to psychoanalyze me? If I were running this place I would disallow that kind of personal remark. It's far nastier than namecalling.
Second observation is that you are awfully certain about your judgments of everything, militant even. Kind of a crusader perhaps. Unbelievably arrogant I would add. I wonder if you are willing to tolerate any disagreement with your conclusions whatever, or are you just out to denigrate your opponents and trash their character?
You also respond rather snappily and out of context to some other statements. What's the point if you are going to take things out of context. Don't bother answering please.
About the tests I proposed, the one about the I Ching involves too much subjective interpretation of its messages to lend itself to a test, especially by those of a militant debunking mindset. As for your link about astrology tests I see they've become a bit more sophisticated than they used to be, but 95% of them couldn't possibly tell you anything. You can't use personality inventories as they add their own interpretive problems to the mix. It would have to be astrologers directly interviewing people as they have their own ways of correlating charts with personality. There are a couple of tests at your link that seem to have attempted something along those lines. You can throw out all the rest. Perhaps I will read more later about the ones that seem relevant.
I think I've had enough conversation with you for quite some time to come however.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Gilgamesh, posted 06-11-2005 7:28 AM Gilgamesh has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 87 of 199 (216152)
06-11-2005 12:12 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by Gilgamesh
06-11-2005 7:28 AM


Re: paranormal phenomena etc.
Gilgamesh writes:
Sure, throughout history many many people believed in the supernatural. That's because we didn't understand the natural.
Not necessarily just this fact, however.
Now we do. The ancient Gods of the elements, planets, and animals have all given way. We no longer need to invoke supernatural explanations and our Gods have receded to the heavens, out of sight, but not out of mind because of evolutionary need for religiousity still remains.
When you speak of "we" you surely cannot include everyone...nor even a majority of people. This "we" ....who are they? I can say that God imagined man long before man had "evolved" even to the point of being able to imagine God. God may not be able to be provable by "science" but He surely has not been conclusively disproven, either.
Lets all keep our minds open, here...much of what a person believes IS..of course because of what you call emotional investment. I would assert that you have quite an emotional investment in human potential. Not that this is necessarily a bad thing. I only maintain that human intelligence is not the apex of a belief system, however.
Gilgamesh writes:
Christians you need not waste you time investigating superntural claims that have already been debunked.
And I would not cringe if all of what I have determined to be "supernatural" in my experience was to be debunked. I believe that I told you once about the time that I distinctly heard several voices at once coming from someone.
1)The event was witnessed by two other friends.
2) I have ruled out that I was being tricked by them. One can know their friends well enough to eventually expose such a joke were it perpetrated.
3) The setting was in my apartment at 2 a.m.
4) I felt a static electrical feeling accompanying these voices.
5) Nobody was influenced by any sort of intoxicants, and we were not expecting such an event to occur..in fact, it woke me up.
6) I will allow one variable...we have never invested our emotional energy into disproving this event.
7) This cannot be re-enacted, so I cannot expect you to believe it.
I maintain that even though science is based on facts and empiricism, the emotional investment towards a logical measureable world overseen by human reasoning can in itself be an emotional investment.
After all, if I were even partly right and God (and/or spiritual realm) DID exist, you would have to re-evaluate your entire belief system. Same as I would should the reverse apply.
I don't buy the claims that dismiss the Bible as entirely irrefutable. There are many respected scholatrs who disagree and say that the book is credible.
In other words, there is simply no conclusive evidence that I have yet to accept. Partly because I believe that humans are themselves imperfect and liable to taint the evidence to agree with their preconceptions.
This message has been edited by Phatboy, 06-11-2005 10:28 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Gilgamesh, posted 06-11-2005 7:28 AM Gilgamesh has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by Faith, posted 06-11-2005 12:28 PM Phat has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 88 of 199 (216155)
06-11-2005 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Phat
06-11-2005 12:12 PM


Re: paranormal phenomena etc.
I believe that I told you once about the time that I distinctly heard several voices at once coming from someone.
Since we have been describing such phenomena on this thread I wonder if you would describe this in more detail -- or refer to the message where you did describe it? Thanks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Phat, posted 06-11-2005 12:12 PM Phat has not replied

  
valerieelliott
Inactive Member


Message 89 of 199 (217004)
06-15-2005 12:30 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Gilgamesh
06-02-2005 11:15 PM


conversion
I was led to the Lord via telephone when a co-worker called for his schedule. He was always harrassing (witnessing) to me. I remember telling him one night that I was glad that Jesus worked for him--but I had real problems!! I was in the middle of the Paint and Hardware Dept. of Montgomery Ward's 1/17/85, appx 7:30 in the evening. Crying, broken, nowhere to turn for answers and help wiht my life. I didn't want to take the route my two younger brothers had taken--suicide. They were hurting, too...we grew up mad crazy...twilight zone. I had been running for years, tried everything else, nothing left but GOD. But when you've got nothing left but GOD, you've got enough to start again!

Val

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Gilgamesh, posted 06-02-2005 11:15 PM Gilgamesh has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Gilgamesh, posted 06-16-2005 3:49 AM valerieelliott has not replied

  
Gilgamesh
Inactive Member


Message 90 of 199 (217329)
06-16-2005 3:49 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by valerieelliott
06-15-2005 12:30 AM


Re: conversion
Hello valerieelliott,
Thank you for taking the time to share your very moving story. I'm am genuinely sorry to hear the tragedy about your brothers and to hear that you have had a very hard time in your life.
If your faith can help you, then I wish you all the best. I hope things take a turn for the better.
People experiencing a life crisis are very open to religious conversion. Organised religion is well aware of this. It is truly unfortunate that other support, professional or family, was not available to you in your time of need.
Remember that just because your need for faith was so strong and that religion provided you with what you needed, you are not immune to the abuse often inherent in organised religion.
I again wish you the very best, valerieelliott, in getting your life back on track.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by valerieelliott, posted 06-15-2005 12:30 AM valerieelliott has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by ringo, posted 06-16-2005 12:15 PM Gilgamesh has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024