Why I am creationist

Sounds a reasonable position to me.

Nope it's not - Experience is a terrible guide. It's quite easy to get people to recall events differently than actually occured or indeed recall figures who were not even present.Therefore experience of a entity that has no physical presence is a bit of a non-starter.

quote:

---

So, the number of people that claim to have experienced God over the documented history of man is not sufficient to claim He exists,

---

You start with the wrong question - it's more like "the number of people who claim to have experienced gods". Because if we say that Personal experience equals truth then Allah must be the true god..or maybe the jewish one. Maybe it's buddah? or Zeus? Is it sheer numbers that makes your god more true? maybe the experience of brighter people should count double? What about drug-users - maybe that should count for half an experience?

quote:

---

while those who claim to not have experienced God can claim His non-existence only by their lack of experiencing Him?

---

Nothing to do with experience - all to do with evidence - I don't see any - and it's not like science can test for Gods.This message has been edited by Charles Knight, 12-16-2004 02:18 PM

That's not experience (not in the sense that you are using it) that repeptition (or extension/development) of method.

OK - you have used the term experiment there - how do I falsify that experiment?

quote:

---

Repeat that several million times and you have a pretty defendable method I'd say.

---

Ok - outline the steps of that experiment for me? I'll do the same:1) take ball - roll off flat level table.2) What is the result? What happens when you repeat the experiment?

Sorry if I am simplifying this two far but if we want to go further into the epsitomology of science - I'm quite happy to do that.

quote:

---

You know trust that it is the only lens you need to filter scientific truth.

---

That's actually wrong - why do I need to trust in something that is repeatable and observable?Millons of Muslims say that their God is the true god. If more people become muslims, surely their collective experiences means that their god is more true that yours?

quote:

---

My thoughts on that is that all of these different religions are recognizing that there is a God, and that God created them.

---

But some think there are creatorS - Why is your experience more valid?

quote:

---

but I will note that in many of these other religions, they don't claim to "experience God."

---

But what about muslims? they claim the hand of Allah is everwhere ?So what is it? Your experience of god more valid then that of a muslim?

got ya - you've said in this and the other thread that you use logic (partly) as a guide.I take on board what you are saying - I can see how logic would led you to believe that the universe must have created itself.

Well if logic leads you to belive that the universe was created - it must have created itself, right? The only other logical position is that it had a creator who had a creator who had a creator....

I'm sort of wondering the same thing Ned.

Because of course otherwise your concept would be illogical (if I have understood how you have used the term, because people generally never me it in the same way or in terms of proposition,premise,proposal etc).

Sorry I got lost a while back - why is it we should believe in Zeus?or was it Allah?If you could just narrow it to say 50 possible gods, that would be a start.