Out of body religious experiences

[thrall]

The problem with the religion debate is the lack of evidence for and against. But we have the wonderful tool of logic.

Exactly Tom. You CAN NOT argue logic without evidence. Otherwise anything you may conclude, is determined with false logic either for or against. So, again.....the bottom line is only opinion.

And opinion is just that........an opinion. Opinion is neither right or wrong, it is only personal opinion.


QUOTE.....The discussion on religion has to be about which evidence there are and then evaluate them. There's no way we can reason about an entity we know nothing about.


Again ..my point exactly

There is no evidence.....for or against. So again, the bottom line is only opinion.



QUOTE.....These are all pretty basic things. So religious faith is not only about opinion, but structured reasoning and logic.



Your contradicting yourself here, Tom. How can you have structured reasoning and logic......without evidence?

The thing your not getting Tom, is that I'm playing Devils advocate for both sides.......LOL




I love you Tom..........kisses and hugs

Thrall

[TomOfSweden]

Exactly Tom. You CAN NOT argue logic without evidence. Otherwise anything you may conclude, is determined with false logic either for or against. So, again.....the bottom line is only opinion.

And opinion is just that........an opinion. Opinion is neither right or wrong, it is only personal opinion.


QUOTE.....The discussion on religion has to be about which evidence there are and then evaluate them. There's no way we can reason about an entity we know nothing about.


Again ..my point exactly

There is no evidence.....for or against. So again, the bottom line is only opinion.



QUOTE.....These are all pretty basic things. So religious faith is not only about opinion, but structured reasoning and logic.



Your contradicting yourself here, Tom. How can you have structured reasoning and logic......without evidence?

The thing your not getting Tom, is that I'm playing Devils advocate for both sides.......LOL




I love you Tom..........kisses and hugs

Thrall

Sorry for being unclear. We can use structured logic even though we have nothing to work with. The fact that we have no evidence is also evidence.

Christianity is formulated in such a way as to make it impossible to both verify and reject. How does this add to its credibility?

...and I've got this thing about always questioning myself. Even my own conclusions he he. Schizofrenic, who me....nah.... But I don't think I did so here.

[thrall]

Sorry for being unclear. We can use structured logic even though we have nothing to work with. The fact that we have no evidence is also evidence.

Christianity is formulated in such a way as to make it impossible to both verify and reject. How does this add to its credibility?

......Precisely.....


Evidence of non-evidence. So apply logic.......you can not prove or disprove.......anything.

Any and all conclusions you may make, logically, will only be opinion.........personal opinion.

All religions........not just Christianity......are set up with this conundrum built into them. That is why they are not a science, Tom.

They are however..........based on blind faith.

Credibility has nothing to do with anything in any Religion, because there is nothing to prove. Religon is about believing blindly in something bigger than yourself.

love you Tom
hugs and kisses

Thrall

[TomOfSweden]

......Precisely.....


Evidence of non-evidence. So apply logic.......you can not prove or disprove.......anything.

Any and all conclusions you may make, logically, will only be opinion.........personal opinion.

All religions........not just Christianity......are set up with this conundrum built into them. That is why they are not a science, Tom.

They are however..........based on blind faith.

Credibility has nothing to do with anything in any Religion, because there is nothing to prove. Religon is about believing blindly in something bigger than yourself.

love you Tom
hugs and kisses

Thrall

I'll buy that but it's when the religious makes claims as if it was a choice made by rational evaluation of available evidence that I get pissed off. If somebodies best case for something is the impossibility of proving it's non-existence. It's still making an inference from nothing at all, which shouldn't allow us to make any statements about it what so ever, let alone a whole library of religious texts we have in the world today. They are all inferences from thin air. Or rather they are inferences from phenomena which we today judge as insanity. If Moses would come today he'd be locked up or just laughed at. Just like we're doing to Raëlians today.

I heard an interview yesterday with a scholar studying religion yesterday called Barry Kosmin. He is responsible for USA's two largest religious surveys. One in 1990 and one in 2001. They where both pretty comprehensive regarding what people believe in detail. Where he did manage to show that belief in the supernatural was increasing. This was the basis for a shock of fear that went through the secular community a while back. The assumption has always been that the atheist faith would be increasing. But what Kosmin said in the interview was that even though religious faith is increasing the rejection of religious authorities and texts is also increasing at an ever growing pace. So it's not the old religions that are growing but the numbers of peoples own private interpretations growing. Which is to me a sign of health. People thinking more and more and questioning old truths more and more is always good. This was only in the USA though. But I think the trend is pretty international and equally true for the middle-east albeit a bit later in the start.

This effectively ended my crusade against god. I don't mind people being deluded, as long as they don't make it a hassle for me boarding aeroplanes or worse. My only problem with religion is that it can be dangerous. But so can pretty much anything so I'll bury my hatchet now.