Personal experience argument
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-07-2015, 07:25 PM (This post was last modified: 18-07-2015 07:28 PM by RocketSurgeon76.)
RE: Personal experience argument
(17-07-2015 09:39 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Experience, particularly when corroborated by multiple witnesses, may often be taken as facts in evidence in a court of law. I will again ask how you dare consider theists to be deluded when the majority of people who have ever lived in all times, in all cultures, have been theist.

Just needed to address this one thing...

http://people.eku.edu/winslowm/psylaw/ey...spaper.htm

(All that follows is a quote of the above link's opening sentences. I post without italics for ease-of-reading.)

Throughout history the eyewitness has gained support and weight added to their testimony in our court system. In this paper I will try to demonstrate the importance of not relying solely on their testimony because, as I will show, misidentification is more common than most in society believes. Many research experiments have looked at this highly controversial topic and studied it from every possible angle. What influences the eyewitness at the time of the event, are there any factors that may distort the viewer’s perspective, just how reliable is the human memory? These questions and more are what will be covered and explained throughout this paper.

In a court of law the eyewitnesses’ testimony of what happened can either make or break the case being presented. The eyewitnesses’ confidence in their words can lead even the toughest jury to convict an innocent person. This confidence can persuade the jury to believe whatever it is that they are saying and give the false impersonation that what they are saying is actually the truth. Our court system assumes that individuals’ memory can perform like a video in that they will be able to store information with precise clarity and without prejudice. The current research on perception and memory does not validate this idea of a human recording device. It generally states that the reliability of the human memory is far from perfect and can be influenced by many different factors that are occurring at the time of the event in question and even at times after the event.

Noted in the current research on memory is the idea of unconscious transference, it states that eyewitnesses can place an innocent bystander at the scene of the crime or even as the accused, even when the accused is not present at the time. The theory reports that memories of past events can interfere with the present memory. The eyewitness might recall the accused individual from a scene that might have taken place more than three months ago, but still be able to place them as the accused with their own amount of confidence. This is where every individual should take notice, this places the entire public at risk for being the accused! This may not be entirely correct but it stands that the individual making the accusations will believe through suggestion that they are making the correct assumption and will then produce confidence in their statement, thus enabling others to believe what they are saying. This just keeps snowballing to a point where the accused goes from being suspected of a crime to being convicted of committing the crime.

See also.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RocketSurgeon76's post
19-07-2015, 06:57 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
Morondog,

Nice name.
There is no risk whatsoever. Don't seek shelter or sanctity. I have describes my experiences numerous times. My personal experiences aren't at question. I don't go to church.
If your so curious then download tapatalk and search my name. You will find my recounting of salvation and other related experiences. There is nowhere I can go and not be tested on all fronts. Even Christians must refrain from physical attack. I am alone but with all in the Lord. I do not seek approval of my personal experiences from other people. Why would I? How could that benifit my cause? It would only center thought on myself as opposed to my message. Not what I am here for. Not productive to my goal. You have less understanding than most, or are lazy and don't read. Christ, isn't exactly required for my forgiveness or Faith. Really skim through my posts and then let's talk.
I look forward to it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-07-2015, 06:58 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(17-07-2015 09:23 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(17-07-2015 06:59 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Of course my personal salvation would leave the doubtful with doubt. I will not attempt to explain at this time due to the negativity. I will say that it was very similar to other cases I have heard about. Sudden, complete ease of burden, overwhelming joy and understanding. An outside source of pure good and obvious righteousness instantly explained everything before I could even completely question it. My entire existence was proven to be destined regardless of my abundant lack of belief or care. I'm pretty sure I have described it in some detail on this forum before. Explaining how t again just for your ridicule doesn't really sound too productive.

There are quite good psychological explanations for sudden religious conversion, usually involving priming by the subconscious or personal 'surrender'.

Your experience does nothing to convince anyone else of the truth of your belief - your experience is not evidence.
Exactly, that's why my description of such is pointless.
(17-07-2015 09:21 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(17-07-2015 06:59 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Of course my personal salvation would leave the doubtful with doubt. I will not attempt to explain at this time due to the negativity. I will say that it was very similar to other cases I have heard about. Sudden, complete ease of burden, overwhelming joy and understanding. An outside source of pure good and obvious righteousness instantly explained everything before I could even completely question it. My entire existence was proven to be destined regardless of my abundant lack of belief or care. I'm pretty sure I have described it in some detail on this forum before. Explaining how t again just for your ridicule doesn't really sound too productive.

So... that unconvincing that you can't risk exposing it to the unrelenting glare of skepticism huh? You know, with actual *facts*, or stuff that people believe to be fact, they're never so bloody shy about questioning it. They're not invested in it to the point that they're afraid to test it. If your God's so great, why're you, the mighty preacher man, afraid to speak up and *testify*. Or do you guys only testify in nice safe places like church, where no one's gonna challenge you?

Ooo look, you're being persecuted. Isn't that lovely, now you know Jesus is gonna let you into heaven, because you are *blessed* for His name's sake Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-07-2015, 07:14 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(18-07-2015 07:24 PM)natachan Wrote:  I've always found the "anger" argument fairly insulting. My church experience was universally positive. The people involved were kind, and the message was rarely one of damnation, but of hope and community. I was treated well and had a lot of fun with the other kids there. I went to a religious school, and I don't hold any of that against my parents. Nor do I hold any resentment or anger towards the authority figures in the church. This was partially why I took so long coming out of religion after I (cognitively) knew of the problems with it. It had been such a positive experience, and I hold no resentment for it. The people involved were doing what they genuinely thought was best for me.

My anger only started to surface YEARS after I came out as an atheist. So not only AFTER I became an atheist, but AFTER I came out as one publicly. Years afterwards. And it isn't anger at religious figures in my life, or at religion as practiced by my family and friends. It's against those who place their religion as a license to hurt or oppress others. It's against the way that religion can corrupt people's minds. It's about the lies and hypocrisy that religious people engage in and justify or ignore using their faith.

Theists try to say that atheists are "angry" so as to rob us of our agency. They want to rob us of any validity our views might have. Because how could we have any validity? Something must be wrong with us, because their views are infallible.

Next theist who says this gets called a frightened child. If you are going to rob me of my agency like this I'll return the favor.
To stereotype is to be hypocritical in a way. Anger, fear, doubt, and a want to do whatever without the sense of guilt are some reasons people are atheists. One really big reason is that the beginning of the Bible attempts to recount the start of the Universe. This is impossible and actually like explaining the causes of God's actions which is wrong. It fails miserably, as anyone can see. This seeds doubt for the rest of the read. The men who wrote the Bible weren't guided when they wrote those early parts pertaining to original creation. To actually have this knowledge would make one feel almost equal to creation which is really wrong. The Lord did not guide parts of the Bible. Period. But yeah, if I had doubts like I did for over 25 years, or if I wanted to do what I felt was wrong without wanting to feel that wrong I would still be atheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-07-2015, 07:21 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(19-07-2015 06:57 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I have describes my experiences numerous times. My personal experiences aren't at question. I don't go to church.
If your so curious then download tapatalk and search my name. You will find my recounting of salvation and other related experiences.

Your personal experiences may convince you but they are worthless to anybody else. Even if I believed that you believe something extraordinary happened and that you believe it was some kind of supernatural cause, I can't evaluate that objectively. Nobody but you can hope to distinguish if your claims are accurate, delusions, or lies.

Quote:I do not seek approval of my personal experiences from other people.

If that were true you wouldn't throw a tantrum every time somebody ridiculed your claims.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like unfogged's post
19-07-2015, 07:25 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(19-07-2015 06:57 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  How could that benifit my cause? ... Not productive to my goal.

What is your goal?

The only one I can see is to troll this site by repeating unsubstantiated claims That may give you comfort but which anybody who values reason will simply dismiss.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-07-2015, 07:34 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(19-07-2015 07:14 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  To stereotype is to be hypocritical in a way. Anger, fear, doubt, and a want to do whatever without the sense of guilt are some reasons people are atheists. One really big reason is that the beginning of the Bible attempts to recount the start of the Universe. This is impossible and actually like explaining the causes of God's actions which is wrong. It fails miserably, as anyone can see. This seeds doubt for the rest of the read. The men who wrote the Bible weren't guided when they wrote those early parts pertaining to original creation. To actually have this knowledge would make one feel almost equal to creation which is really wrong. The Lord did not guide parts of the Bible. Period. But yeah, if I had doubts like I did for over 25 years, or if I wanted to do what I felt was wrong without wanting to feel that wrong I would still be atheist.

First this:
"To stereotype is to be hypocritical in a way."

Then this:
"Anger, fear, doubt, and a want to do whatever without the sense of guilt are some reasons people are atheists."


Congratulations! You have achieved hypocrisy!

I will let others address your gross misconceptions, as they be more eloquent than I.

CLEANUP ON AISLE 4!!!!

We have enough youth. How about looking for the Fountain of Smart?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Thinkerbelle's post
19-07-2015, 08:55 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(19-07-2015 06:57 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Morondog,

Nice name.
There is no risk whatsoever. Don't seek shelter or sanctity. I have describes my experiences numerous times. My personal experiences aren't at question. I don't go to church.
If your so curious then download tapatalk and search my name. You will find my recounting of salvation and other related experiences. There is nowhere I can go and not be tested on all fronts. Even Christians must refrain from physical attack. I am alone but with all in the Lord. I do not seek approval of my personal experiences from other people. Why would I? How could that benifit my cause? It would only center thought on myself as opposed to my message. Not what I am here for. Not productive to my goal. You have less understanding than most, or are lazy and don't read. Christ, isn't exactly required for my forgiveness or Faith. Really skim through my posts and then let's talk.
I look forward to it.

Pops, if you believe Christ isn't exactly required for your forgiveness, you're not reading your Bible and you're just making up your own rules. You are making your own religion. God expects people to take His Word very seriously--anything else is idolatry and worthy of a good 'ole fashioned stoning according to the "good" book.

"Let the waters settle and you will see the moon and stars mirrored in your own being." -Rumi
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-07-2015, 10:16 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
Jennybee, not at all. Jesus returned to the Lord. You can believe in Jesus as the one proficied perfect human. You can believe he returened to God. You can understand that he died for our sins order for us to have way to salvation without being Jewish. I'm not making up anything. If it expressly states anywhere in the Bible that the only meens of salvation are through acceptance of Jesus Christ as your personal savior, or that you can do what you want in sin because all sin was played for in the blood of Christ then you have misenterpreted. Christ's energy returned to the source as all good energy does. Therefore he is an aspect of God. But to assume that other true believers whom don't quite understand the whole Jesus thing are gonna go to he'll, well that's Bs. And most likely due to misenterpretation, or manipulation through translation a some point, or curruption by man through initial writing. Regardless of why so many have this closed view it is wrong. In what reality would an all encompassing, loving, forgiving God stipulate such or condemn to he'll for such? None. It is miss representation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-07-2015, 10:37 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(19-07-2015 10:16 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Jennybee, not at all. Jesus returned to the Lord. You can believe in Jesus as the one proficied perfect human. You can believe he returened to God. You can understand that he died for our sins order for us to have way to salvation without being Jewish. I'm not making up anything. If it expressly states anywhere in the Bible that the only meens of salvation are through acceptance of Jesus Christ as your personal savior, or that you can do what you want in sin because all sin was played for in the blood of Christ then you have misenterpreted. Christ's energy returned to the source as all good energy does. Therefore he is an aspect of God. But to assume that other true believers whom don't quite understand the whole Jesus thing are gonna go to he'll, well that's Bs. And most likely due to misenterpretation, or manipulation through translation a some point, or curruption by man through initial writing. Regardless of why so many have this closed view it is wrong. In what reality would an all encompassing, loving, forgiving God stipulate such or condemn to he'll for such? None. It is miss representation.

John 14:6--Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

Romans 4:25--"He [Jesus] was handed over to die because of our sins, and he was raised to life to make us right with God."

1 Peter 3:18--"For Christ also suffered for sins once, the righteous for the sake of the unrighteous, that he might lead you to God. Put to death in the flesh, he was brought to life in the spirit."

John 5:24--"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life."

Read Deuteronomy 28 for God's "all loving" nature and his curses for not worshiping him. Here's a brief summary:

"But if you do not obey the voice of the Lord, your God, carefully observing all his commandments and statutes which I give you today, all these curses shall come upon you and overwhelm you:"

*You and your family will be cursed everywhere you go.
*God will send disease and plagues
*God will make all your enemies defeat you
*God will strike you with madness and blindness
*God will have your corpse picked apart by birds
*God will make you eat your own children
*God will send you into exile

"Let the waters settle and you will see the moon and stars mirrored in your own being." -Rumi
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: