Personal experience argument
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-07-2015, 10:37 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(09-07-2015 12:22 PM)Commonsensei Wrote:  
(09-07-2015 10:17 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I'm sorry but it is unreasonable to expect to find evidence for desert wanderings upon shifting sands where only tents and no permanent structures resided. You are also underestimating the size of the desert in question and how much digging would be needed to find artifacts--say, the dolls of children or some skeletal remains.

Well not entirely true Q. Thou it may be hard it's not unreasonable. They would have had more then tents. Pottery is normaly a popular artifact that could be found. Even native american tribes that would move with the heard would at one point or another stop. Their are nomadic tribes in the middle east today that follow routes that their ancestors placed. things get left behind, or broken and would not be brought on their trip.

Jewelry, tools, maybe a toys. All things that we've found from other nomadic tribes.
[Image: 59A7A1AB-E1B1-498F-A230-80E295A9E7F7_cx0...s_n_r1.jpg]
http://www.rferl.org/content/new_york_ex...42420.html

People have used the bible to map out the route the the Exodus would have taken. Archaeology dose take a lot of time. Sometimes years. But if we have key sights we could find check those out.

[Image: Hebrews%20-%20The%20Exodus%20from%20Egypt.jpg]

From what I could find we haven't found any from the Exodus.

(But do some real research and i'll check out what your findings are.)

You'll also note the absurd distance that they took to get to the "promised land" If they we're being guided by a devine being. Wouldn't it make more sense to take the quicker route?

(09-07-2015 10:17 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  The slaughter of the infants in context was not more than 30 children--all had to be in a little town area of Bethlehem and under age 2. It might have been 10 children. You are less well versed in Roman histories than I if you think soldiers killing 10 kids in the Ancient Near East was "scroll worthy news".

The correct number of infants that should have been slaughtered is 0.

(09-07-2015 10:17 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  The Bible has been proved correct in certain matters of astronomy and cosmology. For example, the astounding (true) claim that the universe is in expansion.

Vague comments.
Job 9:8 He alone stretches out the heavens and treads on the waves of the sea.

Psalm 104:2 The Lord wraps himself in light as with a garment; he stretches out the heavens like a tent

In Genesis 1:6 - 1:8
And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
[Image: Ancient-Hebrew-view-of-universe.png]

They are talking about the ferment. The bubble that protected earth. Not the expansion of the universe.

Stretches out the heavens like a tent.

[Image: img-deserts-bedouintent.jpg]

I've addressed some of this in two other posts today, but I'll say that if we take any of your routes and move them over a mile or two North or South, we will be "digging" for a long time in that desert, right?

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-07-2015, 10:39 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(09-07-2015 12:37 PM)Simon Moon Wrote:  
(08-07-2015 10:29 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I guess a wise response would be, how would YOU know if it was valid or not? On what basis (psychic, paranormal, mind-reading) are YOU able to qualify/disqualify these kinds of numinous claims? Be honest, can you even verify he walked into a Hindu temple that day? Were you there?

You can see why Christians tire so easily of atheists who tend to judge Christians' personal experiences from afar.

I think you kind of missed my point.

If a Christian that you knew to be sane and reliable, claimed to have a personal experience with Jesus, you would be very likely to believe them. Correct?

But if a person of similar sanity and reliability came to you and claimed they had an experience with the Hindu god, I would guess that you would dismiss their claim.

What I am trying to figure out here is, when a person claims to have a personal experience with a god, what is the algorithm you use in order to tell the difference between a legitimate experience with a god, and one that is probably something else?

Because as an outsider, all claimed personal experiences with gods look a lot like misinterpretations of a natural brain state, that are framed with religious trappings.

For example: put a person in a Church environment, surround them with, dozens or more believers, religious iconography, people singing hymns joyously, repeating ritual words in unison, a pastor speaking in a charismatic manner, etc and it is pretty well understood that this can cause a change in brain states. So, they have a completely natural change in brain states, and they frame it with Christian meaning, reinforced by all the other believers around them.

Now, lets say another person is in the same environment, but they have an actual experience with a god. As an outsider, how am I supposed to know the difference? How do you tell the difference?

Why would I dismiss their claim? Why wouldn't I say the Hindu visitation was a spiritual, demonic visitation?

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-07-2015, 10:40 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(09-07-2015 12:57 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  
(09-07-2015 12:22 PM)Commonsensei Wrote:  Well not entirely true Q. Thou it may be hard it's not unreasonable. They would have had more then tents. Pottery is normaly a popular artifact that could be found. Even native american tribes that would move with the heard would at one point or another stop. Their are nomadic tribes in the middle east today that follow routes that their ancestors placed. things get left behind, or broken and would not be brought on their trip.

Jewelry, tools, maybe a toys. All things that we've found from other nomadic tribes.
[Image: 59A7A1AB-E1B1-498F-A230-80E295A9E7F7_cx0...s_n_r1.jpg]
http://www.rferl.org/content/new_york_ex...42420.html

People have used the bible to map out the route the the Exodus would have taken. Archaeology dose take a lot of time. Sometimes years. But if we have key sights we could find check those out.

[Image: Hebrews%20-%20The%20Exodus%20from%20Egypt.jpg]

From what I could find we haven't found any from the Exodus.

(But do some real research and i'll check out what your findings are.)

You'll also note the absurd distance that they took to get to the "promised land" If they we're being guided by a devine being. Wouldn't it make more sense to take the quicker route?


The correct number of infants that should have been slaughtered is 0.


Vague comments.
Job 9:8 He alone stretches out the heavens and treads on the waves of the sea.

Psalm 104:2 The Lord wraps himself in light as with a garment; he stretches out the heavens like a tent

In Genesis 1:6 - 1:8
And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
[Image: Ancient-Hebrew-view-of-universe.png]

They are talking about the ferment. The bubble that protected earth. Not the expansion of the universe.

Stretches out the heavens like a tent.

[Image: img-deserts-bedouintent.jpg]

Yep, and if the Nile turned it's 4,000 mile+ length to blood, they could have easily found a blood layer somewhere along its length. Also every fish in the Nile would have died, I'm pretty sure there would be some type of evidence if EVERY fish in the Nile died.

The story also said that Egypt's livestock were killed, I think we could find evidence of every single livestock in Egypt being killed.

I also think some of those countries that traded with Egypt would have mentioned something in their records about Egypt having no fish or livestock to trade.

The myth of Moses oversteps and exaggerates so much that it turns the story into a ridiculous fairytale. They're not even good storytellers, anyone with a sense of reality would try to downplay some of these events even if they really happened to maintain believability.

The stories were targeted at primitive savages that had no way of knowing whether it rang true or not, the more educated people of the time didn't believe any of these horseshit stories anyway, they knew it was just a means to control people.

Are you unaware the Nile blood was all turned back to water again? Case in point: The Nile today has water, not blood in it... Drinking Beverage

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-07-2015, 10:45 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(09-07-2015 02:06 PM)Reltzik Wrote:  The four Biblical types of "science" are also some of its approaches to prophesy.

Approach 1: Say shit that could easily have been discovered in that day and age, like the fact that the oceans have currents or that sheep give birth to sheep rather than chickens. Let later generations (such as our own) hype and shill this as some vast god-given knowledge, when really any schmuck could have written it down. This is like finding an existing bullet hole and target on the broadside of the barn and then bragging that you were the one who shot the bullseye.

Approach 2: Say a whole bunch of vague, poetic stuff. When some of that vague poetic stuff bears a passing resemblance to things that science later discovers if you squint really hard, declare victory. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD YOU CLEARLY STATE THE SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY IN PRECISE AND UNAMBIGUOUS TERMS. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD YOU EVER ACKNOWLEDGE THE FACT THAT NOT ONE BELIEVER EVER TOOK THIS VERSE FOR WHAT IT "TRULY" MEANT UNTIL SCIENTISTS HAD ALREADY FOUND THE TRUTH ON THEIR OWN. This is like plugging thousands of bullets into the broad side of the barn, and then jumping around like overjoyed incontinent monkeys when the scientists figure out where the target actually was and, surprise, there's a bullet sorta kinda near it. ... of course, sometimes there isn't, like with the Theory of Evolution and the age of the Earth. Those incontinent monkeys get really nasty when that happens.

This approach is usually the basis for the "Bible predicted the expanding universe" claim. It's usually predicated on phrases about how God spread the heavens over our heads like a tent, which is neither a clear enunciation of a currently-expanding universe, nor unambiguous in its meaning (and seems, on plain reading, to be talking about the momentary action of putting in place a static, physical roof or ceiling, rather than a dynamic expansion of stars, or to simply be flowery metaphor), nor caused a great many believers to believe in an expanding universe until Hubble taught them otherwise. The other verses cited as this scientific claim are that God "bows the heavens", which is even vaguer, even more ambiguous, even less like the actual science on plain reading, and proved just as great of a failure in cluing people in.

Approach 3: Pretend it's science because it's in the Bible, even when real science disagrees with it. This is akin to missing the target on the barn wall... and the entire barn... and then going to the tree you accidentally hit and drawing a bullseye around the bullet hole.

Approach 4: Ignore every example of false "science" in the Bible. Ever. Such as, say, rabbits chewing their cud, or human languages diverging from a single location in the Middle East only a few thousand years ago. In particular, ignore all the thousands of ways that the extremely vague flowery language can be loosely interpreted as BAD science, and just focus on the equally-loose interpretation that matches up. That stretched-out-the-heavens line? Maintain, now and always, in true Orwellian fashion, that does not AND NEVER DID mean the firmament, despite that being what Christians thought it meant for most of Christian history until the scientists showed them better and got severely persecuted for it. No. The Bible always meant that this was an expanding universe, just as you have always been at war with Eastasia. This is akin to riddling the barn into more holes than wood with a Gatling gun, and then refusing to acknowledge any of the holes save the five that actually hit the target, but instead brag incessantly about those five.

One thing to note of all these approaches, is that they are not things that people do when they actually give a damn about finding the truth, or honestly evaluating some method for its capacity to arrive at the truth. They're what people do when they care more about looking good than being correct. When they want to spin their failures, pull the wool over the eyes of others, put on a veneer of unearned respectability, and steal credit from others. These are tactics of fundamentally and unwaveringly dishonest people: con artists, hoodwinkers, and apologists.

An interesting perspective, except I say God wrote all the Bible and YOU say it was a bunch of different, hack writers. ALL the hacks said THIS about the known universe, that it is expanding! I've posted over a dozen verses on another thread that "God stretches out the heavens."

There is enough meat about cosmology and the cosmos in the Bible to whet the appetite of the inquirer. No, there is no autographed copy with God's signature to make a skeptic who hates the concept of the Christian God a God-believer.

Your life is the sum of a remainder of an unbalanced equation inherent to the programming of the Matrix. You are the eventuality of an anomaly, which, despite my sincerest efforts, I have been unable to eliminate from what is otherwise a harmony of mathematical precision. While it remains a burden assiduously avoided, it is not unexpected, and thus not beyond a measure of control. Which has led you, inexorably... here... As you are undoubtedly gathering, the anomaly is systemic - creating fluctuations in even the most simplistic equations... The problem is choice.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-07-2015, 10:48 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(10-07-2015 10:39 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(09-07-2015 12:37 PM)Simon Moon Wrote:  I think you kind of missed my point.

If a Christian that you knew to be sane and reliable, claimed to have a personal experience with Jesus, you would be very likely to believe them. Correct?

But if a person of similar sanity and reliability came to you and claimed they had an experience with the Hindu god, I would guess that you would dismiss their claim.

What I am trying to figure out here is, when a person claims to have a personal experience with a god, what is the algorithm you use in order to tell the difference between a legitimate experience with a god, and one that is probably something else?

Because as an outsider, all claimed personal experiences with gods look a lot like misinterpretations of a natural brain state, that are framed with religious trappings.

For example: put a person in a Church environment, surround them with, dozens or more believers, religious iconography, people singing hymns joyously, repeating ritual words in unison, a pastor speaking in a charismatic manner, etc and it is pretty well understood that this can cause a change in brain states. So, they have a completely natural change in brain states, and they frame it with Christian meaning, reinforced by all the other believers around them.

Now, lets say another person is in the same environment, but they have an actual experience with a god. As an outsider, how am I supposed to know the difference? How do you tell the difference?

Why would I dismiss their claim? Why wouldn't I say the Hindu visitation was a spiritual, demonic visitation?

Q, first, I'm a little upset that you didn't come and say bye to me when I was thinking of leaving Sadcryface2 Second, have you seen anything on ancient Hindu cosmology--it blows any claims of Genesis being "scientific" out the window. If the Hindus visitation was demonic---those were pretty smart demons!

"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
[+] 3 users Like jennybee's post
10-07-2015, 10:58 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(10-07-2015 10:45 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  There is enough meat about cosmology and the cosmos in the Bible to whet the appetite of the inquirer. No, there is no autographed copy with God's signature to make a skeptic who hates the concept of the Christian God a God-believer.

There is no "meat about cosmology and the cosmos in the Bible". There is only your wishful twisting of words.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
10-07-2015, 11:09 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(10-07-2015 10:58 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(10-07-2015 10:45 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  There is enough meat about cosmology and the cosmos in the Bible to whet the appetite of the inquirer. No, there is no autographed copy with God's signature to make a skeptic who hates the concept of the Christian God a God-believer.

There is no "meat about cosmology and the cosmos in the Bible". There is only your wishful twisting of words.

It's even more hilarious to have a person who professes to take the bible literally say that. Drinking Beverage

There is countless and countless accounts of graphs like that one posted above, even one included in some good additions of Paradise Lost and other Biblical talking events before telescopes easily exposed their horrible flaws.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-07-2015, 11:29 AM
RE: Personal experience argument
(10-07-2015 10:31 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(09-07-2015 10:27 AM)morondog Wrote:  Laughat That's a nice vague "astounding(true)" fact you picked there too. Gimme a rock solid prediction that couldn't have been made by a priest making mystical woo poetry to impress other dolts. i.e. that is clearly and unequivocally not the result of human thought (or whatever passed for thought when the bible was written), but of God bestowing his divine wisdom on us.

Quote me verses, brother cosmologist. There's nothing that quite shows how far you woo peddlers have fallen as your desperate attempts to coopt scientific findings into your little cult. Gone are the days when you guys were the arbiters of truth Smile

Sure, here are ten prophecies to start: http://www.watchmanbiblestudy.com/Articl...illed.html and please take particular note of the prophecy of Ezekiel 4:3-6.

Thanks!

click here, read, absorb, ponder...

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_prophecies

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
10-07-2015, 12:16 PM
RE: Personal experience argument
(10-07-2015 11:29 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  
(10-07-2015 10:31 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Sure, here are ten prophecies to start: http://www.watchmanbiblestudy.com/Articl...illed.html and please take particular note of the prophecy of Ezekiel 4:3-6.

Thanks!

click here, read, absorb, ponder...

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_prophecies

Uhoh, trouble in Christianland:

Any church or preacher that claims that 1948 AD fulfilled Bible prophecy when modern Israel gained statehood, is a false teacher and ignorant of the bible. These false teachers are called "premillennialists, dispensationalists" and believe in the Rapture.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
10-07-2015, 12:17 PM
RE: Personal experience argument
(10-07-2015 10:37 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I've addressed some of this in two other posts today, but I'll say that if we take any of your routes and move them over a mile or two North or South, we will be "digging" for a long time in that desert, right?

Archaeologist us many tools that help them locate archaeological sites. It's not like it's a bunch of dim wits walking around aimlessly with a shovel, pointing at a location and hope they find something.

They Use old maps, Historical documents, at times they even talk to people who remember where buildings, roads, or graves used to be. They study the land because people often live on high ground near water sources. They use new techniques like GIS. (Geographic Information System.) that help them recreate environmental models that can predict where archaeological sits might be.

For information on GIS
http://education.nationalgeographic.com/...ystem-gis/

That also have equipment like ground penetrating radar to graves beneath the ground, or other anomalies in the soil. With the radio waves they can even distinguish soil texture and chemistry in materials (like finding clay or soil vs brick or stone)

[Image: 2D%20GPR%20profile%20showing%20example%2...k=y5_UPBdI]

[Image: TARGET_GPR_archaeological-mapping.png]

[Image: 1611_mcneilla-1.gif]

As well as metal detectors to find nails, buttons, that may be associated with former buildings, battlefields, encampments, or any other sites that metal artifacts are expected.

[Image: _53212874_jex_1064875_de27-1.jpg]

Archaeologists use a systematic survey method to find sites. They inspect areas by walking straight lines called transects. They examine the ground surface and dig small holes called shovel test pits at regular intervals along each transect, usually every 100 feet. Investigators record the location where they dig each shovel test, the kinds of soils they see, local vegetation, nearby water sources, and whether they find artifacts or not. Areas that contain artifacts or cultural features are given archaeological site numbers.

[Image: british-columbia-archaeologists-test-pit.jpg]

[Image: v0_master.jpg]

[Image: bb99prfc01web.gif]

This field of science has been around for a very long time ruffly around the 17th centrey. And has grown considerable since that time. These are men and women that have dedicated years of their lives to this field. Most carry a Masters Degree Or PH.D.'s. hardly dim wits.

So if you or I were given this task I would probably say "Yeah, that would be really hard." But you and I are not doing this. Experts are.

Don't Live each day like it's your last. Live each day like you have 541 days after that one where every choice you make will have lasting implications to you and the world around you. ~ Tim Minchin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 9 users Like Commonsensei's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: