Faith In Science Vs Faith In Religion

[Michael]

Lekatt wrote

Yes, isn't that wonderful, it is all anecdotal. No, I don't expect anyone to understand who has not had the experience. So don't ask me to tell about it.

That's fine. But know that this means you no longer bring anything to the conversation.
You can't insist things are a certain way, or that people should think a certain way and refuse to give your reasons why without making yourself irrelevant.

Pretty much what smelly said, but without the swearing.

[Lekatt]

Michael wrote

That's fine. But know that this means you no longer bring anything to the conversation.
You can't insist things are a certain way, or that people should think a certain way and refuse to give your reasons why without making yourself irrelevant.

Pretty much what smelly said, but without the swearing.

I have not insisted on anything. But suddenly I have nothing to bring to the conversation? What is it you expect? I say this with respect.

[Michael]

I'm going to address the second part first-

Lekatt wrote

But suddenly I have nothing to bring to the conversation? What is it you expect? I say this with respect.

Okay, I shouldn't write you have nothing to add. I should write you have nothing of value to add.

If you make a claim, and then refuse to give any corroborating information for it, then it's useless.

Here's the conversation with all the fancy bits and extraneous bits taken out -
I don't think a supernatural entity exists.
Actually, a Very specific supernatural entity exists.
Oh yeah? What makes you say that?
Oh, I have plenty of experience.
Oh. What experience tells you that?
Well, I'm not going to tell you because you won't believe me.
Oh. So there's not really anything for me to evaluate your claim on then. Guess your part of this conversation is over.

Lekatt wrote

I have not insisted on anything.

Sure you have. Let's see-

But it is possible for some to have faith in both science and religion.

There are scientists that believe in God, Einstein was one

In close examination science and religion are not that much different.

Those aren't the ones that bother me, though. These ones are -

Over 10 million people have experienced an afterlife in the US alone

When the bus leaves with the newly dead it always goes to the same place. Heaven.

Hell exists only in the minds of those who fear it. There is no hell in reality. There exists a spirit world (heaven) and a physical world. Both were created by and from an intelligent source. The Bible does not matter in finding God.

The Source is pure Love. It exists in everyone.

But none of these writings are close to the Source. You were created by the Source and contain the Source. The Source can be discovered within you. It is not necessary to worship or placate Source. It will not interfere with your life, but if you connect with the Source within, your life will change dramatically for the better. Jesus was one of the few that understood the Source.

These are specific claims to knowledge, that after some pushing you admit you only have one specific type of corroborating evidence for. Then, when pushed further, you refuse to elaborate. That leaves us with nothing to evaluate your claims with. At that point, there's nothing to do with the claims but discard them.

[Lekatt]

Michael wrote

I'm going to address the second part first-




Okay, I shouldn't write you have nothing to add. I should write you have nothing of value to add.

If you make a claim, and then refuse to give any corroborating information for it, then it's useless.

Here's the conversation with all the fancy bits and extraneous bits taken out -
I don't think a supernatural entity exists.
Actually, a Very specific supernatural entity exists.
Oh yeah? What makes you say that?
Oh, I have plenty of experience.
Oh. What experience tells you that?
Well, I'm not going to tell you because you won't believe me.
Oh. So there's not really anything for me to evaluate your claim on then. Guess your part of this conversation is over.




Sure you have. Let's see-







Those aren't the ones that bother me, though. These ones are -












These are specific claims to knowledge, that after some pushing you admit you only have one specific type of corroborating evidence for. Then, when pushed further, you refuse to elaborate. That leaves us with nothing to evaluate your claims with. At that point, there's nothing to do with the claims but discard them.

Yes, that is true, so what more is there to say. You already have the knowledge to all so what could I possible add.

[dogpet]

I think poor Lekatt might be on a notification loop

[Smellyoldgit]

The poor old bugger is certainly loopy