Exploring religious theory

[DigitalShadow]

One more question for you digital that I personally am curious about is. You seem to be a very bight guy. You seem to read alot and ask lots of questions. And I would bet that this is not the first forum that you have asked these kind of questions to right? Which is a good thing in my opinion..but have you ever just done a in depth study on who Jesus is? What did he say about himself? What did others say about him? In the bible and not in the bible..and how he compares to the world's reglions of what they believe..how he is different or the same...It would interesting for you to do that..and I think if you did it with an open mind to the possiblity but using logic and reason to support it you will have all your answers met.

You are correct. I like to keep a balanced view of things, so I also frequent a skeptics forum which is prodominantly atheist/agnostic (go figure). For what it's worth I have looked into the historical aspects of the life of Jesus and have been underwhelmed with the results.

I agree with your reasoning and can see what your saying.

as far as no human being able to explain comment i posted..I meant..person was laying on the stretcher.no heart beat, no brain activity and clinicaly dead..no doctor in that room could account for the fact as to why he came to life..and nobody could explain it even one step further in that there was no brain damage. 4 min of no heat beat and that equalls brain damage. It is beyond reason or intellect or science. It was God.

I think if you took one isolated arguement a christian gives you for God and you might be able to come up with a reasonable rebuttel but when you lay all the evidence on the table it is hard to ignore.This where I put my faith in. My faith does not contridict my logic.

Now that is only part of the equation Digital..then it comes down to which path right? If you come to the conclusion there is a God then at some point you've got to figure out which path to God right? And this is where I purposed to you a analytical study on Jesus and the bible.

I would like to point out that simply because something is beyond our current scientific knowledge, does not mean that God did it. As reassuring as it is to point to things that are beyond our current level of knowledge and say how God must have been responsible, I think that it is far more useful to use those as opportunities to further our scientific knowledge than to declare it as a miracle. If we stopped at "God did it!" every time we don't understand something, our increasing scientific knowledge would come to a hault.

[Misshalfway]

I believe that I have found out what it is you believe and why you believe so strongly. The question now is whether I will accept that for my own beliefs as well. I know this is mostly a personal question, but the main purpose of this thread is to explore religion from an objective perspective and to discuss the reliability of personal subjective experiences, why they conflict so much from person to person, and why so many people describe them as undeniable experience when obviously some if not many are wrong since their experiences conflict.

I encourage debate, citing evidence, and even philosophical reasoning on this thread. What I somewhat discourage is dogmatic reasoning of "it is this way because the scriptures say so!" because while I find it fascinating, to someone who does not accept the scriptures as the word of God, it means the same as pointing to a book that is right because it says it is right.

I don't know how to measure religious experience on a global scale. I can't jump into the minds and hearts of others. All we really have in order to evaluate spiritual experience is personal accounts -- whether they come from a living prophet or scriptures or any of us here or someone who is driving a selfish agenda. We can use our logic and gut feelings to discern that truth, but without the spirit, we can't really know. I will be an educated guess at best. I personally point you to scripture and prayer and obedience because they are the places I find the spirit. I know that is where I have found truth. It is like inviting you to the party.

I guess I am not sure about what kind of evidence you want. Testimony and scripture passages seem to be unsatisfactory for you. If it is truth you want as to whether or not there is a God, then the best place to find that knowledge are the scriptures and testimony and prayer. Science and scholars can talk all day long and try to measure all of it. But to what end? They can't give you the knowledge. They can do what they can do.....but in the end you will end up unsatisfied as well.

DS. Believing is a choice. I have said it before. So is disbelieving. So is skepticism. Neither side is determined by 100% predictability. You can't prove that God never at anytime answers prayers. Some say prayer works. Some say it doesn't. Only you can decide for yourself. And you can't get the answer any other place than on you knees.

You may want everything to fit nicely into a predictable and familiar way for you to discover the truth. If you want cake, you gotta follow the recipe for making cake. If you want really good cake, then you follow my recipe for cake! :) Little joke. The same is true for spiritual things. God made the rules. Man didn't. You can't tell God to do it your way and then wonder why he doesn't comply.

With regards to faith. We all believer or non, use faith. We don't have 100% guarantee that the plane will function perfectly, but we get on the plane. You believe a certain way. And you exercise a lot of faith in your line of thinking. I hope that you can see that faith isn't as far away from you as you may think. I don't think it is that some of us don't have the ability for faith. I think it is where we put our faith that makes all the difference. Because even though I don't have a 100% guarantee, I can still fly!

[DigitalShadow]

I guess I am not sure about what kind of evidence you want. Testimony and scripture passages seem to be unsatisfactory for you. If it is truth you want as to whether or not there is a God, then the best place to find that knowledge are the scriptures and testimony and prayer. Science and scholars can talk all day long and try to measure all of it. But to what end? They can't give you the knowledge. They can do what they can do.....but in the end you will end up unsatisfied as well.

I see religion the same as I see any other theory and use the same logic to determine whether or not it makes sense. Is there some reason I shouldn't? If you propose a scientific theory that can only be verified through scripture feelings that you receive after having enough faith in it, I would be just as skeptical.

DS. Believing is a choice. I have said it before. So is disbelieving. So is skepticism. Neither side is determined by 100% predictability. You can't prove that God never at anytime answers prayers. Some say prayer works. Some say it doesn't. Only you can decide for yourself. And you can't get the answer any other place than on you knees.

Yes, there is no proof for any religious viewpoint, but that doesn't mean that they should all be equally considered. There is as much emerical evidence for the Flying Spaghetti Monster as there is for God. Feelings are great, but without some logic behind them, they will easily mislead you.

You may want everything to fit nicely into a predictable and familiar way for you to discover the truth. If you want cake, you gotta follow the recipe for making cake. If you want really good cake, then you follow my recipe for cake! :) Little joke. The same is true for spiritual things. God made the rules. Man didn't. You can't tell God to do it your way and then wonder why he doesn't comply.

Whether the rules were made by God or not, it is man that is presenting them to me and given how fallable man is, I am understandably skeptical when people tell me they know the will of God and what I should do to please Him.

With regards to faith. We all believer or non, use faith. We don't have 100% guarantee that the plane will function perfectly, but we get on the plane. You believe a certain way. And you exercise a lot of faith in your line of thinking. I hope that you can see that faith isn't as far away from you as you may think. I don't think it is that some of us don't have the ability for faith. I think it is where we put our faith that makes all the difference. Because even though I don't have a 100% guarantee, I can still fly!

I get on a plane because I know how many flights there are and how few of them crash. No faith required. I know the rough odds of dying and the convenience of getting across the country in hours is worth the miniscule risk. Making decisions based on observable and well understood principles is quite different from justifying belief based on feeling. While both fall under the very broad definition of faith, it is the more specific definition of faith as it pertains to religion that I have problems with. Nice try though :)

[Misshalfway]

I see religion the same as I see any other theory and use the same logic to determine whether or not it makes sense. Is there some reason I shouldn't? If you propose a scientific theory that can only be verified through scripture feelings that you receive after having enough faith in it, I would be just as skeptical.

No. Please don't misunderstand me. Yes use your logic. I am not telling you to lean on feelings alone. No one here is. The proof is in the pudding. You gotta live it to know the truth of it. That is where your logic and reason really can serve you. But you gotta get a vision of where you wanna go and then determine how to get there. So, really DS. What do you really want? What need is there in you to even have these conversations? Boil it down. Do you want religious truth? If the answer is yes, then you have to move yourself to a different position. Otherwise you will hover around all of it and never land.

Yes, there is no proof for any religious viewpoint, but that doesn't mean that they should all be equally considered. There is as much emerical evidence for the Flying Spaghetti Monster as there is for God. Feelings are great, but without some logic behind them, they will easily mislead you.

I absolutely agree with you. There are a billion and one religions and science is one of them.

So, maybe you could explain why it is you are focusing on the LDS church....or Christianity perhaps. I am making the assumption that you have determined, at least to some degree, that there might be something to it all. Perhaps it would be helpful for your own searchings if you could argue the other side. Why IS religion or specifically this religion something that makes sense to you?

Yes feelings can easily mislead. Thus the Spirit. Look, if God is real and he does want to talk to an individual, don't you think it is logical that he would speak to them directly in a perfectly confidential and personal way? How else would something like that work without feelings AND logic AND perceptive ability? And please remember that the Spirit is NOT our feelings. Our feelings are a response to the Spirit.

Whether the rules were made by God or not, it is man that is presenting them to me and given how fallable man is, I am understandably skeptical when people tell me they know the will of God and what I should do to please Him.

Yes, we are all fallible, dang it. God uses the weak things of the world. And that is ok. The messenger doesn't have to be perfect to deliver a perfect message. God does the converting. He does the changing of mind and knowledge.

I get on a plane because I know how many flights there are and how few of them crash. No faith required. I know the rough odds of dying and the convenience of getting across the country in hours is worth the miniscule risk. Making decisions based on observable and well understood principles is quite different from justifying belief based on feeling. While both fall under the very broad definition of faith, it is the more specific definition of faith as it pertains to religion that I have problems with. Nice try though :)

I pray and practice for the very same reason! I can observe what happens when a person feels the spirit or becomes clean from sin or changes into a more loving individual. I can see it with my own eyes and feel it with my own everyday senses. I have seen it in others and I have seen it in myself. It is not just touchy feely feelings and blindness to the rest. It is so very much more!! It is logical. It makes sense. And it feels really good. I am sad that after all of this discussion, that is what you still feel like we are saying to you.

[Misshalfway]

DS. You remind me of the brother in Field of Dreams. There will be a day when you see the baseball men too. :)

[lostnfound]

excellent points misshalfway!

[Traveler]

How does one decide who they will marry? Is this done by checking requirements off a list or by “feeling’?

Do we decide to keep our children or dispose of them by applying logical principles of when we would ask most anyone else to leave our home or is it more because of how we “feel” about them.

Do we take care of our aging parents because it fulfills logic or because of how we “feel”?

If because we are intelligent do we eat according to what we need or what tastes “good” to us.

I would submit that it is as important to recognize beneficial feelings from destructive impulses and it is to deduce logical conclusions from insane notions (realizing that some people are incapable of either).

Sometimes I am disappointed with the notion of religion. Religion is based too much (in my thinking) on doctrine and not enough on enlightened behavior. If someone defines religion based on doctrine then they ought to be rhetorical and logical. If however, religion is defined as enlightenment above logic then the disciple must manifest that higher enlightened behavior. Failure to master higher enlightened behavior can only be because either the enlightenment is not believed or it is flawed.

This also means that if one does not engage enlightenment once found “true religion” then they either deceive themselves what is required to “believe” or their religion is flawed.

Finding the correct religion is not just how to judge others in their faith as it is so much to view ourselves and our personal relationship with the divine.

The Traveler

[Misshalfway]

I get on a plane because I know how many flights there are and how few of them crash. No faith required. I know the rough odds of dying and the convenience of getting across the country in hours is worth the miniscule risk. Making decisions based on observable and well understood principles is quite different from justifying belief based on feeling. While both fall under the very broad definition of faith, it is the more specific definition of faith as it pertains to religion that I have problems with. Nice try though

BTW, are you an expert on airplanes? Have you tested the planes yourself? How do you know this particular one is safe? Did you inspect it? Measure fuel levels? Check all the systems? Ask every passenger if they are a terrorist? Interview each employee of the airlines? Test all the food for poison? Interview the president of the airline? Make sure of his credentials? I hope you don't have that much time on your hands. :) You trust the people who do say they know and that, my friend, IS very much faith. Is your faith blind? No. You do have a few facts to go on. But you will never KNOW for sure.

[rameumptom]

That is an assumption. Other men tell you that the scriptures come from God, you had enough faith in the scriptures that your feelings confirmed that information.

If you don't already believe the scriptures are from God, yes it is circular logic.

In the LDS Church, we believe that all men and women can be prophets in their own lives. Moses wished that all his people could/would be prophets, and Joseph Smith's goal was to have every person receive their own theophany.

what if my faith was only partially based upon what other men told me, and that it was also based upon my own spiritual experiences, which could include angelic visitations, miracles, personal prophecies, or perhaps even a visit from God himself? I'm not saying I have had all these experiences, I haven't - but I've had several of them. And I know others who also have had many of these experiences.

As I said before, how does one explain it when Joseph Smith is not the only one who has seen a vision? How do we consider 12 men seeing the gold plates on three separate occasions? How do we explain hundreds seeing angels in the Kirtland Temple? How do we explain Jesus Christ being seen by Joseph Smith and others at the same time? Either there was a huge hoax, a huge hypnotic experience, or it was real. My spiritual experiences tell me that it was real, to the point that I know God lives and that there are living prophets today.

I don't go into details in my spiritual experiences, as I consider them sacred and allow other spiritual beings to seek their own experiences. I will tell you that from spiritual witnesses I have seen the mantle of priesthood authority fall upon a man 2 weeks before he was called as bishop. I have a witness of Brigham Young as prophet that came unexpectedly, but is definite that he is in the Spirit World performing sacred ordinances for the spirits there. I have felt the spirit speak words of prophecy through me as I've given blessings. I've seen people with incurable diseases healed through that priesthood power. For me, these are witnesses and evidences that have not come from the scriptures, but from God interfacing directly with me.

And this is why I know these are true, and not merely a belief in what someone else said.

[Misshalfway]

Hey Ram.

Just wanted to say I was touched by your post. Especially when you received unexpected testimony. The same has happened to me as well.

[Traveler]

BTW, are you an expert on airplanes? Have you tested the planes yourself? How do you know this particular one is safe? Did you inspect it? Measure fuel levels? Check all the systems? Ask every passenger if they are a terrorist? Interview each employee of the airlines? Test all the food for poison? Interview the president of the airline? Make sure of his credentials? I hope you don't have that much time on your hands. :) You trust the people who do say they know and that, my friend, IS very much faith. Is your faith blind? No. You do have a few facts to go on. But you will never KNOW for sure.

We all exercise faith - what is most telling about a person is how skeptical they are of other's faith when they are unwilling to examine their own.

The Traveler

[DigitalShadow]

No. Please don't misunderstand me. Yes use your logic. I am not telling you to lean on feelings alone. No one here is. The proof is in the pudding. You gotta live it to know the truth of it. That is where your logic and reason really can serve you. But you gotta get a vision of where you wanna go and then determine how to get there. So, really DS. What do you really want? What need is there in you to even have these conversations? Boil it down. Do you want religious truth? If the answer is yes, then you have to move yourself to a different position. Otherwise you will hover around all of it and never land.

I want the truth, religious or not. My point is that I don't see why I should make exceptions for religious theory and go about validating the truth of them in ways other than how you determine the truth of anything else.

I absolutely agree with you. There are a billion and one religions and science is one of them.

So, maybe you could explain why it is you are focusing on the LDS church....or Christianity perhaps. I am making the assumption that you have determined, at least to some degree, that there might be something to it all. Perhaps it would be helpful for your own searchings if you could argue the other side. Why IS religion or specifically this religion something that makes sense to you?

No, no, no. I'm sorry, but I really don't like it when people make the claim that science is just another form of religion.

Religion is a based on a specific set of beliefs or doctrine that is unverifiable by emerical evidence. Science is based on a process that assumes you don't know everything and seeks to learn more through observable repeatable experiments. While some people may take a few scientific theories and religiously cling to them, science itself is a process with no set doctrine. It is the objective study of the world around us. There is no definition of religion that could be construed to have science as a whole fit into it.

Yes feelings can easily mislead. Thus the Spirit. Look, if God is real and he does want to talk to an individual, don't you think it is logical that he would speak to them directly in a perfectly confidential and personal way? How else would something like that work without feelings AND logic AND perceptive ability? And please remember that the Spirit is NOT our feelings. Our feelings are a response to the Spirit.

Don't you think that it is logical that if God exists and is a perfect being and we were His creations that He could reliably communicate with His children who are honestly seeking him and end all this confusion over what He really wants?

Yes, we are all fallible, dang it. God uses the weak things of the world. And that is ok. The messenger doesn't have to be perfect to deliver a perfect message. God does the converting. He does the changing of mind and knowledge.

Given the number of so-called messengers of God in this world bringing conflicting messages, I remain skeptical when claims are made absent of evidence. That is all I was saying.

I pray and practice for the very same reason! I can observe what happens when a person feels the spirit or becomes clean from sin or changes into a more loving individual. I can see it with my own eyes and feel it with my own everyday senses. I have seen it in others and I have seen it in myself. It is not just touchy feely feelings and blindness to the rest. It is so very much more!! It is logical. It makes sense. And it feels really good. I am sad that after all of this discussion, that is what you still feel like we are saying to you.

You can claim that those feelings originated from the Holy Ghost or the Alien Overlord Xenu, I'm not saying you're wrong, but until I personally see evidence otherwise, from my point of view they are just feelings. The power of an idea combined with faith in it can do amazing things, I've witnessed it as well. You say that is proof of God, and I say it is proof of the power of the human mind. Just look at studies into the placebo effect if you don't believe what the mind can do by itself.

[DigitalShadow]

BTW, are you an expert on airplanes? Have you tested the planes yourself? How do you know this particular one is safe? Did you inspect it? Measure fuel levels? Check all the systems? Ask every passenger if they are a terrorist? Interview each employee of the airlines? Test all the food for poison? Interview the president of the airline? Make sure of his credentials? I hope you don't have that much time on your hands. :) You trust the people who do say they know and that, my friend, IS very much faith. Is your faith blind? No. You do have a few facts to go on. But you will never KNOW for sure.

I think I get your point now, that I get on a plane even though I'm not 100% sure I'll get off it alive so I should be able to place faith in a religion that I'm not 100% sure is true. I think the important difference here that I take issue with is that from the emperical evidence I've seen, I am 99.999% sure I'll get off the plane alive and I'm 0% sure that God exists, based on the fact that I've seen no emperical evidence (0% meaning I have no idea, NOT that I'm positive He doesn't exist).

[Vanhin]

I want the truth, religious or not. My point is that I don't see why I should make exceptions for religious theory and go about validating the truth of them in ways other than how you determine the truth of anything else.

DigitalShadow,

Do you mind sharing something that you have verified to be absolutely true? Let's examine that for a bit.

Sincerely,

Vanhin

[DigitalShadow]

We all exercise faith - what is most telling about a person is how skeptical they are of other's faith when they are unwilling to examine their own.

The Traveler

In the most general sense of the word, yes we all do things we are not 100% sure of. The amount of evidence required to cause the incidence of faith is an important distinction though.

[DigitalShadow]

DigitalShadow,

Do you mind sharing something that you have verified to be absolutely true? Let's examine that for a bit.

Sincerely,

Vanhin

I don't consider anything absolutely true, that is one of my main issues with joining any particular religion. Given enough evidence, I will consider something most likely true, but sufficient amounts of conflicting evidence will change my mind. In my opinion, claiming that anything is "absolutely true" is arrogant and nonproductive because it closes your mind to other possibilities.

[Vanhin]

I don't consider anything absolutely true, that is one of my main issues with joining any particular religion. Given enough evidence, I will consider something most likely true, but sufficient amounts of conflicting evidence will change my mind. In my opinion, claiming that anything is "absolutely true" is arrogant and nonproductive because it closes your mind to other possibilities.

I mean anything, not just religious. So, you don't believe that absolute truth exists, or are you saying we are incapable of knowing that anything is absolutely true?

Is there nothing that you are aware of that you would consider absolutely true then?

Vanhin

[DigitalShadow]

I mean anything, not just religious. So, you don't believe that absolute truth exists, or are you saying we are incapable of knowing that anything is absolutely true?

Is there nothing that you are aware of that you would consider absolutely true then?

Vanhin

I believe we are incapable of knowing anything to be absolutely true. That basically is the definition of what it means to be agnostic, even though it is usually applied in a religious sense and widely misunderstood by many people.

[Misshalfway]

I want the truth, religious or not. My point is that I don't see why I should make exceptions for religious theory and go about validating the truth of them in ways other than how you determine the truth of anything else.

Yes. I think I know that about you. I believe that you are sincere in your desire for truth. I just see that you limit yourself from finding it because you have decided that there is only one reliable method.

No, no, no. I'm sorry, but I really don't like it when people make the claim that science is just another form of religion.

Religion is a based on a specific set of beliefs or doctrine that is unverifiable by emerical evidence. Science is based on a process that assumes you don't know everything and seeks to learn more through observable repeatable experiments. While some people may take a few scientific theories and religiously cling to them, science itself is a process with no set doctrine. It is the objective study of the world around us. There is no definition of religion that could be construed to have science as a whole fit into it.

I agree with you. But I also agree with me! :) People do in fact get fixated on a set of truths and sometimes that can be a stumbling block. Yes science is objective. It is also amoral. In that lies a big limitation of science. IMO, science has a vital and irreplaceable place. But in my estimation, it can only measure certain kinds of information. In that way, it is limited. And the reliability of the scientific method can't change the imperfection of the humans who use it. Human's will try to know it all. And try to fit all knowledge and detection of that knowledge into a box. It comes from our deepest desires to know things. But we mistake, when we believe that this is the ONLY way to find or measure truth.

In the end, when all is revealed there will be no conflict between science and religion.

Don't you think that it is logical that if God exists and is a perfect being and we were His creations that He could reliably communicate with His children who are honestly seeking him and end all this confusion over what He really wants?[/quote

Yes. Every single one of Heavenly Father's children deserves this kind of blessing. From my experience and the experience of so many others, I see that this does happen. I know, DS, that you are searching and praying. I wish I knew what was blocking your answers. Sometimes, I wonder if you are not recognizing it. Sometimes I think that you are feeling something but then you dismiss it as fast as it comes. I can't know what is truly going on with you. If I could be with you, and see and feel your face and your energy, perhaps I could know more. All I can do or any of us can do, is share wit you what has worked for us and invite you to try. I know it is frustrating. I know that God makes us stretch out of our comfort zones. I know he wants more from us, than we sometimes are willing to give. I know that answers come, but they don't always come when or how I want. And in the moment, my childlike impatience is a stumbling block for me. But when I raise my view and look back , I can see so much wisdom in how Father has dealt with me. And because he has shown me what he has done, and as I come to know the reasons why, my trust in this crazy process is deepened. Prayer is something that must be part of everyday practice for the power of it to really be made manifest. It takes practice and work and faith and sweat. And lots of humility. Are you ready to get to that place? Are you ready to suspend you doubts and believe anyway? Are you ready for a serious study of the scriptures? Are you willing to suspend your judgement until all your findings are in?

I am reminded of my 6 year old. He tried to ride a bike a couple of times. Didn't work out. Quit too soon. Couldn't find his balance. Now he refuses to try. Says he'd rather ride the scooter cuz that works for him better. I keep telling him riding a bike is great. He sees his siblings do it and wishes he could ride around with his buddies doing and seeing all that they do......but he stumbles over his own disbelief. Until he gets out there and applies himself with faith and determination...... you understand.

Are you ready to get to that place? Are you ready to suspend you doubts and believe anyway? To act 'as if'? Are you willing to fall a few times while you find your own balance without allowing yourself to quit, knowing that you may not get all the answers you want when and how you want them? Can you discipline yourself to dedicate yourself to believing? Even if all that may consist of the believing on the words of others? Are you ready for a serious study of the scriptures? Are you willing to suspend your judgement until all your findings are in? Fasting....prayer....broken heart, contrite spirit, real intent sort of stuff?

[DigitalShadow]

In the LDS Church, we believe that all men and women can be prophets in their own lives. Moses wished that all his people could/would be prophets, and Joseph Smith's goal was to have every person receive their own theophany.

what if my faith was only partially based upon what other men told me, and that it was also based upon my own spiritual experiences, which could include angelic visitations, miracles, personal prophecies, or perhaps even a visit from God himself? I'm not saying I have had all these experiences, I haven't - but I've had several of them. And I know others who also have had many of these experiences.

As I said before, how does one explain it when Joseph Smith is not the only one who has seen a vision? How do we consider 12 men seeing the gold plates on three separate occasions? How do we explain hundreds seeing angels in the Kirtland Temple? How do we explain Jesus Christ being seen by Joseph Smith and others at the same time? Either there was a huge hoax, a huge hypnotic experience, or it was real. My spiritual experiences tell me that it was real, to the point that I know God lives and that there are living prophets today.

I don't go into details in my spiritual experiences, as I consider them sacred and allow other spiritual beings to seek their own experiences. I will tell you that from spiritual witnesses I have seen the mantle of priesthood authority fall upon a man 2 weeks before he was called as bishop. I have a witness of Brigham Young as prophet that came unexpectedly, but is definite that he is in the Spirit World performing sacred ordinances for the spirits there. I have felt the spirit speak words of prophecy through me as I've given blessings. I've seen people with incurable diseases healed through that priesthood power. For me, these are witnesses and evidences that have not come from the scriptures, but from God interfacing directly with me.

And this is why I know these are true, and not merely a belief in what someone else said.

If I said that I've seen Jesus appeared to me and clearly state that Joseph Smith is wrong and that I should start my own church and had another witness who saw the same thing as I do, how would you explain that? Well, that is my answer to you as well.

I've never claimed that people believe in religions merely because someone else said to, I have heard the "undeniable" feelings and experiences they received that led them to their particular religion and supported their particular doctrine or interpretation. My only concern is that I've seen many people utterly convinced they are right but whose "undeniable" knowledge conflicts with each others. Obviously not all of them are right, therefore "undeniable" knowledge does not seem very reliable from my point of view which is why I like emperical, observable, repeatable evidence.

[Vanhin]

I believe we are incapable of knowing anything to be absolutely true. That basically is the definition of what it means to be agnostic, even though it is usually applied in a religious sense and widely misunderstood by many people.

Roger that. Just clarify for me some more then. So, you do believe that absolute truth exists, but you don't believe we are capable of discerning it?

Regards,

Vanhin

[Misshalfway]

I believe we are incapable of knowing anything to be absolutely true. That basically is the definition of what it means to be agnostic, even though it is usually applied in a religious sense and widely misunderstood by many people.

I don't think you really believe this! Sorry bud. But I am calling your bluff on this. Gravity, water is wet, fire burns, stubbing your little baby toe on the furniture hurts like ****! Give me a break! If you couldn't know something for sure then you wouldn't hang onto science like you do.

[Vanhin]

I don't think you really believe this! Sorry bud. But I am calling your bluff on this. Gravity, water is wet, fire burns, stubbing your little baby toe on the furniture hurts like ****! Give me a break! If you couldn't know something for sure then you wouldn't hang onto science like you do.

Hold yer horses Misshalfway!

Vanhin

[Misshalfway]

I think I get your point now, that I get on a plane even though I'm not 100% sure I'll get off it alive so I should be able to place faith in a religion that I'm not 100% sure is true. I think the important difference here that I take issue with is that from the emperical evidence I've seen, I am 99.999% sure I'll get off the plane alive and I'm 0% sure that God exists, based on the fact that I've seen no emperical evidence (0% meaning I have no idea, NOT that I'm positive He doesn't exist).

Really? 0% eh? no evidence what so ever? There is not one shred of evidence that compels you to continue these conversations. Whatever......

[DigitalShadow]

Roger that. Just clarify for me some more then. So, you do believe that absolute truth exists, but you don't believe we are capable of discerning it?

Regards,

Vanhin

I believe that there is one truth, but we are incapable of determining it for certain and when people claim to know something with absolute certainty they are only closing their mind off to other possibly valid ideas.