[QUOTE=Voyager]
Clearly some people thought they did, or we wouldn’t have the concept of fairy, right? Ditto for much of the other old supernatural entities - not counting those we can trace to recent fiction.
[/QUOTE]
Not so, I can’t think of anyone experiencing a Cat in the Hat, or a talking rabbit, our language is full of subjects that live only in the imagination. However, God has been experienced by millions, including me.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Not so, I can’t think of anyone experiencing a Cat in the Hat, or a talking rabbit, our language is full of subjects that live only in the imagination. However, God has been experienced by millions, including me.
[/QUOTE]
I’ve experienced The Cat in the Hat, same way you’ve experienced god. Well, no, I can actually prove I’ve experienced The Cat in the Hat.
[QUOTE=hotflungwok]
I’ve experienced The Cat in the Hat, same way you’ve experienced god. Well, no, I can actually prove I’ve experienced The Cat in the Hat.
[/QUOTE]
Do you mean you can show me the book and tell me about it, that is your proof, of course someone who had never experienced the book could then experience it if you allowed them to read it. But how about a sunset, or a flash of lightening, something lasting only a moment or two. That you could only explain to them from your personal experience, anecdotal material as science believes, maybe they would believe you and maybe not. It’s the same with experiencing God, I can explain what I saw and felt, but you will tell me not so. However, I can set down with a group of others who also have experienced God and compare what we saw and felt with much agreement and feeling. Just because you have not experienced God in no way means God doesn’t exist. I think you know that of course.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Can science measure God, quantify or catalog God? That is science, I think what you are talking about is history, or perhaps humanities. If science can prove God exists then it would be a proper subject for science.
[/QUOTE]
Wasn’t the prayer experiment an attempt to measure the impact of God without measuring God? I think we can consider history, at least with respect to determining the facts of what happened if not the whys of what happened, as a science, especially modern history backed by carbon dating and such. History and archeology kind of merge at the times we’re interested in.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Yes, and there has never been any proof of color to those who are color-blind. But to those who can see, there is color and God.
[/QUOTE]
Does there happen to be a correlation between “Those who can see color” and “Gullible”? 'Cause, I’m getting that feeling.
There is just as much proof for the existence of brain-eating zombies as there is for god. If you believe in God with no proof, you must in good conscience allow for the existence of brain-eating zombies.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Do you mean you can show me the book and tell me about it, that is your proof, of course someone who had never experienced the book could then experience it if you allowed them to read it. But how about a sunset, or a flash of lightening, something lasting only a moment or two. That you could only explain to them from your personal experience, anecdotal material as science believes, maybe they would believe you and maybe not.
[/quote]
One person, maybe not. Lots of people with roughly the same experiences, more likely. They may suspend belief until they can record information about the phenomena, which is what happened with meteorites. They were not believed in until they fell under observation, after which they were.
So, are those who experienced God differently lying or deluded? I include those in traditional religions here, since I’m aware your idea of god is different from theirs.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Do you mean you can show me the book and tell me about it, that is your proof, of course someone who had never experienced the book could then experience it if you allowed them to read it. But how about a sunset, or a flash of lightening, something lasting only a moment or two. That you could only explain to them from your personal experience, anecdotal material as science believes, maybe they would believe you and maybe not. It’s the same with experiencing God, I can explain what I saw and felt, but you will tell me not so. However, I can set down with a group of others who also have experienced God and compare what we saw and felt with much agreement and feeling. Just because you have not experienced God in no way means God doesn’t exist. I think you know that of course.
[/QUOTE]
I’m sure that if you hand-picked a group that you felt believed pretty much what you believe and talked with them, you might eventually come to a vague consensus about a god. If, on the other hand, we randomly picked 100 people who said that they believed in a god and questioned them separately, without influence from you or each other, I think you’d be damn lucky to find 3 of them that agree on the history, abilities or motives of their individual gods. Thus, using your standards of evidence, we must either conclude that there are either thousands of gods running around, or…?
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Do you mean you can show me the book and tell me about it, that is your proof, of course someone who had never experienced the book could then experience it if you allowed them to read it. But how about a sunset, or a flash of lightening, something lasting only a moment or two. That you could only explain to them from your personal experience, anecdotal material as science believes, maybe they would believe you and maybe not.
[/QUOTE]
I experienced a Cat in the Hat last night in my dreams. It only lasted a short time (stupid alarm clock), there was a strong feeling associated with it (he was hunting me with a machete), and I can only explain it as an anecdote. Exactly the same as your experience.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
It’s the same with experiencing God, I can explain what I saw and felt, but you will tell me not so. However, I can set down with a group of others who also have experienced God and compare what we saw and felt with much agreement and feeling. Just because you have not experienced God in no way means God doesn’t exist. I think you know that of course.
[/QUOTE]
Gosh, this explains why everyone believes the same thing, and none of the experiences people have said were god are different! Oh wait, no they don’t and aren’t. Ask a worshipper of Thor how he experiences god. Or Bacchus. Or Eris.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Just because you have not experienced God in no way means God doesn’t exist. I think you know that of course.
[/QUOTE]
Isn’t it more likely that your “Experiencing God” was actually something you misinterperated? Let’s apply Occam’s Razor here. You felt something that you interpreted as something you wanted to be true.
Or is it more likely that there is an invisible entity who can’t be detected or verified and has left nothing at all to betray his existence, aside the insistence that he is indeed real from some contradictory, poorly edited books from the woefully primitive past.
How did a thread on the Goofiness of Agnosticism turn into another **Lekatt’s ** personal Religion thread?
Isn’t this an extreme hi-jack of the thread?
Hasn’t this been done dozens of times already?
A really good thread that covered something relatively new has become just another GD religious debate. 
Jim
I’ve been thinking the exact same thing for the last couple of pages of this train wreck…
-XT
[QUOTE=What Exit?]
How did a thread on the Goofiness of Agnosticism turn into another **Lekatt’s ** personal Religion thread?
Isn’t this an extreme hi-jack of the thread?
Hasn’t this been done dozens of times already?
A really good thread that covered something relatively new has become just another GD religious debate. 
Jim
[/QUOTE]
If you think about it, there wasn’t much room for the original argument to expand anyway. It had already degenerated into “yes it is!” “no it isn’t!” “yes it is!” “nuh uh!” by the time Lekatt ruined our fun.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Not so, I can’t think of anyone experiencing a Cat in the Hat, or a talking rabbit, our language is full of subjects that live only in the imagination. However, God has been experienced by millions, including me.
[/QUOTE]
And why should I believe that ? People who want to spread a religious belief usually have no problem lying. And even if they are honest, they can be ( and almost certainly are ) deluded or outright insane. The claim that you experience God is an extraordinary claim, which requires extraordinary evidence. Not zero evidence. Not the unsupported word of believers.
[QUOTE=Lobohan]
There is just as much proof for the existence of brain-eating zombies as there is for god. If you believe in God with no proof, you must in good conscience allow for the existence of brain-eating zombies.
[/QUOTE]
More evidence, actually. We don’t have zombies, but we do have corpses and brains for them to eat, if they were so inclined. There’s no evidence that spirits of any kind exist, much less a specific kind labeled “God”.
[QUOTE=What Exit?]
How did a thread on the Goofiness of Agnosticism turn into another **Lekatt’s ** personal Religion thread?
[/QUOTE]
Because religion is a disease of the mind, that subverts people to spread itself. If lekatt had the flu, he/she would be sneezing virus filled infectious fluids; as a believer, lekatt is sneezing his/her religion onto the boards.
[QUOTE=hotflungwok]
I experienced a Cat in the Hat last night in my dreams. It only lasted a short time (stupid alarm clock), there was a strong feeling associated with it (he was hunting me with a machete), and I can only explain it as an anecdote. Exactly the same as your experience.
Gosh, this explains why everyone believes the same thing, and none of the experiences people have said were god are different! Oh wait, no they don’t and aren’t. Ask a worshipper of Thor how he experiences god. Or Bacchus. Or Eris.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t know any worshippers of Thor, Bacchus, or Eris, if I did, I would ask them for you.
[QUOTE=Czarcasm]
I’m sure that if you hand-picked a group that you felt believed pretty much what you believe and talked with them, you might eventually come to a vague consensus about a god. If, on the other hand, we randomly picked 100 people who said that they believed in a god and questioned them separately, without influence from you or each other, I think you’d be damn lucky to find 3 of them that agree on the history, abilities or motives of their individual gods. Thus, using your standards of evidence, we must either conclude that there are either thousands of gods running around, or…?
[/QUOTE]
It is not necessary to believe in minor doctrine to find people to agree with. There are over two billion Christians in the world. I could walk into any Christian church and say I believe in God, that God is love, and Jesus was His son who taught us about God, and most everyone in the church would agree I was correct. As for people who have actually experienced God, there are thousands, perhaps millions, and with them I would find an even closer bond. I have met through the Internet and in person hundreds of such individuals.
[QUOTE=Lobohan]
Isn’t it more likely that your “Experiencing God” was actually something you misinterperated? Let’s apply Occam’s Razor here. You felt something that you interpreted as something you wanted to be true.
Or is it more likely that there is an invisible entity who can’t be detected or verified and has left nothing at all to betray his existence, aside the insistence that he is indeed real from some contradictory, poorly edited books from the woefully primitive past.
[/QUOTE]
Not a chance of misinterpretation, there are thousands of people who experienced God as I did. Don’t want to upset you, but for me the issue is settled. You are free to believe what you will.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Not a chance of misinterpretation, there are thousands of people who experienced God as I did.
[/QUOTE]
But there are millions of people who have many different experiences of God. If divine epiphany comes from God, why can’t they agree on the nature of God?
[QUOTE=What Exit?]
How did a thread on the Goofiness of Agnosticism turn into another **Lekatt’s ** personal Religion thread?
Isn’t this an extreme hi-jack of the thread?
Hasn’t this been done dozens of times already?
A really good thread that covered something relatively new has become just another GD religious debate.
Jim
[/QUOTE]
I don’t have a religion and my posts concerned belief or disbelief in God, but I will quit the thread so you can have your say if that is necessary. This is a place for debates and that means some people will have things to say you don’t agree with. I would not post on this board ever if it weren’t for the gross misinformation about God and religion going on here. So a good debate is in order to fight ignorance about such things.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Not a chance of misinterpretation, there are thousands of people who experienced God as I did. Don’t want to upset you, but for me the issue is settled. You are free to believe what you will.
[/QUOTE]
It doesn’t upset me. For me, without proof, you and the millions of others are believing in a fantasy story because it makes your life easier to bear. I think it’s pathetic, but unless you foist the rules your imaginary friend imposes on you, on me, more power to you.
However, it really is popular for the people working under your misconception to want to tell others how to live. That I think is a problem.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
I don’t have a religion and my posts concerned belief or disbelief in God, but I will quit the thread so you can have your say if that is necessary. This is a place for debates and that means some people will have things to say you don’t agree with. I would not post on this board ever if it weren’t for the gross misinformation about God and religion going on here. So a good debate is in order to fight ignorance about such things.
[/QUOTE]
But this thread was not really about God and Religion. We have dozens of threads on God and Religion. This one was basically about varying degrees of non-belief in God. You know Agnostics and Atheists. Once you got going in it, the discussion ended and moved over to the normal GD tired old stuff of God debate.
It doesn’t matter now anyway. Have fun. The debate is already dead.
Jim