Searching for GOD...

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

No-one has said “Oi…nutter” about the people in the videos – you’re straw manning again about this.

I don’t quote anyone when I use that term. It’s my own, so, another mistake on your part

What they’ve actually said is that there’s no reason to treat their accounts as evidence for having encountered Jesus. 

That’s naive and eliminates any conclusions people have come to on the matter. Gordon stated that such testimonies are dependent on the mental state of the believer and that they bore no resemblance to what he called reality. The direct implications being that there is mental abberation or lying.

Last Tuesday I was kidnapped by aliens for a bit.

A bit of what?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Someone bursting into tears is releasing pent-up emotions

Not sure that describes the “emotionally needy”
CS Lewis describes his unemotional conversion on a bus to Whipsnade in Bedfordshire and others have converted in emotional states only brought on by the conviction that they needed to turn to God rather than any emotional crisis.
Jesus states that he will not turn away the person who turns to him.

[Maeght]

Not sure that describes the “emotionally needy”
CS Lewis describes his unemotional conversion on a bus to Whipsnade in Bedfordshire and others have converted in emotional states only brought on by the conviction that they needed to turn to God rather than any emotional crisis.
Jesus states that he will not turn away the person who turns to him.

Many seem to express a need for something and talk about not being happy in their life before conversion.

[Maeght]

I don’t quote anyone when I use that term. It’s my own, so, another mistake on your part  That’s naive and eliminates any conclusions people have come to on the matter. Gordon stated that such testimonies are dependent on the mental state of the believer and that they bore no resemblance to what he called reality. The direct implications being that there is mental abberation or lying.A bit of what?

The implication was that was what some people on here thought. Recognising that we can all fool ourselves and believe in things which aren't true doesn't mean that it is correct to call those with religious beliefs or stories of their emotional conversions as being nutters.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Many seem to express a need for something and talk about not being happy in their life before conversion.

I’m sure they do but so what?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The implication was that was what some people on here thought. Recognising that we can all fool ourselves and believe in things which aren't true doesn't mean that it is correct to call those with religious beliefs or stories of their emotional conversions as being nutters.

What are you saying isn’t true here, Maeght?

[Gordon]

Jesus states that he will not turn away the person who turns to him.

Not exactly: it would be more accurate to state that there are anecdotal reports that Jesus said this, but that these reports lack provenance.

By the way, 'nutter' was your term and not mine. You really should try reading and thinking about what people actually wrote as opposed to what you like to presume they meant.

[Maeght]

What are you saying isn’t true here, Maeght?

It was a general point but clearly the discussion here is about the truthfulness of visions of Jesus etc. I'm not convinced they are true and recognise that we can easily fool ourselves about things which aren't true and see that as a possible explanation for these visions and experiences.

[Maeght]

I’m sure they do but so what?

An obvious possible explanation for why they interpret experiences in a particular way and are open to fooling themselves.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

It was a general point but clearly the discussion here is about the truthfulness of visions of Jesus etc. I'm not convinced they are true and recognise that we can easily fool ourselves about things which aren't true and see that as a possible explanation for these visions and experiences.

Why are you not convinced?And what do you think a vision is?To you, what constitutes the “etc” you talk about. As far as I know, some people think pictorially, others may think audial
Y, others don’t do either. So I am not thinking hallucination or voices here.
James Hinton a mathematician, was once credited as being able to ‘see’ the fourth dimension an ability, not literally of sight, that enabled him to contribute to mathematics.

A claim of “Isn’t true’ does carry a burden of proof.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

An obvious possible explanation for why they interpret experiences in a particular way and are open to fooling themselves.

But they could rethink it when they were more emotionally composed.
I don’t know Meaghan, if what you say is true, the world should be full of temporary emotional theists and steely emotionless temporary atheists.

Again some assertions here that could do with an explanation.

[Maeght]

Why are you not convinced?And what do you think a vision is?To you, what constitutes the “etc” you talk about. As far as I know, some people think pictorially, others may think audial
Y, others don’t do either. So I am not thinking hallucination or voices here.
James Hinton a mathematician, was once credited as being able to ‘see’ the fourth dimension an ability, not literally of sight, that enabled him to contribute to mathematics.

A claim of “Isn’t true’ does carry a burden of proof.

There is plenty of evidence that people believe things which aren't true. Recognising that as a possible explanation is a reasonable conclusion based on that, hence such claims are not convincing to me. I am not convinced by  personal testimony since we know that we can easily fool ourselves. The etc is clearly other things people claim in their personal testimonies.

[Maeght]

But they could rethink it when they were more emotionally composed.
I don’t know Meaghan, if what you say is true, the world should be full of temporary emotional theists and steely emotionless temporary atheists.

Again some assertions here that could do with an explanation.

If it fulfills an emotional need and they are convinced then they may not. Atheists are not emotionless and are also susceptible to fooling themselves.

Do you actually doubt that it is possible for us all to fool ourselves and believe in things that aren't true for various reasons such as fulfilling an emotional need? That emotional need doesn't need to be a temporary things by the way.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

There is plenty of evidence that people believe things which aren't true. Recognising that as a possible explanation is a reasonable conclusion based on that, hence such claims are not convincing to me. I am not convinced by  personal testimony since we know that we can easily fool ourselves. The etc is clearly other things people claim in their personal testimonies.

It will not be hard then for you to give examples of things people believe that aren’t true or for you to demonstrate how a belief in God The son fits in with that.

in other words, what delusions are you comparing it with?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

If it fulfills an emotional need and they are convinced then they may not. Atheists are not emotionless and are also susceptible to fooling themselves.

Do you actually doubt that it is possible for us all to fool ourselves and believe in things that aren't true for various reasons such as fulfilling an emotional need? That emotional need doesn't need to be a temporary things by the way.

Again though, what about those who convert who are not in an emotional state and those who, if they are emotional, are only so because of their conviction of their status with God? Which could equally apply I suppose to atheists avoiding God.

[Maeght]

It will not be hard then for you to give examples of things people believe that aren’t true or for you to demonstrate how a belief in God The son fits in with that.

in other words, what delusions are you comparing it with?

You can't think of examples yourself? You don't accept that people can fool themselves? Ok - on example I recall was on a TV program about all this when a group of people were taken out on a walk in the desert in the US under some pretext. They were all wearing bodycams and so everything they saw was recorded. On this walk they went past a staged situation where there was some 'keep out' tape, a few bits of metal and one person in a military uniform stood behind the tape. There was no explanation and no comment about it made by the TV people. A week later they were brought together again and as part of that they talked about what they saw. They agreed that they had seen wrecking of an crashed UFO that they had been threatened by armed guards and some had even seen alien bodies on the site. They were then showed the bodycam footage and found out they were wrong.

I was talking about personal testimony of visions of Jesus or similar not 'belief in God the Son'.

[Maeght]

Again though, what about those who convert who are not in an emotional state and those who, if they are emotional, are only so because of their conviction of their status with God? Which could equally apply I suppose to atheists avoiding God.

I didn't say it applied to all conversions. We were discussing the examples in the posts from Youtube and talking about their emotional state at the time of those. Some people who identify as atheists may do so due to their emotional state for sure.

[Gordon]

It will not be hard then for you to give examples of things people believe that aren’t true or for you to demonstrate how a belief in God The son fits in with that.

Dreams, or perhaps being unreasonably frightened due to misinterpretation of surroundings but where there is no threat (such as when it is dark).

in other words, what delusions are you comparing it with?

You do like loaded terms, and since the term 'delusion' can relate to mental illness I'd say that 'unjustified false belief' better fits what we are discussing (since I'm assuming that neither of us are qualified psychiatrists).

So I'd say that the feeling you've had a personal encounter of some sort, or a vision, of someone who has been dead for around 2,000 years would be an 'unjustified false belief': I accept that someone may feel this has happened to them but I doubt that there belief is true unless they can validate in terms independent of themselves. 

[Spud]

Spud,

No. There are various experiment-based hypotheses about what causes déjà vu and déjà rêvé, none of which include actually predicting the future:

But she said that she was aware of the dream the next morning - that she thought she'd been hallucinating. Interesting how a lot of her words get muddled up so you have to work out what she means; but that part of her story is completely coherent, and brief to the point of baldness (to quote someone else writing about Matthew's version of one of Jesus' miracles): "When I woke up the next morning I thought I'd been hallucinating". That could indicate accuracy.
If so, that would rule out déja révè.

[jeremyp]

It is what follows the tears -
A monumental change in lifestyle - leaving their past behind to follow their newfound Christian faith.

So they've basically joined a cult.

[Outrider]

It will not be hard then for you to give examples of things people believe that aren’t true or for you to demonstrate how a belief in God The son fits in with that.

Reiki. Homeopathy. Ghosts. Alien abductions. Selkie. Vampires. The Illuminati.

The list goes on.

O.

[Nearly Sane]

Reiki. Homeopathy. Ghosts. Alien abductions. Selkie. Vampires. The Illuminati.

The list goes on.

O.

I suspect that Vlad would assert that these are somehow not the equivalent to 'a belief in God The son'. If he does, then I hope that he makes clear what he sees as the difference

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

I don’t quote anyone when I use that term. It’s my own, so, another mistake on your part

FFS. By “say” I clearly meant something like “no-one takes the approach you’re claiming they’re taking” rather than using your exact term in argument. This is a low even by your dismal standards.

That’s naive and eliminates any conclusions people have come to on the matter.

No it isn’t. It merely identifies that the reasons used to justify those conclusions are either absent or false.

Gordon stated that such testimonies are dependent on the mental state of the believer and that they bore no resemblance to what he called reality. The direct implications being that there is mental abberation or lying.

Or prey to confirmation bias.

A bit of what?

I notice you just edited out the corrective you were given – ie, that AB was attempting to introduce unqualified personal testimonies as evidence for having actually met Jesus and similar. Why do you behave like this?   

[bluehillside Retd.]

Spud,

But she said that she was aware of the dream the next morning - that she thought she'd been hallucinating. Interesting how a lot of her words get muddled up so you have to work out what she means; but that part of her story is completely coherent, and brief to the point of baldness (to quote someone else writing about Matthew's version of one of Jesus' miracles): "When I woke up the next morning I thought I'd been hallucinating". That could indicate accuracy.
If so, that would rule out déja révè.

Being apparently "aware of" a dream the next morning doesn’t imply that the dream predicted the event for the reasons I set out. There isn’t an agreed explanation for the phenomenon, but competing hypotheses suggest that that some combination of selection bias (the brain picks the memories that fit and ignores those that don’t), confirmation bias, approximation bias etc. is likely at play. Show me an example of someone dreaming the winning lottery numbers, writing it down when they woke up and then the prediction coming true and perhaps we’d have something to talk about.     

 

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

Why are you not convinced?

Because the justifying reasoning is either wrong or absent. This shouldn't be difficult to grasp.