Family Man

Unless you can demonstrate that you're not operating under a self-fulfilling prophecy, I can't be confident that you are interpreting the events properly. Neither can you, really, though I don't expect you to accept that.

Of course you were. By your own testimony, you've received hundreds (bumped up to possibly thousands) of "messages" since you've become a Christian. If that were true, you'd have to be expecting these messages all the time.

I'm not trying to be insulting, Luvluv, but I want you to understand why I'm skeptical about your own interpretations. Right here, you're trying to minimize the expectations that you had going into your experience -- because that's precisely what my argument is -- but your own testimony contradicts what you'd have us believe. It is your beliefs that are driving your arguments, not your experiences.

If you review my opening post, the message Christians send is to expect messages from God at any time. You had to been expecting a message -- it is no surprise that you found one.

The only expectation that is relevant is the expectation you have about God. None of this has any effect on my argument.

Then why doesn't he talk to me? Or to Hindus? Or Confucians? Or American Indians? Why does he appear to talk to those who at least live where the belief system is prevalent?

I only started this thread. If you think your religious experience is real, it's your life. I've given my reasons why I don't think it's real. You haven't given a coherent reason why a skeptic should trust them.

And if you consider the possiblity that you are deluded (your term, not mine) than perhaps you could be persuaded to my point of view. It appears to me that you have your mind made up too. The difference is, I can put forth a coherent reason why your personal experiences shouldn't be trusted by anyone. I haven't seen anything from you that would refute that.

And you'll excuse me if I don't expect to hear my name on TV. I don't watch religious programs.

luvluv

It wasn't just them, and I never explicitly asked them or discussed my specific situation (if I remember correctly). They were talking about experiences of God talking to them in their lives. This was in conjunction with the fact that it seemed like all my favourite TV preachers (get off my back, I was a baby Christian) decided to preach on the topic of God's voice, and that the Bible passages I was reading at the time had something to do with that topic, and I decided to give the possibility a shot. I didn't tell anybody that I thought God was talking to me. I was afraid they would think I was going bonkers. I thought I was going bonkers. But these (unrelated) discussions on the topic influenced me to give the possibiity a chance.

Which would probably fall under bonkers.

Scottyman

I will respond to you directly Family Man. I started a thread back awhile ago about John Edwards and his show "Crossing Over". Some of the people responded to me and gave me some really interesting insight into how this scam works. Aparently he is wrong just about 85% of the time but they don't show that on the broadcast. There have been some attempts by journalists to uncover the scam and they found that they manipulate the audience and even mike the crowd to garner information yet peopel still believe he's communicating with the dead. Now don't you think that if the dead could really be communicated with we would all be deaf by now?

The truth is that so many people want to believe so much that they will attribute random experiences with revalation even though it is really a small part of their total experiences. This has actually been proven scientifically many times over so I agree with the solution that these are self-fulfilling prophecies and I also agree that this is the worst form of evidence of any supernatual omnipotent being.

Now if a aparition came to me in public and was witnessed by a large group of people and maybe caught on video tape and was able to be broadcast through the news, maybe I would believe in the existence of spirits. I might not believe in a "god" but I would at least be convinced that spirits do exist. But I question a society that still believes in such things when no physical evidence of the sort has ever been put forth. And I don't mean by indirect evidence like, something great happened that must be attributed to "god" or the clouds look like Jesus type of thing.

Family Man

In other words, you bought into the belief system that produces the self-fulfilling prophecy I've been talking about.

Or that you're completely unaware of how your belief system has affected how you perceive the world.

Family Man

Scottyman, I agree with everything you said.

luvluv

Family Man:

Have you read anything I've typed? The branch of Christianity I was most attracted to was the mainline liberalish school, and they absolutely do not believe that God talks to anyone anymore, if indeed He ever did. I was not expecting to hear from God when I first heard from Him. It was my experiences of hearing from God that made me believe it was possible to hear from God.

I admit, you have good reasons for disbelieving my views. Nevertheless, my beliefs may be true. And from my vantage points, your explanations don't hold much water. I've cried on the floor from doing (or not doing) things according to what I believe this voice has asked me to do. Some of them were TOTALLY unexpected and totally heartbreaking. They've nearly all come out to have good results (and the ones that haven't are still pending). If you're telling me that I expected to have my life and my expectations turned upside down simply because I have a general belief that God will talk to me, you'll excuse me if I think that interpretation involves a weak grasp of the actual evidence. In fairness to you, you are not privy to the evidence about my life that I am privy to, so your misunderstanding is totally understandable.

Nevertheless, my friend, I say in all humility that you are totally wrong. Just wrong. There's no animousity in that statement. I have no ill will towards you. But you are wrong, and I want you to remember that I said that.

cricket

Yes. God talking to all of us at once, big booming voice, light show in the heavens as trees are uprooted and pigs fly...

And I am amazed that people see this as the work of God when we know it's a cognitive brain trick that happens to everyone.

Last week I was helping my sister study vocabulary words, including "regicide." Neither one of us knew the meaning of the word before that. Ten minutes after we finished studying I was reading a book, and lo and behold, I read the word "regicide."

Things like this happen all the time, luvluv, and it means nothing!

Clutch

It need neither be acute, nor strictly self-delusional, nor lying, nor strictly exaggerating. Why do you insist on redescribing things in these extravagant ways? You have a belief unsupported by evidence; you interpret events in a way that makes them seem to amount to evidence; in this you are mistaken. But the underlying explanation is nothing more than a very widespread -- ie, far from strictly theistic! -- misunderstanding of evidence, probability and some related notions. Similar misunderstandings underwrite all sorts of widespread false beliefs: I gave a couple of examples earlier. You are doing what sincere and smart people do all the time when they assume and are invested in some unwarranted belief. Neither your character nor your sanity is at issue here. Your "trilemma" claim is as misguided as Lewis's own.

luvluv

cricket:

If you decide ahead of time that they don't, indeed they don't.

Clutch:

How do you know I am mistaken?

Are you saying that a person should not have a belief unsupported by evidence? Fine. What is your evidence that I am mistaken? Did you believe I was mistaken before you heard my case? And how would your doing that jive with your notion that all beliefs should be supported by evidence?

Jobar

luvluv:
No matter how poor the evidence for a religous experience, the devoted theist will believe it, and no matter how good the evidence for a religious experience, the devoted atheist will not believe it.

luvluv, I must disagree. The many unbelievers who read and contribute to this board do so in part, I am convinced, as a search for 'evidence for religious experience'. Thing is, we see no evidence worthy of the name. Your interpretation of your own experience does not constitute evidence to anyone but you. (I know you realize this.)

A suggestion. Get a small notebook, and whenever you get one of these feelings or messages you think are from God, jot it down. Then later note the consequences of obeying or disobeying it. Do that for a long time, several months or more.

At the end of that time, look at the results and classify them as positive, negative or neutral, in terms of actual benefit to you. I would wager that you would find most of the results to be neutral- with positive and negative results about even. IOW you would find that your messages do you no overall and consistent good.

I admit that I could be wrong about that, because those messages are coming from your own subconscious mind, and the nonverbal parts of our brains have their own undeniable wisdom. However, that sort of experiment might demonstrate to you exactly what Family Man, and we others too, have been trying to get across to you.

On a different level, I want to thank you for your input on this thread. You may not appreciate it, but you have provided a wonderful practical demonstration of how believers categorize their experiences in such a way that those experiences are seen as evidence for deity. Also, despite our direct (but not, I think, disrespectful) opposition to, and questioning of, your views, you have remained calm and respectful, honestly attempting to explain to us why you feel and think as you do. This sort of thing is what IIDB is for!