Yes, I am. People experience God in subjective ways. If you can't accept that, then stay an athiest.
Just because we experience something subjectively doesn't mean it is subjective. If the spiritual world has no objective existence, then within that context of the word it doesn't actually exist.
Oh come on! You want us to believe that you are just innocently coming to a Christian forum to say that you don't think God exists? Please!
I would rather you understand where I'm coming from, but you certainly don't have to accept it. I'm merely stating a fact. I don't believe, if I remember correctly, that I've told anyone here that they must or must not believe in anything. I'm more interested in the discussion to better understand why some people hold a different position than I do, not any sort of de-conversion.
Right and so if we don't apply your standards accross the board then that justifies your campaign against belief in God? No, I don't want to play. Thanks.
What? Again, I'm only interested in the standards you use, why you believe what you believe, and if you apply those standards for belief in God consistently to other such claims. I don't see how that is a "campaign against God". It sounds more like an invitation to conversation.
I thought you were not going to tell us what to believe?
There is no need for you to be so defensive. You don't have to believe it, but if you dispute that I'd certainly want some justification. Science is not meant to show anyone what they should value, as values are subjective personal opinions, not objective facts. Objective reality can certainly help inform regarding our opinions, however.
What a hypocrite! Scientists do it all the time. One guy has a hypothesis that leans one way and some other guy has a different hypothesis and they each base it on what they have seen and experienced themselves. Each scientist believes that he has "the Truth" but it's not the whole picture.
I can generally only speak on my behalf, so what other scientists do or do not do is kind of irrelevant. But I don't think you understand the differences between values and hypotheses. A hypothesis is a prediction about the "behavior" of objective reality. We then use our subjective observations, compare and contrast, and determine whether the hypothesis is valid or invalid.
A value is a personal, subjective opinion.
Why would the search for spiritual truthes be any different?
It shouldn't be, which is why I find it interesting that you think the spiritual world (again, thus far undefined), can't be objectively determined to exist like anything else. Just because we experience something subjectively does not mean it doesn't exist objectively. I would have thought you'd agree with that.
Why pretend that you respect my beliefs? Don't insult to my intellegence. You came here to pick a fight. Respect implies that you value my position, which clearly you do not.
What have I done that allows you to conclude I'm here to pick a fight?
Also, I'd appreciate it if you'd answer my previous question so I can better understand what you mean. What is the spiritual world?
By all means, though, if you don't want to engage in a polite discussion with me, then maybe it's better we don't converse, don't you think?
Respectfully,
Traverse
