How many GODS do you have?

[Baruch]

There are literally millions of us.

Billions virtue-signaling ;-) ... theist and atheist.

[Baruch]

Yeah, what a coincidence, huh?

People here constantly mix these up.  We should retire the term "atheist" because it is confusing.  This site can be renamed worshippersofthednc.com (sarc).

[aitm]

Even the so called believers get punishment if they do the wrong thing.

The real problem with ALL religions is that the believers still get punished when they do NOTHING wrong. This is where religion fails miserably. If a god demands I worship it, promising me good then lies about, you don't have a god at all, you have mere chance. And the reality is that gods promises are never kept, therefore god is useless.

[Unbeliever]

That was one reason.  But non-orthodox .. if by that both the body and soul are inherited from both parents.  The orthodox version is that the soul is "ab inito".  The body is inherited by both parents.  Each soul starts temporally innocent, but eternally shadowed by the sin of Adam.  This is also why it was necessary to imagine that Mary didn't conceive Jesus except as a virgin.  But to justify Jesus' perfection, her sainthood was continually elevated, even to today.  The theory being is that Jesus is the only human with a heavenly father, and the only human with a mother free of original sin.  A good reason why I deny all theological pretzel making.

Many people believe that Jesus was a product of "Immaculate Conception," but it was Mary who was immaculately conceived, without original sin. If God could abolish Mary's original sin, then why could he not do that for everyone else? Was he not powerful enough?

[Unbeliever]

People here constantly mix these up.  We should retire the term "atheist" because it is confusing.  This site can be renamed worshippersofthednc.com (sarc).

That's why I like the terms "unbeliever" or "nullifidian" - a person having no faith or religious belief.

[trdsf]

This is gonna be something of a mess, given the number of short choppy answers and non-answers, but let's go ahead.

Technically no; but what better way is there to study actual events that happen in the actual world?  Anything you do in a lab that is termed science is in many respects, a mere simulation.

I don't care whether it's a simulation.  I care whether it's reliably repeatable by any individual capable of making the observation independently.

Again, you can do all the equations you want, it's all abstract, a simulation of reality. Astrology is an art but there are  rules and guiding principles.  Somewhat like life.

And unlike mathematics, astrology does not give the same output when provided with the same input.  In fact, it will often give mutually exclusive results.  That makes it totally useless as either a predictive or descriptive tool.

And if the supernatural can't be proven, then I don't have to take it into account.  Until it can be, I can discount it with complete legitimacy.

This is understood--and by design.

Then you understand why I reject your claims.  Good.

Of course, I object to your usage of the word 'by design'.  You can't demonstrate a designer.

If it can't be perceived the same by two people independently, it's by definition completely without merit as evidence.

That's an exaggeration.

The hell it is.  Without confirmation, it's only an assertion.

If you want to claim my experience was a genuine encounter with the divine, you must deny the god of the Qu'ran.  If you assert the god of the Qu'ran, then you must deny the validity of my experience.  You can't have it both ways.  It's like trying to assert that 1=2.

Let's talk about this, since you are obviously big on mathematics.  Do you accept the concept of infinity as valid mathematical construct?

Which infinity are you talking about?  There are several.

And you're avoiding the question again.  We're going to take this one step at a time.

Do you, or do you not, believe that I had a legitimate religious experience, whether or not I accept it as one?

There is scientific evidence for the existence of higher realms.  Check out Dr. Michael Newton's work on soul realms

No there isn't.  Evidence means a) that the proposition has been measured and observed, and that b) someone has duplicated his result independently.  No one has duplicated Michael Newton's work, therefore it's not evidence, it's an assertion.  I've read his stuff, and he was a woolly-headed idiot.

Neither does life.  That's why pi is an abstraction.

Now you're conflating the generalities of daily life with the scientific method.  That's both sloppy and dishonest.

And whether or not pi is an abstraction is of no relevance, since it can be measured and re-measured and its value confirmed both with precision and without fail.

Religious beliefs in the supernatural work too.

Religious beliefs, and beliefs in the supernatural, existâ€"against all evidence and reason.  They don't "work".  They are not reliable predictors and they are not repeatable observations.

Answers to prayer are always tailored to the specific needs and circumstances of the individual.  We wouldn't logically expect them to be uniform.

That's just the old "oh, god works in mysterious ways" dodge.  If you got what you prayed for, goddidit, and if you didn't, either something's wrong with you or 'mysterious ways'.

Prayer, specifically for sick people, has been studied, and demonstrated to have no effect when the person being prayed for does not know they are being prayed for, and two opposite effects with the same root cause (when any effect at all) when the patients do know about the prayer: some of them take psychological comfort in the knowledge and get better quicker (a psychosomatic effect), and some of them think "oh shit, I must be really sick if they're praying for me!" and get worse (another psychosomatic effect).

[Absolute_Agent]

This is gonna be something of a mess, given the number of short choppy answers and non-answers, but let's go ahead.
I don't care whether it's a simulation.  I care whether it's reliably repeatable by any individual capable of making the observation independently.
And unlike mathematics, astrology does not give the same output when provided with the same input.  In fact, it will often give mutually exclusive results.  That makes it totally useless as either a predictive or descriptive tool.
This is understood--and by design.

Then you understand why I reject your claims.  Good.

Of course, I object to your usage of the word 'by design'.  You can't demonstrate a designer.
That's an exaggeration.

The hell it is.  Without confirmation, it's only an assertion.
Let's talk about this, since you are obviously big on mathematics.  Do you accept the concept of infinity as valid mathematical construct?

Which infinity are you talking about?  There are several.

And you're avoiding the question again.  We're going to take this one step at a time.

Do you, or do you not, believe that I had a legitimate religious experience, whether or not I accept it as one?
No there isn't.  Evidence means a) that the proposition has been measured and observed, and that b) someone has duplicated his result independently.  No one has duplicated Michael Newton's work, therefore it's not evidence, it's an assertion.  I've read his stuff, and he was a woolly-headed idiot.
Now you're conflating the generalities of daily life with the scientific method.  That's both sloppy and dishonest.

And whether or not pi is an abstraction is of no relevance, since it can be measured and re-measured and its value confirmed both with precision and without fail.
Religious beliefs, and beliefs in the supernatural, existâ€"against all evidence and reason.  They don't "work".  They are not reliable predictors and they are not repeatable observations.
That's just the old "oh, god works in mysterious ways" dodge.  If you got what you prayed for, goddidit, and if you didn't, either something's wrong with you or 'mysterious ways'.

Prayer, specifically for sick people, has been studied, and demonstrated to have no effect when the person being prayed for does not know they are being prayed for, and two opposite effects with the same root cause (when any effect at all) when the patients do know about the prayer: some of them take psychological comfort in the knowledge and get better quicker (a psychosomatic effect), and some of them think "oh shit, I must be really sick if they're praying for me!" and get worse (another psychosomatic effect).

Yes, your experience was valid because it made sense to you at that time.  Why would I want to repeat your experience?  I want my own unique experiences.    Abstract mathematics have their usefulness, and so do religious experiences.  You said yourself, the experience helped you get out of Catholicism.  It "worked".  I live in the real world, not an abstract mathematical universe.  I want experiences--not simulations.  Unpredictability is part of life and what makes it fun.  Science kills that.

Which infinity?  What are my choices?

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

[aitm]

Unpredictability is part of life and what makes it fun.  Science kills that.

There it is. Science makes sense while religion is unpredictable. Thus I will ignore that which is proven and accept that which is bullshit.  Religion in a nutshell, thus spake its absolute agent. LOLOL.

[Absolute_Agent]

There it is. Science makes sense while religion is unpredictable. Thus I will ignore that which is proven and accept that which is bullshit.  Religion in a nutshell, thus spake its absolute agent. LOLOL.

You know how I know God is real @aitm?  Because I love God.  Can you love what isn't real?

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

[Mike Cl]

You know how I know God is real @aitm?  Because I love God.  Can you love what isn't real?

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

Ah......I see.  I love bugs Bunny!  Therefore, he is real--but I always kinda knew that.  He is so damned funny, how could he not be real?!!

[Absolute_Agent]

Ah......I see.  I love bugs Bunny!  Therefore, he is real--but I always kinda knew that.  He is so damned funny, how could he not be real?!!

I know God is real, and Bugs Bunny is not. God answers my prayers, Bugs Bunny does not. God speaks to me, Bugs Bunny does not.  There is no god but the one true God (Allah).  I don't love that which is unreal.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

[aitm]

  Can you love what isn't real?

Jeezus boy, get out of your mothers basement and into the real world. People love all kinds of shit that isn't real. Are you a mental patient somewhere?

If you have the ignorance to proclaim that one cannot love something that is not real then you just admitted that all of the gods ever invented, imagined or believed by humankind must exist. By that reasoning we have tens of thousands of gods and yours is just another minor player given your success of your prayers.
Face it, you are just another in the millions of cultural religionists, your parents told you what to believe and you do. Despite your objections you have never went on your own, you just followed the crowd. You don't get any special awards for simply being a dust bunny.

[Mike Cl]

I know God is real, and Bugs Bunny is not. God answers my prayers, Bugs Bunny does not. God speaks to me, Bugs Bunny does not.  There is no god but the one true God (Allah).  I don't love that which is unreal.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

I do know that Bugs answers as many prayers as Allah.  Bugs and Allah are the same.  Praying to either gives one the same results.  Both are fictions.  And your opinion proves nothing.  And you have not provided any more evidence for Allah than for Bugs.

[Absolute_Agent]

Jeezus boy, get out of your mothers basement and into the real world. People love all kinds of shit that isn't real. Are you a mental patient somewhere?

If you have the ignorance to proclaim that one cannot love something that is not real then you just admitted that all of the gods ever invented, imagined or believed by humankind must exist. By that reasoning we have tens of thousands of gods and yours is just another minor player given your success of your prayers.
Face it, you are just another in the millions of cultural religionists, your parents told you what to believe and you do. Despite your objections you have never went on your own, you just followed the crowd. You don't get any special awards for simply being a dust bunny.

Congratulations @aitm, you are now a believer. 1 John 4:8 says "God is love". When you recognized the existence of love, you recognized God. And you mentioned Jesus to boot! [emoji28]

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

[Baruch]

Many people believe that Jesus was a product of "Immaculate Conception," but it was Mary who was immaculately conceived, without original sin. If God could abolish Mary's original sin, then why could he not do that for everyone else? Was he not powerful enough?

This is Catholic magic.  They are the ones who have more recently pushed Mariolatry.