Quote:
Originally Posted by skeptic griggsy
People can prattle to the high heavens, but the subjectivity of religious experience lacks inter-subjectivity,
|
That's nonsensical. I understand now why you tried the font/underline distraction. Do you have something to say? Did you mean it lacks uniformity?
Quote:
|
as so many differing notions come forth, and all religious experience is just ones own mind at work,
|
The only thing you can say for certain is that this is your mind at work. Else, a great deal of witness to the contrary, your opinion notwithstanding.
Quote:
|
and to prattle about His input, begs the question thereof!
|
No it doesn't. Demonstrate how.
Quote:
|
People can self-induce religious experiences so that the miraculous fails.
|
The last part is, again, nonsense. As to religious experiences, induced by self or no, you can stimulate the brain to produce sounds and sights and smells in a person. It doesn't follow that any of those things only exist in the mind. Doofus.
Quote:
|
Where lies the evidence for any supposed miracle?
|
Query the Catholic church. As hard as they are on the miraculous they have accounts, as do others. Doesn't prove anything, given a miracle today might be something explained at some point distant. Or, the problem isn't in what we don't know but in what we don't know we don't know.
Quote:
|
No, personal observations fail, as miracles are magical tricks at times and have natural causes.
|
Some. Maybe most. All? Not so far as we know.
Quote:
|
No substantiate evidence ever comes forth, but just false observations!
|
A meaningless declaration and one countered by any number or witnesses, though your attack and their defense won't settle the question. You aren't looking in the right place or using the right tool for the job.
Quote:
|
That is not dogmatic but the evidence from lack of evidence for miracles and evidence for natural causes.
|
Addressed, supra.
Or, hello pot. But I'm not trying to bury counter. That's essentially what you seem to be up to.
Linear Mode
