I can't prove it to you, but I know it's true

[jgh7]

Thanks Christians. After all the years on this forum, this is the best summary I can make for you guys as far as your debating goes. And where does that get me or anyone else for that matter in a debate...

Nowhere.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 29 by OpenYourEyes]

You still haven't answered my question. How am I supposed to verify that God spoke to OpenYourEyes today?

[OpenYourEyes]

[Replying to post 29 by OpenYourEyes]

You still haven't answered my question. How am I supposed to verify that God spoke to OpenYourEyes today?

You don't. You do your own fieldwork and perhaps through that, you will have your own experiences that you can use as verification for Rikuoamero. Or, you can look at this collectively by referencing the millions or perhaps even the billions who have had experiences.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 31 by OpenYourEyes]

And what fieldwork can I do? Would this fieldwork involve doing science in any way? I thought this was beyond the scope of science.
So I see the problem still hasn't been fully processed on your end. OpenYourEyes is spoken to by God and OpenYourEyes says this on the forum.
Other than OpenYourEye's words, what do I have to work with, when it comes to investigating the claim?
Nothing, that's what.

[Zzyzx]

.

[Replying to post 29 by OpenYourEyes]
You still haven't answered my question. How am I supposed to verify that God spoke to OpenYourEyes today?

You don't.

Exactly.

The testimonial is unsupportable – and is worthless in debate (and of very questionable value in any reasoned discussion). It is no more meaningful than “This car was only driven by a little old lady going to church. Take my word for it.�

You do your own fieldwork and perhaps through that, you will have your own experiences that you can use as verification for Rikuoamero.

Those who cannot support their contentions often attempt to pass the buck to others by saying “Do your own work to support my contention.�

Or, you can look at this collectively by referencing the millions or perhaps even the billions who have had experiences.

That is a blunder in logic known as Argumentum Ad Populum – “Many believe so it must be true�

[OpenYourEyes]

Exactly.
The testimonial is unsupportable – and is worthless in debate (and of very questionable value in any reasoned discussion). It is no more meaningful than “This car was only driven by a little old lady going to church. Take my word for it.�

To you it's hearsay but to me it's evidence since I can vouch for my experience which is more than hearsay, and therefore it's why I believe in it unless proven false. My reply is mainly for those who not only keep asking for "verifiable evidence" for these type of experiences, but also for those like you who KNOW that these experiences are rarely reproducible, but then get frustrated or question why people believe in such and such.

You do your own fieldwork and perhaps through that, you will have your own experiences that you can use as verification for Rikuoamero.

Those who cannot support their contentions often attempt to pass the buck to others by saying “Do your own work to support my contention.�

No, that's YOUR spin. It is possible to induce spiritual experiences or even contact God by various means, like meditation, prayer, witchcraft, etc. There are many testimonials to that fact from non-believers and believers alike.

Or, you can look at this collectively by referencing the millions or perhaps even the billions who have had experiences.

That is a blunder in logic known as Argumentum Ad Populum – “Many believe so it must be true�

True, but I'd also find it suspect when people waive off those billions of experiences based off of ideology and/or a few disproven con artists. The experiences of many have often served as the basis for the identification, classification of a variety of matters, like when it comes to illnesses, mental disorders, human behavior, etc. So experiences aren't worthless as some might think.

[Zzyzx]

.

Exactly.
The testimonial is unsupportable – and is worthless in debate (and of very questionable value in any reasoned discussion). It is no more meaningful than “This car was only driven by a little old lady going to church. Take my word for it.�

To you it's hearsay but to me it's evidence

Agreed. To you, your experiences are evidence. When you tell them to others it becomes hearsay.

Hearsay is defined as “That heard from another�. Thus, when a person hears about anything from another person that is hearsay.

since I can vouch for my experience which is more than hearsay, and therefore it's why I believe in it unless proven false.

Vouching for one's own experience is meaningless to anyone who has no reason to believe what you say. Doing so is certainly not acceptable in reasoned debate.

Doesn't "I can vouch for what I say" sound a little bit silly?

My reply is mainly for those who not only keep asking for "verifiable evidence" for these type of experiences, but also for those like you who KNOW that these experiences are rarely reproducible, but then get frustrated or question why people believe in such and such.

Those who offer testimonials in debate can expect to be challenged. Forum Rules require that claims be supported by evidence. “I am telling the truth� or “It really happened� are NOT evidence.

You do your own fieldwork and perhaps through that, you will have your own experiences that you can use as verification for Rikuoamero.

Those who cannot support their contentions often attempt to pass the buck to others by saying “Do your own work to support my contention.�

No, that's YOUR spin.

Is it my "spin" to note that telling someone to do their own "fieldwork" is an attempt to pass the buck? What would you call it if someone did that to you? Would you regard them doing so as honorable debate response to being asked for evidence to support a statement they made?

It is possible to induce spiritual experiences or even contact God by various means, like meditation, prayer, witchcraft, etc. There are many testimonials to that fact from non-believers and believers alike.

Agreed, spiritual “experiences� in the mind can be induced by various drugs, electrical stimulation of the brain, sensory deprivation, meditation / prayer, and perhaps witchcraft.

THUS, claims of spiritual “experiences� can be caused by numerous conditions and are no assurance of supernatural involvement. They are mental / psychological / emotional (or whatever) episodes.

Or, you can look at this collectively by referencing the millions or perhaps even the billions who have had experiences.

That is a blunder in logic known as Argumentum Ad Populum – “Many believe so it must be true�

True, but I'd also find it suspect when people waive off those billions of experiences based off of ideology and/or a few disproven con artists.

Asking for verifiable evidence is not “waving off� anything – it is asking that claims made be substantiated. That concept may be unfamiliar to those who are accustomed to believing what others say or justifying their beliefs by citing numbers of believers (as in a popularity contest).

The experiences of many have often served as the basis for the identification, classification of a variety of matters, like when it comes to illnesses, mental disorders, human behavior, etc. So experiences aren't worthless as some might think.

Yes, psychological “experiences� are often studied by psychiatrists. Sometimes their patients are medicated or institutionalized. So what?

[JehovahsWitness]

THUS, claims of spiritual “experiences� can be caused by numerous conditions and are no assurance of supernatural involvement. They are mental / psychological / emotional (or whatever) episodes.

And can you offer verifiable proof that this is the case for ALL spiritual experiences?

JW

[Zzyzx]

.

THUS, claims of spiritual “experiences� can be caused by numerous conditions and are no assurance of supernatural involvement. They are mental / psychological / emotional (or whatever) episodes.

And can you offer verifiable proof that this is the case for ALL spiritual experiences?

I make no claim regarding ALL claimed "spiritual experiences".

However, that they CAN be caused by multiple things other than supernatural involvement indicates that one cannot be certain that any reported "spiritual experience" actually involves supernatural involvement -- it could be drugs, hallucinations, delusions, sensory deprivation or whatever.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 37 by Zzyzx]

And how would you explain those that are not caused by the factors above?

[Justin108]

[Replying to post 37 by Zzyzx]

And how would you explain those that are not caused by the factors above?

Can you give an example of a spiritual experience that was not caused by the factors above?