[Bored chemist]

It may be irrelevant to you because you have your mind firmly made up.

No, it is irrelevant to everyone because it's an anecdote, not evidence.
So the answer to my question was yes. You really don't understand what evidence is.
No wonder you make so many mistakes.

[CliveG]

It may be irrelevant to you because you have your mind firmly made up.

No, it is irrelevant to everyone because it's an anecdote, not evidence.
So the answer to my question was yes. You really don't understand what evidence is.
No wonder you make so many mistakes.

You choose to exclude the evidence of the mind and the conscious despite knowing that it is poorly understood. You choose to exclude the one pathway that the spirit world uses to communicate.

Suppose I rejected everything unless the Pope told me in person that it was true. I would have to reject everything. Is there not the science of mind? Do they only believe graphs on a machine? Do not a group of anecdotes form the basis for science to start an inquiry into something they suspect but do not fully understand?

You can live your life on peer-reviewed evidence or you can use a bit of common-sense. Remember when most people rejected global warming and climate change? The mechanism, an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, seemed to be too small to have an effect. So it is with spirit communication but even more so. It does not make it false which is what you are arguing.

And you have no substitute hypothesis for the Prime Cause, nor any substitute for the good that religion does, despite the abuses of the clergy and the fraudsters who get rich.

[Bored chemist]

You choose to exclude the evidence of the mind and the conscious despite knowing that it is poorly understood.

It's not just me.
Science rejects anecdotes as evidence.
This is a science web page.

nor any substitute for the good that religion does

I am still waiting for evidence of good done by religion that couldn't be done without religion (and thus without the risk of the fraudsters you mention).

[Bored chemist]

Remember when most people rejected global warming and climate change?

No, but that's beside the point
But do you recognise that what changed their minds was evidence, rather than gossip?
People came to recognise that this was unavoidably true.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=fjtSAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA382&lpg=PA382&dq=%22Circumstances+Affecting+the+Heat+of+the+Sun%E2%80%99s+Rays%22+foote&source=bl&ots=j5MLp3r_i4&sig=pfHXWv44uTHzjMyCAx_vjOnxlyU&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22Circumstances%20Affecting%20the%20Heat%20of%20the%20Sun%E2%80%99s%20Rays%22%20foote&f=false

[Bored chemist]

you can use a bit of common-sense.

From the man who is trying to tell me I should take his ghost stories as scientific evidence.

[hamdani yusuf]

The thread is about proof but also about the hints and messages that God, if he exists, seems to be leaving for us. Today, while working in the garage I thought about the justification the Israelis give for the establishment of the State of Israel. It is simple "God gave it to them".

What makes you think that God is a male? What is the defining characteristics that makes him male instead of female of gender neutral? Can he change his own gender at will? Does he got female partners?

[CliveG]

The thread is about proof but also about the hints and messages that God, if he exists, seems to be leaving for us. Today, while working in the garage I thought about the justification the Israelis give for the establishment of the State of Israel. It is simple "God gave it to them".

What makes you think that God is a male? What is the defining characteristics that makes him male instead of female of gender neutral? Can he change his own gender at will? Does he got female partners?

It is logical that when souls are in the afterlife that they have no gender. My experience of being with my late wife for a short time was that there were no forms. The closest I could describe it was it was like swirling colors of smoke. So male can reincarnate in female and vice versa. Makes sense since I have a feminine side to me - despite being a straight alpha male.

This would apply to God also. I use "he" because it is commonly used. God and Satan are neither male nor female and have no form.

[CliveG]

you can use a bit of common-sense.

From the man who is trying to tell me I should take his ghost stories as scientific evidence.

I think this thread has run it's course. It took 45 years of experience to change me from an atheist to a de facto theist. Listing my experiences is only being meet with scoffing. Presenting a plausible hypothesis for the Prime Cause, and for the mystic experiences of many, and for religion has no traction. So far, no one following this thread has indicated any interest in my experiences. What will force change is an apocalyptic scenario where science has no answers. It is coming soon, and not just to a theater near you.

I will answer any questions if anyone has an interest.

At the moment, I am praying that the corona virus does not affect South Africa until we have our house sold. The market is already depressed and we cannot afford to hold on to the property.

[Bored chemist]

I think this thread has run it's course.

It ran its course the first time you decided that evidence didn't matter.

[CliveG]

I think this thread has run it's course.

It ran its course the first time you decided that evidence didn't matter.

I was okay with you having the last word, but it seems God wanted me to reply to you.

He says you are a denialist 

From Wiki:
In the psychology of human behavior, denialism is a person's choice to deny reality as a way to avoid a psychologically uncomfortable truth. Denialism is an essentially irrational action that withholds the validation of a historical experience or event, when a person refuses to accept an empirically verifiable reality.

The motivations and causes of denialism include religion, self-interest (economic, political, or financial), and defence mechanisms meant to protect the psyche of the denialist against mentally disturbing facts and ideas.

[Bored chemist]

Denialism is an essentially irrational action that withholds the validation of a historical experience or event, when a person refuses to accept an empirically verifiable reality.

Your dreams are not empirically verifiable reality.
I have been pointing this out all along.
You are in denial about it.

The motivations and causes of denialism include religion, self-interest (economic, political, or financial), and defence mechanisms meant to protect the psyche of the denialist against mentally disturbing facts and ideas.

Perhaps God wanted you to post that so I could tell you to get a mirror, in order that you may see your own failing.

You pretend to yourself that your dreams are empirically verifiable in order to protect yourself from the disturbing reality that you are just making stuff up.

[CliveG]

Denialism is an essentially irrational action that withholds the validation of a historical experience or event, when a person refuses to accept an empirically verifiable reality.

Your dreams are not empirically verifiable reality.
I have been pointing this out all along.
You are in denial about it.

The motivations and causes of denialism include religion, self-interest (economic, political, or financial), and defence mechanisms meant to protect the psyche of the denialist against mentally disturbing facts and ideas.

Perhaps God wanted you to post that so I could tell you to get a mirror, in order that you may see your own failing.

You pretend to yourself that your dreams are empirically verifiable in order to protect yourself from the disturbing reality that you are just making stuff up.

See what I mean about being in denial. There were about three experiences that could be classified as dreams. Even so the information gained in those dreams is a form of communication. How many people wake up at 2 am and have a eureka moment of clarity?

Now what about the rest? The mental telepathy, the Tarot cards, the seeing a future events, communicating with a ghost, getting prayers answered? Your avoidance of these strong experiences (and also the experiences of prophets such as Jesus and Muhammad) is a feature of denialism. You even deny that although you have no answer to the Prime Cause, my hypothesis has a lot of merit.

When a debater resorts to scorn and insults, as you often do, it is usually an indication they are losing the debate.

Do you still deny that you are a denialist? 

[Bored chemist]

See what I mean about being in denial.

See what I mean about a mirror?

Now what about the rest? The mental telepathy, the Tarot cards, the seeing a future events, communicating with a ghost, getting prayers answered? Your avoidance of these strong experiences

I didn't "avoid" them, did I?
I pointed out that they can be explained - often by confirmation bias.

But you don't see that because it conflicts with what you want to believe.

The difference is that I have evidence.
You can simply look back through the thread and see that I didn't "avoid" them, I addressed them at the time.


Do you realise that anyone else reading this will recognise that you are the one in denial?

You deny obvious things like the fact that I addressed those points.

[CliveG]

Did!
Did not!
Did too!
Did not, did not!
Did, did, did...

So let us move on. Let me try something else.

Pascal's Wager. The odds of belief are better than the odds of disbelief. Plus side benefits that believers are less stressed and more able to deal with trying times.

You cannot prove me wrong. Admit it. You cannot deny this simple truth.

Do I take comfort in the hope that there is an afterlife? I have not up to now because my faith that it truly exists is just not there. Lately my health is getting very bad, and there are times that death would be a welcome relief. Now that death may be very close, I am finding that the possibility of an afterlife is comforting.

The comfort is in a sense of meaning - not of fear. I have never feared death even as a strong atheist. If life is mechanical then any of my achievements are no different to the formation of a stalactite caused by the dripping of water from a cave. Nice as it may be, it is meaningless. If, on the other hand, I have made the world a better place for generations of souls to come - that is much more meaningful. It is part of a grand scheme of an intelligence.

And compare the difference between you and I in the afterlife. You say - I wasted all that time criticizing the existence of an afterlife and here I am. I say - aah, just as I had experienced it.

Any contrived answer from you is just more denial.

[Bored chemist]

You cannot prove me wrong.

Now what about the rest? The mental telepathy, the Tarot cards, the seeing a future events, communicating with a ghost, getting prayers answered? Your avoidance of these strong experiences

I did not avoid them.

What I have said is things like you are looking at the placebo effect, but not recognising it or you are a victim of confirmation bias.

So it'snot a matter of "Did!
Did not!
Did too!
Did not, did not!
Did, did, did..."
It's a matter of "I did.Here is the quote that proves it."

So, let's not "move on" , let's just stop and wait for you to accept reality.
I did address those things, didn'tI?

Pascal's Wager. The odds of belief are better than the odds of disbelief.

The odds are that you pick the wrong religion and are held to account for worshipping a false idol (like Christ, or Mary).
Pascal's wager only works if there is only one religion.

You cannot prove me wrong. Admit it. You cannot deny this simple truth.

I just did.
I predict that you will deny it.
And then you will call me a denialist.

[CliveG]

You cannot prove me wrong.

Now what about the rest? The mental telepathy, the Tarot cards, the seeing a future events, communicating with a ghost, getting prayers answered? Your avoidance of these strong experiences

I did not avoid them.

What I have said is things like you are looking at the placebo effect, but not recognising it or you are a victim of confirmation bias.

So it'snot a matter of "Did!
Did not!
Did too!
Did not, did not!
Did, did, did..."
It's a matter of "I did.Here is the quote that proves it."

So, let's not "move on" , let's just stop and wait for you to accept reality.
I did address those things, didn'tI?

Pascal's Wager. The odds of belief are better than the odds of disbelief.

The odds are that you pick the wrong religion and are held to account for worshipping a false idol (like Christ, or Mary).
Pascal's wager only works if there is only one religion.

You cannot prove me wrong. Admit it. You cannot deny this simple truth.

I just did.
I predict that you will deny it.
And then you will call me a denialist.

So let me see what we have here.

I say you cannot prove me wrong that God exists. You have not said you can prove me wrong.

I have said that God exists because I experience the supernatural and God. You say I am a) making things up b) dreaming c) guilty of confirmation bias d) having brain malfunctions such as hallucinations e) personal experience does not count.
To which I respond a) I am not a liar b) dreams can have meaning c) confirmation bias did not apply d) most events were clear and distinct and there was no substance abuse and I am a high performing individual e) the events happened and none of the usual explanations fit despite your round-pegging-in-a-square-hole.

Now I have given you a number of examples of my "reality". Your reality only differs from mine in that you do not experience mystic or psychic events. Have you ever thought that only some of us do - the real ones and not the many fakes?

Pascal's Wager. What an imaginative twist to a simple choice? Luckily you have me to guide you. I understand the way it works. It also shows you have not been paying attention to what I have been saying. Let me spell it out.

There is one God. So no matter what God you choose you get it right. God is not defined by religion and most religions that have survived recognize that there is one God. The key aspect to God is that he/she is good and if you pray for a good outcome you have a chance it will happen. You can direct your prayer through a representative such as Jesus or Saint Mary, although I think God will frown upon prayers to the Mother of God.

You can choose a ritual which is pleasant. A service with hymn and joint prayer and fellowship. Most will do. I have said most religions have some truth in them and that they all need updating. You could do some good work by assisting the various religions to update. Some ritual such as fastings and chanting and dancing as the Shamans do is one way to open oneself up to information.

You also have to realize that Evil exists and that you need to avoid religions that tend towards the dark side. The cults and the gurus. And there are religions that pray to Evil (Satan, Devil whatever). Choosing one of these might be worse than no choice at all. You do not need the ritual of a particular religion. Recognize what the spirit world can do and stay grounded.

You might say to yourself that if you stay an atheist it does not matter because you would get to the afterlife and find that you have an eternal soul. Sorry but this is where religions need an update. Souls can be terminated, and souls that have not evolved and have not achieved (either good or bad) are not needed. If there is a huge die-off, you can be sure there is an over-supply of souls.

So what have you got to lose. You simply say "Gee. God does not want scientific absolute proof of his existence, but is he is prepared to tell people how the spirit world works, and to give hints about a philosophical hypothesis that is as good (better actually) than any one relying on interpretation of mathematical symbols and formulae." And you might just get some benefit to "good luck" in the form of answered prayers. Even if you say it is all placebo, placebo works.

But no. Thinking you know it all (as I did when I was young) is a better ego trip for you. Pity.

I would add an addendum. The God of the Zoroastrians became the God of the Israelites which became the God of the Christians which became the God of the Muslims. The God of the Israelites was and is a vengeful God. Jesus updated the religion to one of unconditional love. Then it got a slight update to a God of mercy with Muhammad. The Jews do not believe in an afterlife so I would not chose Judaism as a model to go on. One could go with Hinduism or Buddhism (which is based on Hinduism). Tao and Confucianism are ways of living right and do not deal too much with the soul and God. Shamanism and tribal religions mostly believe in One God. The mythical religions are now seen as myths - stories of families living in a place not too different from Earth.

You now have a binary choice. Atheism or theism. With atheism, you risk the chance of getting what you expect - no soul in the afterlife.

[CliveG]

Just saw these two articles. I am okay with atheism. I am not okay with the bigotry that is as bad if not worse than what some religious bigots espouse. In my opinion these four "horsemen" are ignorant of the religions they denigrate. Money is their God especially in the case of Sam Harris.

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/atheists-case-devolving-bigotry-200220114842749.html

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/resurrection-atheism-190503132921871.html

[Bored chemist]

So let me see what we have here.

I say you cannot prove me wrong that God exists. You have not said you can prove me wrong.

No
You made a false statement

Your avoidance of these strong experiences (and also the experiences of prophets such as Jesus and Muhammad) is a feature of denialism.

I pointed out that it was wrong.
You wasted time and bandwidth by saying

Did!
Did not!
Did too!
Did not, did not!
Did, did, did...

And I showed that you were, in fact wrong, because I hadn't "avoided" those issues, I had addressed them.

I never said anything about proving God one way or another.
You tried to prove it using an argument that was shown to be wrong shortly after Pascal put it forward.

It really would be better if you stopped saying things that were not true, particularly stop lying about what I have said or done- don't "bear false witness" as the book puts it.

[alancalverd]

The Jews do not believe in an afterlife

All of us? Really? It's mentioned in the Talmud. Get your facts straight, if you want to be taken seriously..

[Bored chemist]

You simply say "Gee. God does not want scientific absolute proof of his existence, but is he is prepared to tell people how the spirit world works,

God is part of the "spirit world".
 If the "spirit world" worked then it would prove His existence.
So, you have contradicted yourself there.
I suggest you stop trying.