How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times can't

[Cephus]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

I could be wrong, but I assumed his point was that other religious people have independently confirmed his experiences just as schizophrenics confirm their experiences or all of us confirm the existence of our inner thoughts with others.

How could they independently confirm HIS experiences, wouldn't they just confirm their own? They do not share an experience with him.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

How could they independently confirm HIS experiences, wouldn't they just confirm their own? They do not share an experience with him.

I assume it works the same way the we verify our own thoughts or the same way schizophrenics verify the voices they hear. We check to see if we're not alone by finding out if others have had the same thoughts.

The independent confirmation of things in our mind is less reliable than the independent confirmation of things outside of it, but we do it everyday regardless and religious people have verified each other's experiences much like schizophrenics have verified theirs.

 

[megrimlock]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

why would an entity that is - by definition - non-physical have a physical image?

Because it's been said on multiple instances that he does or at least can become one. He walked with Adam and Eve, he "communed" with Moses and Jesus and the holy spirit have manifested themselves in the physical form and they are essentially the same thing as God himself.

But that's beside the point, I just want to know if there was any proof of interaction whether it be visual or aural.

 

[Cephus]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

I assume it works the same way the we verify our own thoughts or the same way schizophrenics verify the voices they hear. We check to see if we're not alone by finding out if others have had the same thoughts.

The independent confirmation of things in our mind is less reliable than the independent confirmation of things outside of it, but we do it everyday regardless and religious people have verified each other's experiences much like schizophrenics have verified theirs.

He said there was no difference. He was wrong.

 

[gekaap]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

i think you are missing the part where we depend on others to independently confirm our experience.

No, I'm not missing that at all. There are a great many Zoroastrians who could all independently "confirm" each others' experiences. There are a great many Muslims who can independently "confirm" each others' experiences. But none of that is actual, objective confirmation. Therefore, your argument offers no means why which the "confirmed" experiences of Zoroastrians interacting with Ahura Mazda should be rejected in favor of the "confirmed" experiences of you and others who claim to interact with your god.

Thus, we must either accept that both gods exist, or that neither group has offered anything of logical value to support any claim that their god exists. The first option is impossible, because both gods cannot exist, as each faith proclaims to follow the only truly existing god. That leaves us with option #2.

 

[gekaap]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

Also, two people having comparable experiences does not actually prove that either is telling the truth about their experiences. Lets take the example of going to war in Viet Nam. Jack steps up and talks about being drafted and sent to war. Then Bill steps up and confirms that he was drafted and sent to war. Even if we accept Bill's story, we still have no evidence that Jack's story is true.

 

[Anarcho-fascist]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

and see, this is why i avoid the religious forum. because - like the abortion forum - it's really just one debate, as the fanatics scream endlessly endlessly endlessly.... :roll: no actual discussion can ever take place because they must jump in and destroy it in order to repeatedly hammer home the One Thing That They Are Obsessed With.

I am discussing this in good faith.

 

[cpwill]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

So you're saying you have no objective evidence for the existence of your brother? You can't touch him? Can't prove he's real to anyone else?

:shrug: i think i can touch him. but that's just my perception. i perceive him to be real. but, as you have pointed out, mere perception is not absolute proof. others perceive him too, but as you have also pointed out, we could merely all be deceived, or deluded. all we have is a very high probability based on multiple independent confirming perceptions that he does - in fact - exist.

 

[cpwill]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

I am discussing this in good faith.

you perhaps are, and if so I am glad. Others.... :shrug: others, it seem, are unable to do so. And that is unfortunate .

 

[cpwill]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

Also, two people having comparable experiences does not actually prove that either is telling the truth about their experiences. Lets take the example of going to war in Viet Nam. Jack steps up and talks about being drafted and sent to war. Then Bill steps up and confirms that he was drafted and sent to war. Even if we accept Bill's story, we still have no evidence that Jack's story is true.

correct. however, we now have whats' called "multisource reporting" that there was, in fact, a draft; which is what both of these men are claiming to have interacted with.

 

[cpwill]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

No, I'm not missing that at all. There are a great many Zoroastrians who could all independently "confirm" each others' experiences. There are a great many Muslims who can independently "confirm" each others' experiences.

indeed there are. it seems, in fact, nearly universally agreed upon in the history of human civilizations that there is, in fact, a divine and that human beings can, in fact, interact with it.

But none of that is actual, objective confirmation.

:shrug: by the standards being put forth, nothing provides actual objective confirmation. since all we have is perception, we are limited to the standards of it.

Therefore, your argument offers no means why which the "confirmed" experiences of Zoroastrians interacting with Ahura Mazda should be rejected in favor of the "confirmed" experiences of you and others who claim to interact with your god.

i'm not here claiming that they should, i'm simply pointing out that both agree on a rather key fact.

Republicans think Obama is a horrible president, Democrats think that he is a great president. The fact that they disagree on the particulars does not mean that - in fact - Obama is not president.

 

[cpwill]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

Because it's been said on multiple instances that he does or at least can become one. He walked with Adam and Eve, he "communed" with Moses and Jesus and the holy spirit have manifested themselves in the physical form and they are essentially the same thing as God himself.

indeed, He can project one, if He so chooses. I can paint a picture if I so choose (though badly ). that does not mean that I can only express myself through painting.

But that's beside the point, I just want to know if there was any proof of interaction whether it be visual or aural.

:shrug: that varies widely, even within the experience of a single individual.

 

[gekaap]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

:shrug: i think i can touch him. but that's just my perception. i perceive him to be real. but, as you have pointed out, mere perception is not absolute proof. others perceive him too, but as you have also pointed out, we could merely all be deceived, or deluded. all we have is a very high probability based on multiple independent confirming perceptions that he does - in fact - exist.

So now we're down to solipsism? Okay, here it goes: Nazi's believed in God, therefore God can't exist.....

 

[cpwill]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

Can you confirm for me if this bagel I'm eating is warm?

no because I cannot interact with your bagel which is limited by it's physical nature to your location.

however, i hope it is because warm bagels are delicious

 

[cpwill]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

How could they independently confirm HIS experiences, wouldn't they just confirm their own? They do not share an experience with him.

have you ever seen out of someone else's eyes? heard with their ears? felt with their nerve endings?

 

[megrimlock]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

indeed, He can project one, if He so chooses. I can paint a picture if I so choose (though badly ). that does not mean that I can only express myself through painting.



:shrug: that varies widely, even within the experience of a single individual.

I never said that he's confined soley to physical form, or that he always manifests himself as such. I was only claiming that he apparently can.

And I just want to know if he himself experienced any such events, in any form.

 

[Radical Ron]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

People still communicate with God, maybe just not in the most basic way or in ways that most people can understand.

 

[megrimlock]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

People still communicate with God, maybe just not in the most basic way or in ways that most people can understand.

Can you elaborate on that statement?

 

[cpwill]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

So now we're down to solipsism? Okay, here it goes: Nazi's believed in God, therefore God can't exist.....

um.... that literally is meaningless. Nazi's also believed (for example) in gravity. are you stating that because the Nazi's believe something, it cannot be true?

 

[cpwill]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

I never said that he's confined soley to physical form, or that he always manifests himself as such. I was only claiming that he apparently can.

And I just want to know if he himself experienced any such events, in any form.

yes, but that is not His one form, so to ask if you have seen "His" image is a misnomer. But i think we are on the same page here.

 

[megrimlock]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

um.... that literally is meaningless. Nazi's also believed (for example) in gravity. are you stating that because the Nazi's believe something, it cannot be true?

His post was sarcastic, I wouldn't waste any time trying to argue his point.

 

[TheBook]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times can't?

Because of a little something called the controlled substances act...

 

[iamitter]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

:shrug: i think i can touch him. but that's just my perception. i perceive him to be real. but, as you have pointed out, mere perception is not absolute proof. others perceive him too, but as you have also pointed out, we could merely all be deceived, or deluded. all we have is a very high probability based on multiple independent confirming perceptions that he does - in fact - exist.

If its worth anything, I once had an angel carry me through a castle.

 

[Cephus]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

:shrug: i think i can touch him. but that's just my perception. i perceive him to be real. but, as you have pointed out, mere perception is not absolute proof. others perceive him too, but as you have also pointed out, we could merely all be deceived, or deluded. all we have is a very high probability based on multiple independent confirming perceptions that he does - in fact - exist.

No one has mentioned absolute proof but you. I asked for evidence. You have objective evidence for the existence of your brother. You have nothing for the existence of God. Stop squirming and just admit it.

 

[Cephus]

Re: How come people in biblical times could talk to god, but people in modern times c

have you ever seen out of someone else's eyes? heard with their ears? felt with their nerve endings?

Nope and neither have you. Therefore, you cannot compare a common experience with someone who has not had a common experience.