tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-4221805665252536802007-11-30T09:29:00.000-08:002007-11-30T09:29:00.000-08:00akakiwibear said...<BR/><BR/> A great argument - stretched the mind!.<BR/><BR/><B>hey thanks man.</B><BR/><BR/> The argument from religious experience is strong even at an empirical level. The number of people who have them cannot be ignored. Yes some who claim them are charlatans, but many are reliable individuals.<BR/><BR/><B>and there are different kinds. (9 x out of 10 when atheists argue against this they assume the arong kind of experience.</B><BR/><BR/> The often heard, and rather patronising, atheist response that ‘those who claim to have had a religious experience are sincere in what they think happened, but wrong’. The atheist defence of mental illness does not hold water when applied to such a large number of instances across such a range of individuals – it is a shield from the weight of evidence.<BR/><BR/><B>and studies. I think I pointed this out, there are specific studies that rule that out.</B><BR/><BR/> Paul’s Damascus road experience is an example that is hard to refute. He had a conversion that even common sense can only attribute to his own explanation of a religious experience.<BR/><BR/><B>but that is no the type use din the studies I talk about.</B><BR/><BR/> If Paul’s conversion was a conscious exercise of choice then it was certainly a very stupid move – there was no logical upside to becoming a Christian, the persecutions (as Paul well knew) were not fun and the job did not pay well or come with status and power that compared to his old job.<BR/><BR/><BR/><B>how could he choose to see a bright light and hear a voice?</B><BR/><BR/> Simple reasoning says Paul was converted through a religious experience plus there is a pattern of similar experiences across a range of diverse people in different countries over an extended period of time with. It is very hard to deny that there is some substance here – and if there is, then there is a spiritual realm.<BR/><BR/> Really, if atheists accepted the evidence supporting the likelihood of religious experiences then the atheist/theist debate would be about the nature of the supreme figure in that realm – is it really “God”.<BR/><BR/> 12:35 PM<BR/><BR/><B>I have only one or two times been confronted with athesits who even had a clue about how to beat this argument. Most of them poo poo it without even reading the material. most recently on an EZB universe board I put this augment down and they said "O these are just stupid Christian studies." so they have never heard of Maslow. that's par for the course in dealing with atheists, the most ignorant of them, anyway, their version of fundies.</B>J.L. Hinmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.com