I was not trying to force you to change your beliefs; socialism does not require the destruction of all religion. Ho Chi Minh the liberator of Vietnam was a Buddhist and many people of all faiths have been inspired by the works of the great leaders.
But at the same time the Dalai Lama of Tibet kept 6000 slaves and it took Chairman Mao Zedong to liberate them from religious backed serfdom.
Religion has lead to other reactionary ideas such as rejection of scientifically proven medical practice.
@MarxistLeninismJuche My religion does not require me to reject Science. Many of the greatest scientists in history came from ancient Greece. Science and Hellenism are not enemies at all. Again, you need to do research on it.
@PriestChristopher This is typical of Atheists. They only know how to critique Judeo-Christian Theology and paint all forms of Theism with the same brush.
@NeoDarkArckan No I used examples of how the Dalai Lama kept over 6000 slaves and how Chairman Mao Zedong who was an atheist liberated the slaves of Tibet. Not a Judo Christian example but a Buddhist one.
I didn't use this to completely disregard the followers of the religion either. If I had I would not have mentioned how Ho chi Minh who was a Buddhist led the Vietnamese revolution or how the ideas of leaders have inspired many of all religions.
@MarxistLeninismJuche That's called "pidgeonholing". A typical fundamentalist debate tactic to make it look as if you've made a valid point by ignoring important details. But supposing you're not, then that means everything you've mentioned up until now is completely pointless since it does not even deal with anything pertaining to Hellenism.
@NeoDarkArckan What does anything regarding the Dalai Lama and the events in Asian countries have to do with the way of life of the Ancient Greek, who aren't even located on the same continent or even in the same period in history?
@NeoDarkArckan It sounds to me like you're implying that Atheists are the good guys who stop the big mean Theists from oppressing people. A quasi-scientific religious culture that frequently charges people with thought crimes is no freedom fighter.
@NeoDarkArckan No I said that the religion the opiate of the mass and mostly has been used in the suppression of the masses.
The enemy is capitalism; religion is for the most part has been an element of a serfdom or capitalist society.
But If I was to say that religion is the enemy then I would be ignoring the revolutionary accomplishments of Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, Muammar al-Gaddafi and Hugo Chávez. All of whom were religious.
@MarxistLeninismJuche Fair enough. But let me ask you something: what if I were to be an openly practicing Wizard in a socialist or communist country?
@NeoDarkArckanThe DPRK has full religious freedom the state has churches and Buddhist temples. In fact the Cheondoist religion has a political party in the DPRK and has 22 seats in the politburo. So there is no reason to think that Wizards could not practice under a Jucheist system.
But mysticism is also rejected by Marxist-Leninism and Juche thought. The Maoist revolutionaries in India have this issue while trying to free the oppressed of India especially with the people of Bastar
In Bastar practice witchcraft and are persecuted by state for it. The Maoists want to protect the culture of the Bastar which sorcery is a vital part of, but at the same time oppose mystical thinking. So they educate the Bastar people of the causes of their ailments that the witches have treated
But then again there is nothing to say that a form of socialism with witchcraft elements much like Gaddafi’s Islamic socialism there could be a Hellenic socialism or Wiccan socialism.
Muammar al-Gaddafi combined the ideas of socialism with the ideas of Islam with his Third Universal Theory. While it isn't part of the Marxist Leninist line it is still a form of socialism.
∴ in the same way that Third Universal Theory used Islamic elements with its socialism so could you with your beliefs.
@MarxistLeninismJuche Correction: Specific religious *Dogmas* have led to the rejection of scientifically proven medical practice. But then again, so has Dawkin's-Style Atheism who reject things like Holistic Healing and Reiki because it doesn't fall in line with their brand of materialism.
@NeoDarkArckan That's exactly, right. They will always reject anything that does not align with their views, that was my point. Which really doesn't bother me IF they would just admit to it. But many won't, they will act as if they are opened minded and would accept it if there was proof. But how can you accept proof when you have decided that there is no proof? They know they won't accept it, no matter what it is. There is scores of evidence for the spirit world.
@PriestChristopher It would certainly make things simpler if they would just admit, but then they can't pat themselves on the back for being "objective" (which they're not). Like Christianity, it's an extraneous world view.
@NeoDarkArckan Not true most of my critique of religion has come from Marxist-Leninist and Jucheist sources, aka Marx's and Lenin’s critique of religion as well as the works “On Juche” and "Socialism is a science"
Far from being a dogma like Christianity such progressive socialist ideas are a science and far from being ‘extraneous’ the ideas Marxist Leninism and Juche are an inevitable stage in human evolution.
Man can finally take his place as master of his own destiny just as the leader said
@MarxistLeninismJuche In Hellenism, we are considered to be responsible for our own lives and destinies. Once again, research, research and research. You still have that paint brush you call religion and you're only using one color called "fallacy."
@MarxistLeninismJuche If that's you're response, then my critique is not wrong. It is simply a dogma. Science gathers all of the facts before it draws it's conclusions but your mind about Hellenism is already made up without any research. Furthermore, your response is heavily geared towards a predisposed bias to a socio-political idea. Hardly scientific. You're just as zealous to your mass movement as any Christian. "The Gods only help those who help themselves." -_ Aesop
@MarxistLeninismJuche Ancient Greece was a theocracy. What you're describing is simply Government. Furthermore, I find that most people who think that religion is the problem are lacking insight. The real problem is dogma, not religion. Religions do not need to be dogmatic.
@NeoDarkArckan Every government of that time was a Theocracy. But Greece did not see the most oppression and persecution until the Christian establishment took over and instituted their theocracy. Until 1997 I believe, people in Greece who worshiped the old Gods were imprisoned. The Hellenists would never persecute someone because of what they believe. They may disagree but never harm.
@PriestChristopher This is very true. Polytheism has a built-in "diversity clause" and the Gods of Greece were not worshiped as an entire Pantheon. Each God had their own following and some groups following two or more Gods. These Gods were not present throughout the entire History of Ancient Greece, they were added as people had revelations from them, announcing their presence. I was hinting only that there was a caste system in Ancient Greece. Aesop was amongst the slaves.
Interesting theory. I have always assumed reincarnation or past life regression was the presence of a spirit around the individual. I have even witnessed past events in dreams and of the future. I think some people just have an easy way of tapping into hidden knowledge. I think sometimes, in rare cases, the Gods and Goddesses even help some people understand that knowledge. I know that has happened to me. C: Well, I guess theories are only theories in the end. lol
thing is bro. i dont NEED to prove that it is false. if i'm going to believe it YOU would need to prove it. If you do not. Then i will continue not believing. Such is the way of the critical thinking. For example. If i told you. I believe that when ppl die, their "energy" goes to another "plane" where a large spaghetti monster munches on it for sustinans. Prove that to be false. If you give testimonies of ppl claiming they remember past lives. I'll give you ppl claiming to have seen heaven.
@snivvano But no one's asking you to believe it. When's the last time someone tried to shove reincarnation down your throat? lol. Don't use the spaghetti monster nonsense. You go beyond the realms of the ridiculous to make something sound as crazy as that when it is not. I don't care what you believe, just don't force it on me.
@PriestChristopher Exactly. This is a strawman argument made by Dawkin's-style Atheists who haven't even bothered to research Paganism and find out that one of it's defining qualities is the *absence of proselytism*.
@snivvano *facepalm* Man, if I had a nickel for every quasi-scientific troll who misunderstands proper critical thinking, it would pile twice as high as Mt. Olympus. This is a bit off topic, but you're describing is not the way of critical thinking. Critical thinking reserves judgment and then draws its conclusions after all of the facts are in. What you're describing is nothing the juvenile tendencies of Dawkin's-style Atheists.
@PriestChristopher errrr of course not, nor did I claim too, nor has any serious scientist claimed to know anything for certain, only degrees of certainty. THAT is honest. Stating anything as FACT when you have no EVIDENCE is DISHONEST. PERIOD.
@oliverjres You choose to not accept anything that doesn't align with your perspective, and that's your choice. As an individual, you have that right. But what's make is so bad is that you won't admit to it. You pass it off like you would accept Divinity if there was proof and you know you would not. As evidence, I cite the fact that there are countless piece of evidence of the spirit world and you won't accept any of it. If Zeus Himself came before you, you would still say He's not real.
@PriestChristopher I don't see how you can say Zeus came before me I would say he is not real. What in what I said led you to believe that? Zeus appears before me, how do I know its Zeus the greeks spoke of? I just have his word for it. He might be the Christian god saying he is Zeus.how do I know that I am not hallucinating? I know only what I can prove to be fact with DEGREES of certainty. I am not against anything, I am open to everything, but I'm honest about my limitations of that knowledge
@oliverjre It was a hypothetical. My argument was that you won't accept anything that doesn't align with your views, and I don't care. Just admit to it. I don't have a problem with anyone in the world believing anything they want as long as they don't force it on me, and there are Atheists out there who are just as bad as Christians in that department. Not saying you are.
@PriestChristopher If you mean my view is that I only accept things as far as I can honestly appraise them for being a truth, then I guess yes I think that any other view point is dishonest and I wont accept it. The bible is so full of irrefutable contradictions, yet its the word of god who is supposedly infallible, ie its either all correct,or all right. makes no sense to my reasoning or viewpoint.I have nothing against you either, only against those that would force their way of life on others
@PriestChristopher I would also love to hear one of your 'countless pieces of evidence of a spiritual world' and then once having proven that, make the connection to the Christian god of those spiritual world evidences.
point. We know so little about the Universe in terms of "science" and yet you have the audacity to utilize such "science" to challenge the claim of Reincarnation. One word: fail.
Science believes that there is a high possibility of an infinite number of Universes that encompass all outcomes of reality in terms of Quantum Mechanics and spin state of particles. Science also believes that there is a high possibility of 11,12,13 or more dimensions. Science believes that there is a high possibility that information from the future can flow back and affect the present in a theory known as Reverse Casuality. I could go on and on but I think you get the
Lol. You think that science is anywhere near close to comprehending the mysteries of the Universe? Have you ever studied String Theory? M-Theory? Quantum Field Theory? From your posts it's fairly clear that you do not have a clear grasp on modern developments in science. You state "scientific research have unfolded what we earlier did not know". More than anything, science has engendered more uncertainties than "unfolding" questions.
No, I don't think it's dead matter physicaly feeling it. It's a chemical reaction that trigers emotions. I haven't heard a proper explanation yet, but diferent parts of your brain react to different circumastances in different ways. So if you're given an ice cream the sect of your brain that creates what we know as happiness is triggered. And you can't revive dead people because their body has run out of stem cells to repair old parts of the body. You die when the body is too old to be repaired.
@PriestChristopher I just scientificaly explained why you can't revive someone and why we have emotions. If you can't accept that there are actual provable answers then that your loss.
@guitarhero666759 The comment that begins "No, I don't think it's..." was intended for you. When people say 'he's gone' they don't mean that his body has dissappeared wtf, its a sensitive way to say that they are dead. We all know that the body is still there obviously.
@PriestChristopher There is probably no such thing as a soul. There is no longer any good reasons for believing that there is. Scientific research have unfolded what we earlier did not know.
@SensualLeopardDesign So Science is what you cling to because that's what you want to accept. Science will never accept the existence of the Gods or anything spiritual, you and I both know that. The spirit of a person could slap some people across the face and they would still say the soul doesn't exist and that there's no such thing as the spirit world. There's abundant evidence, Science just refuses to accept any of it. Science has not disproven the soul or spirituality btw.
@PriestChristopher I'm accepting it because it builds on evidence, in contrary to faith and religion. Why do you think that? I would submit to the fact that spirits exist if I would get slapped in the face by a spirit. Unfortunately such things dont happen. What abundant evidence are you talking about? I would really like you to share it with me.
@PriestChristopher "Science has not disproven the soul or spirituality btw." What science has been able to do is to actually discover how things work, and we are on the way to understand the human mind as well. As it seems right now, there is no soul. "Consciousness" and "mind" seems to be what the brian does, not some invisible, intangible, eternal soul. What would the brain need with a soul that it cannot do by itself? Btw, what is "spirituality"?
@PriestChristopher I have a good line adressing the problem you are asserting. "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed. Faith is the denial of observation so that belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin. It is a very accurate description of them two.
@SensualLeopardDesign On the contrary for me, my religion is based on logic and reason, you're confusing me with mainstream religions like the Abrahamics. I don't have to deny science to believe what I do, science does not contradict my religion. A more accurate presentation of the quote you gave I think would be "Science tends to adjust its views away from anything that does not align with its viewpoints."
@PriestChristopher Okay, what do you believe then, and how is it based on logic and reason? No, because science doesnt have any viewpoints. Further science is based on earlier discoveries and knowledge about the nature, see? Any god or spirit or supernatural we actually come across would instantly be regarded as natural, existent in our universe. Why do you think most scientists dont believe in such things? Because the more we delve, the more we find out that the explanations are non-magical.
@SensualLeopardDesign look, I'm not here to try to change you, your beliefs and path in life is your own choice and right. Nowhere does my religion tell me to try to convert people, but I will defend it. If you want an honest, intelligent discussion about my beliefs and yours, send me a PM.
@PriestChristopher Oh, believe I was too quick there. I know the video is right above this message board, lol. Excuse me, I'll delve more into what you believe now..
Reincarnation is false because souls are aswell. No one has ever had an experience of souls and people who claim to be mediums are taking advantage of gullible people like you. No one, mark my words, will ever prove that souls or god for that matter exist. Because they don't. Beleif in souls and reincarnation are purely for emotional gain that death-insecure people think they need and there has never been any factual basis on these claims.
@TheAstroSteve so if we're not spirit we must simply be dead matter, then theoretically, we should be able to pump some chemicals into a dead person and revive them. Why have we not done that yet? Because the soul is what gives us life, it's what keeps our heart pumping. When someone breaks your heart or makes you smile, do you think that's just dead matter physically feeling it? when someone dies, people say he's gone, but the body's right there. What's your response to this?
Just so you know, I am NOT disagreeing with you in anyway. Your beliefs are yours and mine are mine. I commend you for coming out and talking about your beliefs when there are so many people that troll on YouTube just to bash people like you and me.
I don't, personally, believe we come back as other things besides humans or humanoid beings. I believe we also reincarnate to other planets. I believe that we do not remember the other side because if we did, we wouldn't want to be here, lol! I had a very very vivid dream as a child.. Over and over. I was me but another person. My aunt, who Is "gifted", told me my dream in detail and helped me research the information I had from my dream to find the evidence of my past life.
@HawkeyeLieutenant definitely, no problem at all with believing or not believing in what you want to! There's no harm in believing in souls. As long as it doesn't infringe on other people's rights I don't care what anyone believes :p
@HawkeyeLieutenant which is why odds are they don't exist. The invisible/intangible and the non-existant have a lot in common. Of course, I could be wrong, but if we had souls, I think whatever being you may believe is at work would make it kind of obvious that we have them instead of giving us something else that is unjustifiable.
@PriestChristopher yup, I go out of my way to ignore the divine intervention that surrounds me. Cause it's extremely obvious, I mean I really do enjoy consciously ignoring them all, but it gets hard sometimes because there are so many! I'm getting better at it though.
@idreamtofflight. Yes, you do, because you and I both know you won't accept anything that shakes your worldview. You will always try to find a loophole, and if you can't explain it, you'll just conclude that there must be another explanation besides the divine. But the path you want to pursue is up to you, each to their own.
@PriestChristopher the exact same can easily be said for you good sir. In the religious worldview, God cannot lose; if you pray for a raise at work, but don't get one, you say to yourself "Oh, God must know better, so me not getting the raise is okay because God is all knowing and he'd know if it would be better for me", but if you DID get the raise, then of course that was God's hand at work. We both have our worldviews, this is for sure. I do not, however, take anything on the basis of faith.
@idreamtofflight. Well firstly, you're assuming I am a Monotheist, along the lines of Abrahamic. Far from it, I'm a Greek Polytheist. I realize that the Gods help us in our lives, but the Ancient Greeks understood one thing very well. Life is not fair and sometimes things go wrong. The Gods are not our personal servants to make sure that we always get our way. But in Christianity for example, you're promised approval if 2 or more people pray for it.
@PriestChristopher well I can't say I saw that coming, haha, sorry about the assumption, it was more of an example, but either way I'm glad you understood what I meant either way.
Now say that we are energy, and what about the world ending? like you said our energy HAS to go somewhere. but i mean if we were born again in a whole (or in other terms, an energy that makes up everything or eath itself) then what would possibly happen? I hate the guy that your responding to By the way, i personally think hes an ignorant asshole that wont think outside of the box, anyway, i like the video and All The Best
@suicidalquiff. Well yes he is closed minded, people like him will never accept anything that shakes down their worldview. They don't want their world upset.
A nasty copy fail in the sentence with the silly word "experiancable", please don't mind that. Also thanks @theamzer for the teapot analogy, I really hope it will spare you from miserable death of sweet sugary tea.
Have anyone seen my flying tea pot? Why should someone else prove something that you have come up with? If most of the people can't see the logic behind it and you can't show proof of your theory, it might be flawed.
@TheArchgnostic. I love how some Atheists use outlandish things like this, when it's really a dead argument. No where in nature has there ever been a flying tea pot, but in nature there is death and rebirth. And as we are part of nature, surely we are subject to her cycles unless you want to argue that we are totally separate from nature, and in that case, where did we come from? Planet 9 of the gamma quadrant? You ask for proof, you will never accept proof unless it aligns with your views.
@TheArchgnostic Secondly, you ask me, why should someone else prove something that you have come up with? This is totally taking me out of context. Firstly, I did not "come up" with reincarnation. That's a belief that's been in cultures for a long time now. It is YOU who want others to accept your claim that there is no spirituality without proving that there is none, when we have experienced much proof that there indeed is spirituality and divinity. I have not tried to force my views on you.
TAA tried to discount reincarnation by people claiming to always be someone well known, but most reincarnation cases like you said, deal with every day people. reincarnation is not about hanging on to superficial things of the Earth world. It's about having experiences that can't be explained away by rational means. Recycled stardust/energy is natural, not supernatural/paranormal. .
Great points! The changing of the seasons shows reincarnation in nature. Winter is like the death and spring is like a rebirth. Energy can't be created or destroyed.
Well you can argue about these things as much as you want, but without evidence it's all meaningless. Believing something is true without proof is still irrational. There is simply no logical basis for this behavior.
@dutchbb1979. Well you believe something is not true without evidence that it is false, so I can dismiss you just as easily. Your arrogance in not better than fundie Christians who tell people they are stupid because they don't see things the way they do. You're no better. Have a nice day.
@PriestChristopher Actually I'm an agnostic atheist (like Einstein and Hawking) so I do not claim that I know for a fact that there is no god like you seem to be implying. I'm not even claiming that reincarnation is nonsense. All I'm saying is that believing something is true when you really have no evidence for it is irrational. Also I never said anything about being stupid. Thanks for your reply and have a nice one too.
@PriestChristopher well that's the thing ... believing in an unfalsifiable hypothesis is irrational. And it all comes down to probability, what is more probable that a soul exists although we have a good understanding of a human body and we've yet to find such a thing or it doesn't. Do you know a principle called occam's razor? although i do not think that both of the hypotheses are equal, but it seems that you do.
@theamzer. But the problem is that science was never made to examine and measure spirituality. You're trying to look for a spirit using something that decided from the beginning that it would not accept such a thing. No matter how much evidence of spirituality is given, it will never be upheld by science because it was intended to be a study that rejected and refused to accept such evidence. You understand?
@PriestChristopher No i don't understand. and i haven't seen any evidence for spirituality. i wasn't atheist since i was born, i also wasn't very religious, but i tried to find something that would comfort me like afterlife or reincarnation and i couldn't find anything solid. I looked through some cases of this reincarnation thing and i must say that the imagination is a really wonderful thing, the kids will not only tell you about their past life, but describe their imaginary friends aswell.
@theamzer. Then that's your own personal choice, and I am deeply sorry you have never experienced spirituality and connection with divinity. But nothing gives you the right to force your worldview due to lack of experience on anyone else.
@PriestChristopher Well, the feeling is mutual. I'm deeply sorry that you've never applied rational thinking to your spirituality, and it wasn't the lack of experience that made me atheist... it was simple logic.
@theamzer That's another place where your fallacy comes in. My religion applies a lot of rationality and critical thinking. You're confusing all religious mentalities with that of Christianity's mentality because Christianity is mostly what you see. It wasn't blind faith that made be a Hellenic Polytheist, it was experience and logic. If you studied about it instead of scratching the surface, you'd see. The path in life you choose, is your doing. But don't try to force that on everyone else.
@PriestChristopher what fallacy? reincarnation: never publicly observed, no evidence, children crap isn't real it's imagination, seasons also aren't explanation for reincarnation, they're explained by elliptical planetary orbits... lizard rejuvenation is as much a reincarnation proof as humans healing injured skin, plant's do not have a nerve system so they can't die in a sense that a human mind can, soul has no use in human body whatsoever so why even believe that there is such a useless thing.
@theamzer Never been observed? Imagination is hardly an explanation for knowing people you never met or studied. This is what I mean, you won't accept any evidence contrary to your views. Denial and dismissal are your dearest friends. If Zeus came down and said "I am Zeus." you'd probably still deny his existence. Your fallacy was you assuming there was no rationality or logic in my religion when you clearly have not studied it. Why are you trying to force your views on others so badly?
@PriestChristopher well then please point out examples of observed reincarnation. If Zeus (or any god) shows that he truly is god (by performing a miracle or something) then i would believe it. And the same dismissal applies to you, your fallacy was you assuming there was no rationality or logic in Flying teapotism when you clearly have not studied it. And I'm not trying to force my views I'm just trying to figure out why some people are even capable of believing in this bullshit.
@theamzer. Alright, then what if I told you that our son was born 3 and a half months early with the highest chances of dying, and we prayed to Artemis, Apollo and Athena to save him and today he's a healthy growing baby? You are trying to force your views on others. When you try to convince someone to think like you, that's imposition, and a forceful act. Also, going back to your last post, we're not talking about nerves and the physical body being reborn, we're talking about one's soul.
@PriestChristopher First of your son wouldn't be a first one that has this happened, and thanks to DOCTORS they survive, not to some imaginary friends in the sky, also human body has a high regenerative ability. and I've discussed soul. human anatomy is well explored by scientists and doctors there is no function for a soul to perform, so why even believe that there is such a thing, what does it do? nothing? also i find you close minded, very defensive, and this conversation is over.
@theamzer. Even with all the scientific medicine they could give him, the doctors could STILL only give him a 50% chance of living, and even then he had a 70% chance of having a bad disability. Staggering statistics when you consider he beat all the odds. The Gods are not imaginary. Human anatomy is not an observation of spirit, but of the physical body as humans perceive. Can human science take in all that exists? No. I have explained my views while you have tried to convince me of yours.
@PriestChristopher The next time you or your kid gets sick try only praying and see if the results will be the same. If science cant explain spirit, but it can explain how body functions without spirit and that there is no need to believe in spirit, then why would anyone still believe it? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and all I've done is explain my views, so this message will be the last one, please do not respond to my questions, just think about them.
@theamzer. Funny you should say that, the other night my baby boy was wheezing and it sounded like he had congestion. My fiancee went to call the doctor. I prayed to Artemis, and before the doctor answered, I told her to hang up because his wheezing and congestion was gone. I'm not saying one should not seek medical help for an illness, of course not. The Gods have blessed people with those skills for a reason. But the Gods do play a vital role in our lives and the universe and world around us.
@PriestChristopher Well this is a barrier of self-interest which probably stays the same because of our ego, simple as that. I believed in things once which now i deny, but also recognized that spirituality is something of a common anomaly and anything, if done with joy and dedication can lead to a spiritual entity. Like art or sports. And it comes from our culture, which is heavily based on divine. Healthy attitude keeps the body healthy, so my vote on spirituality as a good thing.
@PriestChristopher And yes, i dare to voice my opinion and say the divine is out-dated and rather detrimental, also the primary source of racism and hate, and catalyst of violence. Because they are ego driven and always breaking apart forming new cults generating distinctness. Have you ever seen a religion that claims they don't know the answers to everything? Because I'm pretty sure we still have things unexplored, anything else is just self-righteous.
Addendum: It's a feeble attempt to expand your views, if TheAmazingAtheist explanation doesn't come across, you're far from step one. Just keep in mind that if divine ruled the world, you wouldnt be able to pick up that phone, there wouldn't be one. Your family tree would probably be dust just like mine, statistics, that is all. All in all, I would pray to Odin in your place, he has an awesome Swedish army beard and can throw lingtning bolts.
@theamzer. Secondly, in fact, I am probably one of the most open-minded religious people you will meet. I have been explaining why I believe what I do, while you've been trying to convince me of what you believe. I'd say you have a close-mindedness issue. It might interest you to know that there are sciences that I enjoy and like, and I am heading towards a PhD in World History. Science does not contradict my religion, my religion proves science. Hail The Olympians! Blessed Be!
@PriestChristopher But! Claiming that science haven't done much to help humanity to be happier or healthier, I dare to say is silly. History has proven that the presence of advanced (based on experience and the observation of nature) fields like medicine, biology greatly increased child survival rates. Also is the only source experiancable and understandably by If people were more interested in learning rather than worshipping in medieval times, they might have evaded that nasty black death.
Oh and you misunderstood the flying teapot analogy. You cant disprove the flying teapot, the science wasn't was never made to examine and measure flying teapots, you're trying to look for flying teapots using something that decided from the beginning that it would not accept such a thing. no matter how much evidence for flying teapot is given, it will never be upheld by science because it was intended to be a study that rejected and refused to accept such evidence. :)
@theamzer. As I said, this is a dead argument, because we have never seen a flying teapot in nature like we have seen the processes of reincarnation. There is no bad afterlife in reincarnation, there is no Hell or Satan, or anything like that, and yet you still resent the concept of life continuing. I think it's clear you don't want your world view to be upset. If you accept spirituality in any form, it brings into question all you've built for yourself.
Also, I think you misunderstand what scientists mean when they say that "energy cannot be destroyed." The basic components of energy cannot be destroyed, but the form it's currently in can be. Imagine that you have a drawing and you cut or burn it up. The components that the picture was made of still exist, but the picture itself is for all intents and purposes destroyed. Thus whatever it is that makes a person who they are can in essence be destroyed, because the form ceases to exist.
@CommanderSquidlet . Right, but there is no conclusive evidence that energy or consciousness dies upon death, its simply dies as we can perceive it in our state of consciousness. In other words, it transcends to a state that is not the consciousness of the living, and therefore it cannot be as well perceived by the living.
What the ABC news segment DOESN'T tell you is that young James Leininger visited a museum with his father where he saw WW2 planes before his nightmares began. Obviously this doesn't disprove reincarnation, but it casts some serious doubt on this case.
@CommanderSquidlet. I suppose that could have triggered his past life regression, but in a broader sense, how would that explain what he knew about this pilot?
@PriestChristopher I don't know; I'd have to look into it. However, if they left out the story about his trip to the museum, what else might they be leaving out?
look... there is life, you live it, create new life, THEN DIE. once you die, your brain dies, which contains everything that you see as "yourself" (your personality etc.) YOU DO NOT CONTINUE, BECAUSE YOU HAVE DIED. but... what does continue is the new life you have created. The process repeats. Don't beat yourself up trying to prove some batshit retarded hypothesis just because you "believe" in it.
@Electric5ponge. There is no proof that consciousness dies upon death. As I said, if energy cannot be destroyed, it has to go somewhere. I am not beating myself up trying to prove what I know to be true, you and many like you are the ones beating yourself up in an attempt to disprove it. All you've done here is throw insults and use negatives. That's not evidence.
@PriestChristopher As infinite are the stars and galaxies "the universe as a whole", so are the places a soul can go. the universe expands so says science, so logically theres plenty of space in an infinite universe. for souls to reincarnate, everytime a star is born and a planet is blessed with the seeds of life a new home was created for the incarnating souls. We are stars we are expanding the universe.
@Electric5ponge. Also, I think that because you've encountered too many fundie Christians, you are under the impression that everyone who is religious or spiritual is trying to impose their views and beliefs on you. This is not true here. I am not trying to get you to follow my way, what I have done in this video is explain the belief system of reincarnation and why I believe it and why it's possible.
@Electric5ponge There is a book Called "past lives future lives" -Dr. Joel Goldberg that ranks among many many books each based on tens of thousands of cases (each Dr by the way) and to be honest; if people want to simply accept we are born and just die and leave behind offspring and accept that animal-like point of view, thats fine but, anyone who cares to explore and see beyond whats presented well then your in the company of the MANY explorers, scientists etc who did the same and good luck.
I love your response and way of thinking PriestChristopher! I like to think of the Earth as a Continuing Recycling event. Since matter can not be created or destroyed I firmly believe we are part of the never ending process our Earth recycles matter into different forms. Can anyone say they are a new creation of Earth from matter that did not exist, or is the matter that is currently within our being part of recycled matter our Earth was composed of billions of years ago?
@ShadowFireWitch People who do not understand the concepts or Reincarnation do not understand the origins of where their individual matter originated. From a scientific perspective one has to understand that the matter your body is composed of today came from recycled material that was present on the Earth from it's Birth Billions of years ago, and although your matter evolved into the person you are today, you are still a product of the same materials that came from Earth itself.
@TheWiccanRaven If there is a lack of substantial evidence supporting a claim then why would you believe it? Of course it 'could' exist, but anything 'could' exist.
@CopperGaut. Personal Experience. That's your answer. We don't believe everything just because it "could" be true. If that were the case, we'd believe in Christianity, Islam, Judaism, etc.
@TheWiccanRaven The argument against reincarnation is simply that there are no facts supporting it. This constitutes evidence in and of itself because the existence of reincarnation falls short of invalidating the null hypothesis.
If it's true that an individual must provide positive proof for a negative claim, then we should blindly believe in all sorts of mythical creatures and pseudoscientific garbage. Or do you have hard evidence against the existence of unicorns and wood nymphs?
@VolatileReaction. We believe based on our own experiences, you disbelieve based on the lack thereof. No one is saying you have to believe in anything. If you can't disprove it, that still does not mean you have to believe it. You are under the fallacy that lack of disproving evidence requires you to believe in something. It does not.
I've made (or I hope I've made) two claims on this thread: First, there is no empirical evidence for reincarnation. Second, the burden of proof relies on the one who is making the positive claim. I've never said that you can't believe something on the basis of personal experience. But, this qualifies as anecdotal evidence. It's non-scientific and therefore can't be used as evidence.
I haven't said whether or not you should believe in reincarnation based on your personal experience. I've simply stood by my statement that the onus probandi lies with he who is making the positive claim. If you've had a revelation that shaped your beliefs, that's fine. However, it is anecdotal and doesn't qualify as /empirical/ evidence.
@TheWiccanRaven If someone states something does not exist, all they have to do is negate the evidence provided by those who state it does exist. It is impossible to provide positive proof for a negative claim. Instead, we rely on the null hypothesis; if there is no evidence in favour of something (as is the case with reincarnation), then one can safely conclude that there is no reason to believe it.
@TheWiccanRaven I'm aware of the Gaia hypothesis, and I'm in no position to criticize it or defend it, although it is an interesting idea and it does hold some degree of merit (at least from my understanding). I'm also aware that it's an idea originating from Paganism. Even if they were completely right about this hypothesis, it does nothing to credit any other hypothesis they come up with.
@TheWiccanRaven I'll ask again, if I provide no evidence for a negative claim, is it justified to believe in that claim? If so, we all live on the back of a giant tortoise, and the universe is merely an infinite stack of tortoise going on forever. Now, either provide evidence to counter this claim or I will be forced to believe it.
@TheWiccanRaven Firstly I never said that you were stupid, I called you cowards. My standpoint is not a claim of any new idea, it's a conclusion for the lack of evidence for yours. I've explained this numerous times. My statement is not “There cannot ever be reincarnation, it is proven without a doubt”, it is “reincarnation, for the time being, has not enough evidence to support its claim, therefore I will suspend judgement of its existence and live according to its falsehood.”
@TheWiccanRaven It would be a pleasure if you gave me one credible scientific paper or study showing that spirits are possible and/or exist. I know you won't, though, because that is a complete lie. You're right that science can't explain everything, but I believe that it is only limited by our technology and our capacity to understand the complexity of the universe.
with reincarnation why does it have to be earth....with so many planets of the universe there has to be life elsewhere so maybe we die and get reborn on another planet. what makes earth special. also reincarnation is real or not is a endless and stupid argument that cant be argued in anyway from a basis of evidence on either side. no1 knows what is after death. therfore i say reincarnation is real. it is the only plausable after death scenario. this is a baseless argument on both sides get a job
@TheWiccanRaven I'm aware that I don't have the answers to the after-life, and unfortunately neither do you. It may very well seem that way to you, about sceptics always remaining sceptical. They do so because you never provide convincing evidence. Never. I don't say that because I'm unwilling to change my picture of reality.
@TheWiccanRaven Paganism and religion are fundamentally similar in the sense that you must hold irrational beliefs for irrational reasons. Again, this argument is seeming less and less like a debate on reincarnation and more about pointing the finger about who has to prove what. So, let's say I can't disprove reincarnation, does that prove it for you? It must therefore be true because I can't prove evidence against it? You must see the fallacious nature of this mentality.
@TheWiccanRaven I don't know where your spell-check comment applies to. I never claimed to be an intellectual, I'm not. Also, you're absolutely right, I don't provide evidence for my position. How could I, and why would I provide evidence for the lack of belief of something? It's counter-productive. Providing evidence against an unfalsifiable hypothesis is a fruitless endeavour. You say you have evidence, I say it's not logically sound, I therefore do not accept that claim (yet).
@TheWiccanRaven Everything in the natural world, in my opinion, will one day (hypothetically) be explained mathematically and scientifically, and everything outside the natural world does not exist. I say this because that's what history dictates, and that's what logic and common sense requires. This position is completely malleable. If I'm presented with enough concrete, irrefutable evidence I will happily change my position.
This is a summation of what happened (roughly). Person X makes a claim that idea X is true. Person X is laden with the burden of proving idea X. Person X proves it unsuccessfully. Person Y declares that idea X is false because the proof was not sufficient. Person X declares that person Y must prove that it is false. Person Y kills himself due to impossibility of proving unfalsifiable hypothesis.
@CopperGaut. Why can you not understand that I am not trying to convince you or him or him of anything? This is why your summation is not valid, because I am not trying to prove it to you, I have simply explained the beliefs of reincarnation and given testimonies of people. Why can you not understand that that is not imposing or convincing someone? It was more like, Person Y made the claim that something was fake while offering no proof, while person X explained the belief system to Y.
realize that they cannot be convinced contrary to their own views no matter what. Also realize that if they claim to have no reason to believe you, then likewise you have no reason to believe them, especially when they have forgone the burden of proof and are using negatives as their arguments. You can discard them easily, because you don't have to accept what they cannot prove and have said they don't have the responsibility of proving.
Those who agree with them are probably credible to them, but those who do not agree, even in the largest numbers, will just be dismissed. So realize that while the skeptic has discarded the burden of proof for themselves and can not disprove your beliefs therefore, you have your own experiences and the experiences of others as proof of your beliefs instead of not carrying the burden of proof at all and just using negatives. This holds far more water than just having a dismissive mentality.
@PriestChristopher The null hypothesis is essential to the scientific theory. The individual making the /positive/ claim carries the burden of proof. TJ's claim is a /negative/ one: reincarnation does not exist. His position doesn't require proof because what is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. The onus is on you, and fellow believers of reincarnation, to provide support for your beliefs.
@TheWiccanRaven Also, it is quite the defence mechanism you're invoking on yourself there. You don't feel the need to prove anything to sceptics because they “contradict themselves to back up their own views”. This is merely a way to believe what you want. People like you need a crutch to lean on because you're afraid of death because you're a god damn coward. It's not about feeling good, it's about the cold truth. I don't give a flying fuck if it makes you feel good.
Those who agree with them are probably credible to them, but those who do not agree, even in the largest numbers, will just be dismissed. So realize that while the skeptic has discarded the burden of proof for themselves and can not disprove your beliefs therefore, you have your own experiences and the experiences of others as proof of your beliefs instead of not carrying the burden of proof at all and just using negatives. This holds far more water than just having a dismissive mentality.
realize that they cannot be convinced contrary to their own views no matter what. Also realize that if they claim to have no reason to believe you, then likewise you have no reason to believe them, especially when they have forgone the burden of proof and are using negatives as their arguments. You can discard them easily, because you don't have to accept what they cannot prove and have said they don't have the responsibility of proving.
@TheWiccanRaven I don't think you understand what scepticism is. If someone first hears of reincarnation, it is reasonable to not necessarily believe in it immediately. Now, I have been given logically fallacious testimonies by discreditable, unscientific and circumstantial individuals and I'm expected to believe it. There is literally no reason to believe in reincarnation that I have researched, no reason to believe in any religion, no reason to believe in spirits, ghosts, or the human soul.
I was not trying to force you to change your beliefs; socialism does not require the destruction of all religion. Ho Chi Minh the liberator of Vietnam was a Buddhist and many people of all faiths have been inspired by the works of the great leaders.
But at the same time the Dalai Lama of Tibet kept 6000 slaves and it took Chairman Mao Zedong to liberate them from religious backed serfdom.
Religion has lead to other reactionary ideas such as rejection of scientifically proven medical practice.
MarxistLeninismJuche 1 month ago
@MarxistLeninismJuche My religion does not require me to reject Science. Many of the greatest scientists in history came from ancient Greece. Science and Hellenism are not enemies at all. Again, you need to do research on it.
PriestChristopher 1 month ago
@PriestChristopher This is typical of Atheists. They only know how to critique Judeo-Christian Theology and paint all forms of Theism with the same brush.
NeoDarkArckan 1 month ago
@NeoDarkArckan No I used examples of how the Dalai Lama kept over 6000 slaves and how Chairman Mao Zedong who was an atheist liberated the slaves of Tibet. Not a Judo Christian example but a Buddhist one.
I didn't use this to completely disregard the followers of the religion either. If I had I would not have mentioned how Ho chi Minh who was a Buddhist led the Vietnamese revolution or how the ideas of leaders have inspired many of all religions.
MarxistLeninismJuche 1 month ago
@MarxistLeninismJuche That's called "pidgeonholing". A typical fundamentalist debate tactic to make it look as if you've made a valid point by ignoring important details. But supposing you're not, then that means everything you've mentioned up until now is completely pointless since it does not even deal with anything pertaining to Hellenism.
NeoDarkArckan 1 month ago
@NeoDarkArckan What does anything regarding the Dalai Lama and the events in Asian countries have to do with the way of life of the Ancient Greek, who aren't even located on the same continent or even in the same period in history?
NeoDarkArckan 1 month ago
@NeoDarkArckan It sounds to me like you're implying that Atheists are the good guys who stop the big mean Theists from oppressing people. A quasi-scientific religious culture that frequently charges people with thought crimes is no freedom fighter.
NeoDarkArckan 1 month ago
@NeoDarkArckan No I said that the religion the opiate of the mass and mostly has been used in the suppression of the masses.
The enemy is capitalism; religion is for the most part has been an element of a serfdom or capitalist society.
But If I was to say that religion is the enemy then I would be ignoring the revolutionary accomplishments of Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, Muammar al-Gaddafi and Hugo Chávez. All of whom were religious.
MarxistLeninismJuche 1 month ago
@MarxistLeninismJuche Fair enough. But let me ask you something: what if I were to be an openly practicing Wizard in a socialist or communist country?
NeoDarkArckan 1 month ago
@NeoDarkArckanThe DPRK has full religious freedom the state has churches and Buddhist temples. In fact the Cheondoist religion has a political party in the DPRK and has 22 seats in the politburo. So there is no reason to think that Wizards could not practice under a Jucheist system.
MarxistLeninismJuche 4 weeks ago
But mysticism is also rejected by Marxist-Leninism and Juche thought. The Maoist revolutionaries in India have this issue while trying to free the oppressed of India especially with the people of Bastar
In Bastar practice witchcraft and are persecuted by state for it. The Maoists want to protect the culture of the Bastar which sorcery is a vital part of, but at the same time oppose mystical thinking. So they educate the Bastar people of the causes of their ailments that the witches have treated
MarxistLeninismJuche 4 weeks ago
But then again there is nothing to say that a form of socialism with witchcraft elements much like Gaddafi’s Islamic socialism there could be a Hellenic socialism or Wiccan socialism.
Muammar al-Gaddafi combined the ideas of socialism with the ideas of Islam with his Third Universal Theory. While it isn't part of the Marxist Leninist line it is still a form of socialism.
∴ in the same way that Third Universal Theory used Islamic elements with its socialism so could you with your beliefs.
MarxistLeninismJuche 4 weeks ago
@MarxistLeninismJuche Do you have any links to sources that elaborate more on the issue you speak of?
NeoDarkArckan 4 weeks ago
@NeoDarkArckan Look up "Witches & Maoists in rural India"
MarxistLeninismJuche 4 weeks ago
@MarxistLeninismJuche Correction: Specific religious *Dogmas* have led to the rejection of scientifically proven medical practice. But then again, so has Dawkin's-Style Atheism who reject things like Holistic Healing and Reiki because it doesn't fall in line with their brand of materialism.
NeoDarkArckan 1 month ago
@NeoDarkArckan That's exactly, right. They will always reject anything that does not align with their views, that was my point. Which really doesn't bother me IF they would just admit to it. But many won't, they will act as if they are opened minded and would accept it if there was proof. But how can you accept proof when you have decided that there is no proof? They know they won't accept it, no matter what it is. There is scores of evidence for the spirit world.
PriestChristopher 1 month ago
@PriestChristopher It would certainly make things simpler if they would just admit, but then they can't pat themselves on the back for being "objective" (which they're not). Like Christianity, it's an extraneous world view.
NeoDarkArckan 1 month ago
@NeoDarkArckan Not true most of my critique of religion has come from Marxist-Leninist and Jucheist sources, aka Marx's and Lenin’s critique of religion as well as the works “On Juche” and "Socialism is a science"
Far from being a dogma like Christianity such progressive socialist ideas are a science and far from being ‘extraneous’ the ideas Marxist Leninism and Juche are an inevitable stage in human evolution.
Man can finally take his place as master of his own destiny just as the leader said
MarxistLeninismJuche 1 month ago
@MarxistLeninismJuche In Hellenism, we are considered to be responsible for our own lives and destinies. Once again, research, research and research. You still have that paint brush you call religion and you're only using one color called "fallacy."
PriestChristopher 1 month ago
@MarxistLeninismJuche If that's you're response, then my critique is not wrong. It is simply a dogma. Science gathers all of the facts before it draws it's conclusions but your mind about Hellenism is already made up without any research. Furthermore, your response is heavily geared towards a predisposed bias to a socio-political idea. Hardly scientific. You're just as zealous to your mass movement as any Christian. "The Gods only help those who help themselves." -_ Aesop
NeoDarkArckan 1 month ago
@MarxistLeninismJuche Ancient Greece was a theocracy. What you're describing is simply Government. Furthermore, I find that most people who think that religion is the problem are lacking insight. The real problem is dogma, not religion. Religions do not need to be dogmatic.
NeoDarkArckan 1 month ago
@NeoDarkArckan Every government of that time was a Theocracy. But Greece did not see the most oppression and persecution until the Christian establishment took over and instituted their theocracy. Until 1997 I believe, people in Greece who worshiped the old Gods were imprisoned. The Hellenists would never persecute someone because of what they believe. They may disagree but never harm.
PriestChristopher 1 month ago
@PriestChristopher This is very true. Polytheism has a built-in "diversity clause" and the Gods of Greece were not worshiped as an entire Pantheon. Each God had their own following and some groups following two or more Gods. These Gods were not present throughout the entire History of Ancient Greece, they were added as people had revelations from them, announcing their presence. I was hinting only that there was a caste system in Ancient Greece. Aesop was amongst the slaves.
NeoDarkArckan 1 month ago
Interesting theory. I have always assumed reincarnation or past life regression was the presence of a spirit around the individual. I have even witnessed past events in dreams and of the future. I think some people just have an easy way of tapping into hidden knowledge. I think sometimes, in rare cases, the Gods and Goddesses even help some people understand that knowledge. I know that has happened to me. C: Well, I guess theories are only theories in the end. lol
mariegoslar 1 month ago
thing is bro. i dont NEED to prove that it is false. if i'm going to believe it YOU would need to prove it. If you do not. Then i will continue not believing. Such is the way of the critical thinking. For example. If i told you. I believe that when ppl die, their "energy" goes to another "plane" where a large spaghetti monster munches on it for sustinans. Prove that to be false. If you give testimonies of ppl claiming they remember past lives. I'll give you ppl claiming to have seen heaven.
snivvano 1 month ago
@snivvano But no one's asking you to believe it. When's the last time someone tried to shove reincarnation down your throat? lol. Don't use the spaghetti monster nonsense. You go beyond the realms of the ridiculous to make something sound as crazy as that when it is not. I don't care what you believe, just don't force it on me.
PriestChristopher 1 month ago
@PriestChristopher Exactly. This is a strawman argument made by Dawkin's-style Atheists who haven't even bothered to research Paganism and find out that one of it's defining qualities is the *absence of proselytism*.
NeoDarkArckan 1 month ago
@snivvano *facepalm* Man, if I had a nickel for every quasi-scientific troll who misunderstands proper critical thinking, it would pile twice as high as Mt. Olympus. This is a bit off topic, but you're describing is not the way of critical thinking. Critical thinking reserves judgment and then draws its conclusions after all of the facts are in. What you're describing is nothing the juvenile tendencies of Dawkin's-style Atheists.
NeoDarkArckan 1 month ago
@NeoDarkArckan You'll have to forgive my word skipping. I'm multitasking here.
NeoDarkArckan 1 month ago
haha ok cool. not a bad thing to be.
oliverjre 1 month ago
@oliverjre Best thing I have ever become in life. We are a very live and let live type of people. I extend my hand to you in friendship.
PriestChristopher 1 month ago
@PriestChristopher accepted.
oliverjre 1 month ago
thing i dont get about religious ppl- if they dont believe in one part of the religion, why believe in any of it? its not logical and its dishonest.
oliverjre 1 month ago
@oliverjre No it's not. Do you agree with everything that every scientist out there has ever said or proposed? Of course not.
PriestChristopher 1 month ago
@PriestChristopher errrr of course not, nor did I claim too, nor has any serious scientist claimed to know anything for certain, only degrees of certainty. THAT is honest. Stating anything as FACT when you have no EVIDENCE is DISHONEST. PERIOD.
oliverjre 1 month ago
@oliverjres You choose to not accept anything that doesn't align with your perspective, and that's your choice. As an individual, you have that right. But what's make is so bad is that you won't admit to it. You pass it off like you would accept Divinity if there was proof and you know you would not. As evidence, I cite the fact that there are countless piece of evidence of the spirit world and you won't accept any of it. If Zeus Himself came before you, you would still say He's not real.
PriestChristopher 1 month ago
@PriestChristopher I don't see how you can say Zeus came before me I would say he is not real. What in what I said led you to believe that? Zeus appears before me, how do I know its Zeus the greeks spoke of? I just have his word for it. He might be the Christian god saying he is Zeus.how do I know that I am not hallucinating? I know only what I can prove to be fact with DEGREES of certainty. I am not against anything, I am open to everything, but I'm honest about my limitations of that knowledge
oliverjre 1 month ago
@oliverjre It was a hypothetical. My argument was that you won't accept anything that doesn't align with your views, and I don't care. Just admit to it. I don't have a problem with anyone in the world believing anything they want as long as they don't force it on me, and there are Atheists out there who are just as bad as Christians in that department. Not saying you are.
PriestChristopher 1 month ago
@PriestChristopher If you mean my view is that I only accept things as far as I can honestly appraise them for being a truth, then I guess yes I think that any other view point is dishonest and I wont accept it. The bible is so full of irrefutable contradictions, yet its the word of god who is supposedly infallible, ie its either all correct,or all right. makes no sense to my reasoning or viewpoint.I have nothing against you either, only against those that would force their way of life on others
oliverjre 1 month ago
@oliverjre I agree, the Bible is.
PriestChristopher 1 month ago
@oliverjre we are agreed on the most important thing. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. That is admirable.
oliverjre 1 month ago
@oliverjre Yea but dude, I'm not a Christian lol.
PriestChristopher 1 month ago
@PriestChristopher orly? haha ok my bad I was going off your username. So what do you say you are?!
oliverjre 1 month ago
@oliverjre I'm a Hellenist.
PriestChristopher 1 month ago
@PriestChristopher I would also love to hear one of your 'countless pieces of evidence of a spiritual world' and then once having proven that, make the connection to the Christian god of those spiritual world evidences.
oliverjre 1 month ago
But isn’t all religion is only a tool used by the ruling capitalist class to control the proletariat.
Like Karl Marx said “religion is the opiate of the masses”.
It’s time people evolved from religion and expect that we are the masters of our own destiny.
As the Great Leader Eternal President Kim IL Sung said “Man is the master of everything and decides everything”.
MarxistLeninismJuche 1 month ago
@MarxistLeninismJuche When you're talking about mainstream religions of today, yes, they are control tools, but not every religion is like that.
PriestChristopher 1 month ago
There are a ton of studies like the one you mentioned c. 3:00...the most popular was of course Ian Stevenson's "Twenty Cases".
I was told who I was in a past life by a Sufi, I have the name but cannot find a record of the guy. Be good proof If I could, but then...
Phavonic 1 month ago
@SensualLeopardDesign
point. We know so little about the Universe in terms of "science" and yet you have the audacity to utilize such "science" to challenge the claim of Reincarnation. One word: fail.
sigmaetamee 2 months ago in playlist More videos from PriestChristopher
@SensualLeopardDesign
Science believes that there is a high possibility of an infinite number of Universes that encompass all outcomes of reality in terms of Quantum Mechanics and spin state of particles. Science also believes that there is a high possibility of 11,12,13 or more dimensions. Science believes that there is a high possibility that information from the future can flow back and affect the present in a theory known as Reverse Casuality. I could go on and on but I think you get the
sigmaetamee 2 months ago in playlist More videos from PriestChristopher
@SensualLeopardDesign
Lol. You think that science is anywhere near close to comprehending the mysteries of the Universe? Have you ever studied String Theory? M-Theory? Quantum Field Theory? From your posts it's fairly clear that you do not have a clear grasp on modern developments in science. You state "scientific research have unfolded what we earlier did not know". More than anything, science has engendered more uncertainties than "unfolding" questions.
sigmaetamee 2 months ago in playlist More videos from PriestChristopher
No, I don't think it's dead matter physicaly feeling it. It's a chemical reaction that trigers emotions. I haven't heard a proper explanation yet, but diferent parts of your brain react to different circumastances in different ways. So if you're given an ice cream the sect of your brain that creates what we know as happiness is triggered. And you can't revive dead people because their body has run out of stem cells to repair old parts of the body. You die when the body is too old to be repaired.
TheAstroSteve 7 months ago
@TheAstroSteve Once again, it's not the body, it's the soul.
PriestChristopher 7 months ago
@PriestChristopher I just scientificaly explained why you can't revive someone and why we have emotions. If you can't accept that there are actual provable answers then that your loss.
TheAstroSteve 7 months ago
@guitarhero666759 The comment that begins "No, I don't think it's..." was intended for you. When people say 'he's gone' they don't mean that his body has dissappeared wtf, its a sensitive way to say that they are dead. We all know that the body is still there obviously.
TheAstroSteve 7 months ago
@PriestChristopher There is probably no such thing as a soul. There is no longer any good reasons for believing that there is. Scientific research have unfolded what we earlier did not know.
SensualLeopardDesign 7 months ago
@SensualLeopardDesign So Science is what you cling to because that's what you want to accept. Science will never accept the existence of the Gods or anything spiritual, you and I both know that. The spirit of a person could slap some people across the face and they would still say the soul doesn't exist and that there's no such thing as the spirit world. There's abundant evidence, Science just refuses to accept any of it. Science has not disproven the soul or spirituality btw.
PriestChristopher 7 months ago
@PriestChristopher I'm accepting it because it builds on evidence, in contrary to faith and religion. Why do you think that? I would submit to the fact that spirits exist if I would get slapped in the face by a spirit. Unfortunately such things dont happen. What abundant evidence are you talking about? I would really like you to share it with me.
SensualLeopardDesign 7 months ago
@PriestChristopher "Science has not disproven the soul or spirituality btw." What science has been able to do is to actually discover how things work, and we are on the way to understand the human mind as well. As it seems right now, there is no soul. "Consciousness" and "mind" seems to be what the brian does, not some invisible, intangible, eternal soul. What would the brain need with a soul that it cannot do by itself? Btw, what is "spirituality"?
SensualLeopardDesign 7 months ago
@PriestChristopher I have a good line adressing the problem you are asserting. "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed. Faith is the denial of observation so that belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin. It is a very accurate description of them two.
SensualLeopardDesign 7 months ago
@SensualLeopardDesign On the contrary for me, my religion is based on logic and reason, you're confusing me with mainstream religions like the Abrahamics. I don't have to deny science to believe what I do, science does not contradict my religion. A more accurate presentation of the quote you gave I think would be "Science tends to adjust its views away from anything that does not align with its viewpoints."
PriestChristopher 7 months ago
@PriestChristopher Okay, what do you believe then, and how is it based on logic and reason? No, because science doesnt have any viewpoints. Further science is based on earlier discoveries and knowledge about the nature, see? Any god or spirit or supernatural we actually come across would instantly be regarded as natural, existent in our universe. Why do you think most scientists dont believe in such things? Because the more we delve, the more we find out that the explanations are non-magical.
SensualLeopardDesign 7 months ago
@SensualLeopardDesign look, I'm not here to try to change you, your beliefs and path in life is your own choice and right. Nowhere does my religion tell me to try to convert people, but I will defend it. If you want an honest, intelligent discussion about my beliefs and yours, send me a PM.
PriestChristopher 7 months ago
@PriestChristopher Oh, believe I was too quick there. I know the video is right above this message board, lol. Excuse me, I'll delve more into what you believe now..
SensualLeopardDesign 7 months ago
Reincarnation is false because souls are aswell. No one has ever had an experience of souls and people who claim to be mediums are taking advantage of gullible people like you. No one, mark my words, will ever prove that souls or god for that matter exist. Because they don't. Beleif in souls and reincarnation are purely for emotional gain that death-insecure people think they need and there has never been any factual basis on these claims.
TheAstroSteve 7 months ago
@TheAstroSteve so if we're not spirit we must simply be dead matter, then theoretically, we should be able to pump some chemicals into a dead person and revive them. Why have we not done that yet? Because the soul is what gives us life, it's what keeps our heart pumping. When someone breaks your heart or makes you smile, do you think that's just dead matter physically feeling it? when someone dies, people say he's gone, but the body's right there. What's your response to this?
guitarhero666759 7 months ago
Just so you know, I am NOT disagreeing with you in anyway. Your beliefs are yours and mine are mine. I commend you for coming out and talking about your beliefs when there are so many people that troll on YouTube just to bash people like you and me.
lilnuttyredhead 9 months ago
I don't, personally, believe we come back as other things besides humans or humanoid beings. I believe we also reincarnate to other planets. I believe that we do not remember the other side because if we did, we wouldn't want to be here, lol! I had a very very vivid dream as a child.. Over and over. I was me but another person. My aunt, who Is "gifted", told me my dream in detail and helped me research the information I had from my dream to find the evidence of my past life.
lilnuttyredhead 9 months ago
@HawkeyeLieutenant definitely, no problem at all with believing or not believing in what you want to! There's no harm in believing in souls. As long as it doesn't infringe on other people's rights I don't care what anyone believes :p
idreamtofflight 9 months ago
@HawkeyeLieutenant which is why odds are they don't exist. The invisible/intangible and the non-existant have a lot in common. Of course, I could be wrong, but if we had souls, I think whatever being you may believe is at work would make it kind of obvious that we have them instead of giving us something else that is unjustifiable.
idreamtofflight 9 months ago
@idreamtofflight. The divine is right in front of our eyes, there are just those of us who choose to ignore it.
PriestChristopher 9 months ago
@PriestChristopher yup, I go out of my way to ignore the divine intervention that surrounds me. Cause it's extremely obvious, I mean I really do enjoy consciously ignoring them all, but it gets hard sometimes because there are so many! I'm getting better at it though.
idreamtofflight 9 months ago
@idreamtofflight. Yes, you do, because you and I both know you won't accept anything that shakes your worldview. You will always try to find a loophole, and if you can't explain it, you'll just conclude that there must be another explanation besides the divine. But the path you want to pursue is up to you, each to their own.
PriestChristopher 9 months ago
@PriestChristopher the exact same can easily be said for you good sir. In the religious worldview, God cannot lose; if you pray for a raise at work, but don't get one, you say to yourself "Oh, God must know better, so me not getting the raise is okay because God is all knowing and he'd know if it would be better for me", but if you DID get the raise, then of course that was God's hand at work. We both have our worldviews, this is for sure. I do not, however, take anything on the basis of faith.
idreamtofflight 9 months ago
@idreamtofflight. Well firstly, you're assuming I am a Monotheist, along the lines of Abrahamic. Far from it, I'm a Greek Polytheist. I realize that the Gods help us in our lives, but the Ancient Greeks understood one thing very well. Life is not fair and sometimes things go wrong. The Gods are not our personal servants to make sure that we always get our way. But in Christianity for example, you're promised approval if 2 or more people pray for it.
PriestChristopher 9 months ago
@PriestChristopher well I can't say I saw that coming, haha, sorry about the assumption, it was more of an example, but either way I'm glad you understood what I meant either way.
idreamtofflight 9 months ago
3:37 good point.
mindfulcreation 11 months ago
Now say that we are energy, and what about the world ending? like you said our energy HAS to go somewhere. but i mean if we were born again in a whole (or in other terms, an energy that makes up everything or eath itself) then what would possibly happen? I hate the guy that your responding to By the way, i personally think hes an ignorant asshole that wont think outside of the box, anyway, i like the video and All The Best
suicidalquiff 11 months ago
@suicidalquiff. Well yes he is closed minded, people like him will never accept anything that shakes down their worldview. They don't want their world upset.
PriestChristopher 11 months ago
@PriestChristopher I totally agree with you 100%. soon, one of these days he will realize what hes doing to himself and all of the others :/
suicidalquiff 11 months ago
A nasty copy fail in the sentence with the silly word "experiancable", please don't mind that. Also thanks @theamzer for the teapot analogy, I really hope it will spare you from miserable death of sweet sugary tea.
TheArchgnostic 11 months ago
Have anyone seen my flying tea pot? Why should someone else prove something that you have come up with? If most of the people can't see the logic behind it and you can't show proof of your theory, it might be flawed.
TheArchgnostic 11 months ago
@TheArchgnostic. I love how some Atheists use outlandish things like this, when it's really a dead argument. No where in nature has there ever been a flying tea pot, but in nature there is death and rebirth. And as we are part of nature, surely we are subject to her cycles unless you want to argue that we are totally separate from nature, and in that case, where did we come from? Planet 9 of the gamma quadrant? You ask for proof, you will never accept proof unless it aligns with your views.
PriestChristopher 11 months ago
@TheArchgnostic Secondly, you ask me, why should someone else prove something that you have come up with? This is totally taking me out of context. Firstly, I did not "come up" with reincarnation. That's a belief that's been in cultures for a long time now. It is YOU who want others to accept your claim that there is no spirituality without proving that there is none, when we have experienced much proof that there indeed is spirituality and divinity. I have not tried to force my views on you.
PriestChristopher 11 months ago
TAA tried to discount reincarnation by people claiming to always be someone well known, but most reincarnation cases like you said, deal with every day people. reincarnation is not about hanging on to superficial things of the Earth world. It's about having experiences that can't be explained away by rational means. Recycled stardust/energy is natural, not supernatural/paranormal. .
HaleyMary 1 year ago
Great points! The changing of the seasons shows reincarnation in nature. Winter is like the death and spring is like a rebirth. Energy can't be created or destroyed.
HaleyMary 1 year ago
Well you can argue about these things as much as you want, but without evidence it's all meaningless. Believing something is true without proof is still irrational. There is simply no logical basis for this behavior.
dutchbb1979 1 year ago
@dutchbb1979. Well you believe something is not true without evidence that it is false, so I can dismiss you just as easily. Your arrogance in not better than fundie Christians who tell people they are stupid because they don't see things the way they do. You're no better. Have a nice day.
PriestChristopher 1 year ago
@PriestChristopher Actually I'm an agnostic atheist (like Einstein and Hawking) so I do not claim that I know for a fact that there is no god like you seem to be implying. I'm not even claiming that reincarnation is nonsense. All I'm saying is that believing something is true when you really have no evidence for it is irrational. Also I never said anything about being stupid. Thanks for your reply and have a nice one too.
dutchbb1979 1 year ago
@PriestChristopher well that's the thing ... believing in an unfalsifiable hypothesis is irrational. And it all comes down to probability, what is more probable that a soul exists although we have a good understanding of a human body and we've yet to find such a thing or it doesn't. Do you know a principle called occam's razor? although i do not think that both of the hypotheses are equal, but it seems that you do.
theamzer 11 months ago
@theamzer. But the problem is that science was never made to examine and measure spirituality. You're trying to look for a spirit using something that decided from the beginning that it would not accept such a thing. No matter how much evidence of spirituality is given, it will never be upheld by science because it was intended to be a study that rejected and refused to accept such evidence. You understand?
PriestChristopher 11 months ago
@PriestChristopher No i don't understand. and i haven't seen any evidence for spirituality. i wasn't atheist since i was born, i also wasn't very religious, but i tried to find something that would comfort me like afterlife or reincarnation and i couldn't find anything solid. I looked through some cases of this reincarnation thing and i must say that the imagination is a really wonderful thing, the kids will not only tell you about their past life, but describe their imaginary friends aswell.
theamzer 11 months ago
@theamzer. Then that's your own personal choice, and I am deeply sorry you have never experienced spirituality and connection with divinity. But nothing gives you the right to force your worldview due to lack of experience on anyone else.
PriestChristopher 11 months ago
@PriestChristopher Well, the feeling is mutual. I'm deeply sorry that you've never applied rational thinking to your spirituality, and it wasn't the lack of experience that made me atheist... it was simple logic.
theamzer 11 months ago
@theamzer That's another place where your fallacy comes in. My religion applies a lot of rationality and critical thinking. You're confusing all religious mentalities with that of Christianity's mentality because Christianity is mostly what you see. It wasn't blind faith that made be a Hellenic Polytheist, it was experience and logic. If you studied about it instead of scratching the surface, you'd see. The path in life you choose, is your doing. But don't try to force that on everyone else.
PriestChristopher 11 months ago
@PriestChristopher what fallacy? reincarnation: never publicly observed, no evidence, children crap isn't real it's imagination, seasons also aren't explanation for reincarnation, they're explained by elliptical planetary orbits... lizard rejuvenation is as much a reincarnation proof as humans healing injured skin, plant's do not have a nerve system so they can't die in a sense that a human mind can, soul has no use in human body whatsoever so why even believe that there is such a useless thing.
theamzer 11 months ago
@theamzer Never been observed? Imagination is hardly an explanation for knowing people you never met or studied. This is what I mean, you won't accept any evidence contrary to your views. Denial and dismissal are your dearest friends. If Zeus came down and said "I am Zeus." you'd probably still deny his existence. Your fallacy was you assuming there was no rationality or logic in my religion when you clearly have not studied it. Why are you trying to force your views on others so badly?
PriestChristopher 11 months ago
@PriestChristopher well then please point out examples of observed reincarnation. If Zeus (or any god) shows that he truly is god (by performing a miracle or something) then i would believe it. And the same dismissal applies to you, your fallacy was you assuming there was no rationality or logic in Flying teapotism when you clearly have not studied it. And I'm not trying to force my views I'm just trying to figure out why some people are even capable of believing in this bullshit.
theamzer 11 months ago
@theamzer. Alright, then what if I told you that our son was born 3 and a half months early with the highest chances of dying, and we prayed to Artemis, Apollo and Athena to save him and today he's a healthy growing baby? You are trying to force your views on others. When you try to convince someone to think like you, that's imposition, and a forceful act. Also, going back to your last post, we're not talking about nerves and the physical body being reborn, we're talking about one's soul.
PriestChristopher 11 months ago
@PriestChristopher First of your son wouldn't be a first one that has this happened, and thanks to DOCTORS they survive, not to some imaginary friends in the sky, also human body has a high regenerative ability. and I've discussed soul. human anatomy is well explored by scientists and doctors there is no function for a soul to perform, so why even believe that there is such a thing, what does it do? nothing? also i find you close minded, very defensive, and this conversation is over.
theamzer 11 months ago
@theamzer. Even with all the scientific medicine they could give him, the doctors could STILL only give him a 50% chance of living, and even then he had a 70% chance of having a bad disability. Staggering statistics when you consider he beat all the odds. The Gods are not imaginary. Human anatomy is not an observation of spirit, but of the physical body as humans perceive. Can human science take in all that exists? No. I have explained my views while you have tried to convince me of yours.
PriestChristopher 11 months ago
@PriestChristopher The next time you or your kid gets sick try only praying and see if the results will be the same. If science cant explain spirit, but it can explain how body functions without spirit and that there is no need to believe in spirit, then why would anyone still believe it? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and all I've done is explain my views, so this message will be the last one, please do not respond to my questions, just think about them.
theamzer 11 months ago
@theamzer. Funny you should say that, the other night my baby boy was wheezing and it sounded like he had congestion. My fiancee went to call the doctor. I prayed to Artemis, and before the doctor answered, I told her to hang up because his wheezing and congestion was gone. I'm not saying one should not seek medical help for an illness, of course not. The Gods have blessed people with those skills for a reason. But the Gods do play a vital role in our lives and the universe and world around us.
PriestChristopher 11 months ago
@PriestChristopher Well this is a barrier of self-interest which probably stays the same because of our ego, simple as that. I believed in things once which now i deny, but also recognized that spirituality is something of a common anomaly and anything, if done with joy and dedication can lead to a spiritual entity. Like art or sports. And it comes from our culture, which is heavily based on divine. Healthy attitude keeps the body healthy, so my vote on spirituality as a good thing.
TheArchgnostic 11 months ago
@PriestChristopher And yes, i dare to voice my opinion and say the divine is out-dated and rather detrimental, also the primary source of racism and hate, and catalyst of violence. Because they are ego driven and always breaking apart forming new cults generating distinctness. Have you ever seen a religion that claims they don't know the answers to everything? Because I'm pretty sure we still have things unexplored, anything else is just self-righteous.
TheArchgnostic 11 months ago
Addendum: It's a feeble attempt to expand your views, if TheAmazingAtheist explanation doesn't come across, you're far from step one. Just keep in mind that if divine ruled the world, you wouldnt be able to pick up that phone, there wouldn't be one. Your family tree would probably be dust just like mine, statistics, that is all. All in all, I would pray to Odin in your place, he has an awesome Swedish army beard and can throw lingtning bolts.
TheArchgnostic 11 months ago
@theamzer. Secondly, in fact, I am probably one of the most open-minded religious people you will meet. I have been explaining why I believe what I do, while you've been trying to convince me of what you believe. I'd say you have a close-mindedness issue. It might interest you to know that there are sciences that I enjoy and like, and I am heading towards a PhD in World History. Science does not contradict my religion, my religion proves science. Hail The Olympians! Blessed Be!
PriestChristopher 11 months ago
@PriestChristopher But! Claiming that science haven't done much to help humanity to be happier or healthier, I dare to say is silly. History has proven that the presence of advanced (based on experience and the observation of nature) fields like medicine, biology greatly increased child survival rates. Also is the only source experiancable and understandably by If people were more interested in learning rather than worshipping in medieval times, they might have evaded that nasty black death.
TheArchgnostic 11 months ago
Oh and you misunderstood the flying teapot analogy. You cant disprove the flying teapot, the science wasn't was never made to examine and measure flying teapots, you're trying to look for flying teapots using something that decided from the beginning that it would not accept such a thing. no matter how much evidence for flying teapot is given, it will never be upheld by science because it was intended to be a study that rejected and refused to accept such evidence. :)
theamzer 11 months ago
@theamzer. As I said, this is a dead argument, because we have never seen a flying teapot in nature like we have seen the processes of reincarnation. There is no bad afterlife in reincarnation, there is no Hell or Satan, or anything like that, and yet you still resent the concept of life continuing. I think it's clear you don't want your world view to be upset. If you accept spirituality in any form, it brings into question all you've built for yourself.
PriestChristopher 11 months ago
I really wish you had the integrity to not disable your ratings.
SageTheAtheist 1 year ago
Also, I think you misunderstand what scientists mean when they say that "energy cannot be destroyed." The basic components of energy cannot be destroyed, but the form it's currently in can be. Imagine that you have a drawing and you cut or burn it up. The components that the picture was made of still exist, but the picture itself is for all intents and purposes destroyed. Thus whatever it is that makes a person who they are can in essence be destroyed, because the form ceases to exist.
CommanderSquidlet 1 year ago
@CommanderSquidlet. Yes, the body you have right now will one day be gone and it will never return, but your inner energy and spirit will live on.
PriestChristopher 1 year ago
@PriestChristopher I was using the picture as an analogy to one's inner energy - whatever it is that makes a person who he or she is, not the body.
CommanderSquidlet 1 year ago
@CommanderSquidlet . Right, but there is no conclusive evidence that energy or consciousness dies upon death, its simply dies as we can perceive it in our state of consciousness. In other words, it transcends to a state that is not the consciousness of the living, and therefore it cannot be as well perceived by the living.
PriestChristopher 1 year ago
What the ABC news segment DOESN'T tell you is that young James Leininger visited a museum with his father where he saw WW2 planes before his nightmares began. Obviously this doesn't disprove reincarnation, but it casts some serious doubt on this case.
CommanderSquidlet 1 year ago
@CommanderSquidlet. I suppose that could have triggered his past life regression, but in a broader sense, how would that explain what he knew about this pilot?
PriestChristopher 1 year ago
@PriestChristopher I don't know; I'd have to look into it. However, if they left out the story about his trip to the museum, what else might they be leaving out?
CommanderSquidlet 1 year ago
look... there is life, you live it, create new life, THEN DIE. once you die, your brain dies, which contains everything that you see as "yourself" (your personality etc.) YOU DO NOT CONTINUE, BECAUSE YOU HAVE DIED. but... what does continue is the new life you have created. The process repeats. Don't beat yourself up trying to prove some batshit retarded hypothesis just because you "believe" in it.
Electric5ponge 1 year ago
@Electric5ponge. There is no proof that consciousness dies upon death. As I said, if energy cannot be destroyed, it has to go somewhere. I am not beating myself up trying to prove what I know to be true, you and many like you are the ones beating yourself up in an attempt to disprove it. All you've done here is throw insults and use negatives. That's not evidence.
PriestChristopher 1 year ago
@PriestChristopher actually yes there is. dont post comments with claims you cant defend. i will inform you where the proof is lemme get it
jimbeen1771 1 year ago
@PriestChristopher YES iam subbing you bro! you rock!
XLuminariumX 1 year ago
@PriestChristopher As infinite are the stars and galaxies "the universe as a whole", so are the places a soul can go. the universe expands so says science, so logically theres plenty of space in an infinite universe. for souls to reincarnate, everytime a star is born and a planet is blessed with the seeds of life a new home was created for the incarnating souls. We are stars we are expanding the universe.
XLuminariumX 1 year ago
@Electric5ponge. Also, I think that because you've encountered too many fundie Christians, you are under the impression that everyone who is religious or spiritual is trying to impose their views and beliefs on you. This is not true here. I am not trying to get you to follow my way, what I have done in this video is explain the belief system of reincarnation and why I believe it and why it's possible.
PriestChristopher 1 year ago
@Electric5ponge There is a book Called "past lives future lives" -Dr. Joel Goldberg that ranks among many many books each based on tens of thousands of cases (each Dr by the way) and to be honest; if people want to simply accept we are born and just die and leave behind offspring and accept that animal-like point of view, thats fine but, anyone who cares to explore and see beyond whats presented well then your in the company of the MANY explorers, scientists etc who did the same and good luck.
kahetel13 1 year ago
I love your response and way of thinking PriestChristopher! I like to think of the Earth as a Continuing Recycling event. Since matter can not be created or destroyed I firmly believe we are part of the never ending process our Earth recycles matter into different forms. Can anyone say they are a new creation of Earth from matter that did not exist, or is the matter that is currently within our being part of recycled matter our Earth was composed of billions of years ago?
ShadowFireWitch 1 year ago
@ShadowFireWitch People who do not understand the concepts or Reincarnation do not understand the origins of where their individual matter originated. From a scientific perspective one has to understand that the matter your body is composed of today came from recycled material that was present on the Earth from it's Birth Billions of years ago, and although your matter evolved into the person you are today, you are still a product of the same materials that came from Earth itself.
ShadowFireWitch 1 year ago
@TheWiccanRaven If there is a lack of substantial evidence supporting a claim then why would you believe it? Of course it 'could' exist, but anything 'could' exist.
CopperGaut 1 year ago
@CopperGaut. Personal Experience. That's your answer. We don't believe everything just because it "could" be true. If that were the case, we'd believe in Christianity, Islam, Judaism, etc.
PriestChristopher 1 year ago
@TheWiccanRaven The argument against reincarnation is simply that there are no facts supporting it. This constitutes evidence in and of itself because the existence of reincarnation falls short of invalidating the null hypothesis.
If it's true that an individual must provide positive proof for a negative claim, then we should blindly believe in all sorts of mythical creatures and pseudoscientific garbage. Or do you have hard evidence against the existence of unicorns and wood nymphs?
VolatileReaction 1 year ago
@VolatileReaction. We believe based on our own experiences, you disbelieve based on the lack thereof. No one is saying you have to believe in anything. If you can't disprove it, that still does not mean you have to believe it. You are under the fallacy that lack of disproving evidence requires you to believe in something. It does not.
PriestChristopher 1 year ago
@PriestChristopher "You are under ... in something."
Erm...I'm pretty sure that's TheWiccanRaven's position.
I've made (or I hope I've made) two claims on this thread: First, there is no empirical evidence for reincarnation. Second, the burden of proof relies on the one who is making the positive claim. I've never said that you can't believe something on the basis of personal experience. But, this qualifies as anecdotal evidence. It's non-scientific and therefore can't be used as evidence.
VolatileReaction 1 year ago
"You are under the fallacy that lack of disproving evidence requires you to believe in something."
...I'm pretty sure that's TheWiccanRaven's position.
I haven't said whether or not you should believe in reincarnation based on your personal experience. I've simply stood by my statement that the onus probandi lies with he who is making the positive claim. If you've had a revelation that shaped your beliefs, that's fine. However, it is anecdotal and doesn't qualify as /empirical/ evidence.
VolatileReaction 1 year ago
@TheWiccanRaven If someone states something does not exist, all they have to do is negate the evidence provided by those who state it does exist. It is impossible to provide positive proof for a negative claim. Instead, we rely on the null hypothesis; if there is no evidence in favour of something (as is the case with reincarnation), then one can safely conclude that there is no reason to believe it.
VolatileReaction 1 year ago
@TheWiccanRaven Ghost hunting is a laughable exploitation of human gullibility.
CopperGaut 1 year ago
@TheWiccanRaven I'm aware of the Gaia hypothesis, and I'm in no position to criticize it or defend it, although it is an interesting idea and it does hold some degree of merit (at least from my understanding). I'm also aware that it's an idea originating from Paganism. Even if they were completely right about this hypothesis, it does nothing to credit any other hypothesis they come up with.
CopperGaut 1 year ago
@TheWiccanRaven I'll ask again, if I provide no evidence for a negative claim, is it justified to believe in that claim? If so, we all live on the back of a giant tortoise, and the universe is merely an infinite stack of tortoise going on forever. Now, either provide evidence to counter this claim or I will be forced to believe it.
CopperGaut 1 year ago
@TheWiccanRaven Firstly I never said that you were stupid, I called you cowards. My standpoint is not a claim of any new idea, it's a conclusion for the lack of evidence for yours. I've explained this numerous times. My statement is not “There cannot ever be reincarnation, it is proven without a doubt”, it is “reincarnation, for the time being, has not enough evidence to support its claim, therefore I will suspend judgement of its existence and live according to its falsehood.”
CopperGaut 1 year ago
@TheWiccanRaven It would be a pleasure if you gave me one credible scientific paper or study showing that spirits are possible and/or exist. I know you won't, though, because that is a complete lie. You're right that science can't explain everything, but I believe that it is only limited by our technology and our capacity to understand the complexity of the universe.
CopperGaut 1 year ago
with reincarnation why does it have to be earth....with so many planets of the universe there has to be life elsewhere so maybe we die and get reborn on another planet. what makes earth special. also reincarnation is real or not is a endless and stupid argument that cant be argued in anyway from a basis of evidence on either side. no1 knows what is after death. therfore i say reincarnation is real. it is the only plausable after death scenario. this is a baseless argument on both sides get a job
33722janus 1 year ago
@33722janus How could you be presented with no evidence from either side and decide to believe in the claiment?
CopperGaut 1 year ago
@TheWiccanRaven I'm aware that I don't have the answers to the after-life, and unfortunately neither do you. It may very well seem that way to you, about sceptics always remaining sceptical. They do so because you never provide convincing evidence. Never. I don't say that because I'm unwilling to change my picture of reality.
CopperGaut 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheWiccanRaven Paganism and religion are fundamentally similar in the sense that you must hold irrational beliefs for irrational reasons. Again, this argument is seeming less and less like a debate on reincarnation and more about pointing the finger about who has to prove what. So, let's say I can't disprove reincarnation, does that prove it for you? It must therefore be true because I can't prove evidence against it? You must see the fallacious nature of this mentality.
CopperGaut 1 year ago
Comment removed
CopperGaut 1 year ago
@TheWiccanRaven I don't know where your spell-check comment applies to. I never claimed to be an intellectual, I'm not. Also, you're absolutely right, I don't provide evidence for my position. How could I, and why would I provide evidence for the lack of belief of something? It's counter-productive. Providing evidence against an unfalsifiable hypothesis is a fruitless endeavour. You say you have evidence, I say it's not logically sound, I therefore do not accept that claim (yet).
CopperGaut 1 year ago
@TheWiccanRaven Everything in the natural world, in my opinion, will one day (hypothetically) be explained mathematically and scientifically, and everything outside the natural world does not exist. I say this because that's what history dictates, and that's what logic and common sense requires. This position is completely malleable. If I'm presented with enough concrete, irrefutable evidence I will happily change my position.
CopperGaut 1 year ago
This is a summation of what happened (roughly). Person X makes a claim that idea X is true. Person X is laden with the burden of proving idea X. Person X proves it unsuccessfully. Person Y declares that idea X is false because the proof was not sufficient. Person X declares that person Y must prove that it is false. Person Y kills himself due to impossibility of proving unfalsifiable hypothesis.
CopperGaut 1 year ago
@CopperGaut. Why can you not understand that I am not trying to convince you or him or him of anything? This is why your summation is not valid, because I am not trying to prove it to you, I have simply explained the beliefs of reincarnation and given testimonies of people. Why can you not understand that that is not imposing or convincing someone? It was more like, Person Y made the claim that something was fake while offering no proof, while person X explained the belief system to Y.
PriestChristopher 1 year ago
@PriestChristopher
"testimonies of people."
Testimonies don't mean diddly-squat.
MomoTheBellyDancer 1 year ago
@MomoTheBellyDancer. "Testimonies don't mean diddly-squat."
Unless it's a testimony that backs up your views, right?
PriestChristopher 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PriestChristopher
"Unless it's a testimony that backs up your views, right? "
Not even then. Evidence is all that matters,.
MomoTheBellyDancer 1 year ago
realize that they cannot be convinced contrary to their own views no matter what. Also realize that if they claim to have no reason to believe you, then likewise you have no reason to believe them, especially when they have forgone the burden of proof and are using negatives as their arguments. You can discard them easily, because you don't have to accept what they cannot prove and have said they don't have the responsibility of proving.
PriestChristopher 1 year ago
Those who agree with them are probably credible to them, but those who do not agree, even in the largest numbers, will just be dismissed. So realize that while the skeptic has discarded the burden of proof for themselves and can not disprove your beliefs therefore, you have your own experiences and the experiences of others as proof of your beliefs instead of not carrying the burden of proof at all and just using negatives. This holds far more water than just having a dismissive mentality.
PriestChristopher 1 year ago
@PriestChristopher The null hypothesis is essential to the scientific theory. The individual making the /positive/ claim carries the burden of proof. TJ's claim is a /negative/ one: reincarnation does not exist. His position doesn't require proof because what is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. The onus is on you, and fellow believers of reincarnation, to provide support for your beliefs.
VolatileReaction 1 year ago
@TheWiccanRaven Also, it is quite the defence mechanism you're invoking on yourself there. You don't feel the need to prove anything to sceptics because they “contradict themselves to back up their own views”. This is merely a way to believe what you want. People like you need a crutch to lean on because you're afraid of death because you're a god damn coward. It's not about feeling good, it's about the cold truth. I don't give a flying fuck if it makes you feel good.
CopperGaut 1 year ago
Those who agree with them are probably credible to them, but those who do not agree, even in the largest numbers, will just be dismissed. So realize that while the skeptic has discarded the burden of proof for themselves and can not disprove your beliefs therefore, you have your own experiences and the experiences of others as proof of your beliefs instead of not carrying the burden of proof at all and just using negatives. This holds far more water than just having a dismissive mentality.
PriestChristopher 1 year ago
realize that they cannot be convinced contrary to their own views no matter what. Also realize that if they claim to have no reason to believe you, then likewise you have no reason to believe them, especially when they have forgone the burden of proof and are using negatives as their arguments. You can discard them easily, because you don't have to accept what they cannot prove and have said they don't have the responsibility of proving.
PriestChristopher 1 year ago
@CopperGaut. Those were for TheWiccanRaven btw, I just wanted to make sure you saw them too.
PriestChristopher 1 year ago
@TheWiccanRaven I don't think you understand what scepticism is. If someone first hears of reincarnation, it is reasonable to not necessarily believe in it immediately. Now, I have been given logically fallacious testimonies by discreditable, unscientific and circumstantial individuals and I'm expected to believe it. There is literally no reason to believe in reincarnation that I have researched, no reason to believe in any religion, no reason to believe in spirits, ghosts, or the human soul.
CopperGaut 1 year ago