Where the **** was Paul?

[Og3]

The key here is that you must handle the information with a neutral mind, setting aside your biases in either direction.

Can you do that? Set aside your biases in either direction? Can you have a neutral mind?

There are some issues where you can examine the evidence and reach a conclusion. I heard a well known scientist Michael Reiss give an example a few years ago. He asked whether people thought trees get most of the material for their growth from the air or from the ground. He was surprised to find that most of his non-scientist audience said from the air because people usually think it is from the ground, I thought that. His point was that if you thought it was from the ground, for most people you can go through the evidence and they will change their minds. He compared that with people abandoning a belief in creationism and explained that this is much more like a worldview and people tend to take longer to modify that kind of belief. And when you get to core beliefs like materialism or theism then I think it is less a matter of looking neutrally at the evidence and more a matter of making a personal judgement. That judgement will have to take account of the evidence so it is not purely subjective but neither it is this a purely objective matter; there is not some algorithm that will lead all honest people to either the conclusion that there is or is not a God.

To be the Dutch Uncle for a moment:
"You say that because you are an arborist."
"I believe that we are all climbing the same branches."
"I think that both views have some merit."
"There is no tree."
"I prefer not to think about trees."
"Artificial Christmas trees can be made in a factory. So why do you think that your tree is real?"
"Do you really believe that of all the trees in all the world, *yours* draws minerals from the ground?"

[SEG]

The key here is that you must handle the information with a neutral mind, setting aside your biases in either direction.

You no doubt have heard of the mantra used in statistics, Og, "Correlation is not causation". "Correlation is not causation" means that just because two things correlate does not necessarily mean that one causes the other.

Can you truly set aside God as a confounder? Could you also set aside anecdotal and emotional evidence? If you could start from that sort of neutrality, you would be in a much better position to assess the remaining evidence if it exists.

[Og3]

@SEG:
In regards to my own processes of thought, I have explained them above, in answer to Humanguy.
In regards to my own practical reasoning wrt God, I have just made a couple of posts in the "New Proposition" thread, attempting to show how God might be reasoned from as near first principles as I can address.
In regards to setting aside my own biases -- I don't know what you mean by God as a "confounder" -- I do set aside anectdotal and emotional evidence, as I've been explaining to Capn Howdy just above your post.

And you're up mighty early this morning, aren't you? It must be around 4 AM where you are.

[SEG]

@SEG:
In regards to my own processes of thought, I have explained them above, in answer to Humanguy.
In regards to my own practical reasoning wrt God, I have just made a couple of posts in the "New Proposition" thread, attempting to show how God might be reasoned from as near first principles as I can address.
In regards to setting aside my own biases -- I don't know what you mean by God as a "confounder" -- I do set aside anectdotal and emotional evidence, as I've been explaining to Capn Howdy just above your post.

And you're up mighty early this morning, aren't you? It must be around 4 AM where you are.

Nah, we are having a Sunday sleep in, it's 09:50am here. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confounding re leaving God out of the equation.

[Moonwood the Hare]

What you're asking me to do is to lower my standards of evidence. People, believers and many non-believers alike, tend to speak about searching for evidence of God as if they were looking for evidence of phlogiston. But this is the wrong way to view the issue. God isn't some element on the periodic table we have to go hunt down, God is an intelligent agent quite capable of speaking for himself and needs no human spokesman.

Think about it like this: I don't have God's cell phone number but he does have mine. Why am I responsible for trying to call him?

I don't think evidence is something that can or should be used in a uniform way regardless of context. It is not a question of lower or higher standards but what would be appropriate. I agree that God is an agent and can look for you but that does not mean there is nothing you can do to make yourself more findable. If we are talking about a relationship then by definition there are two sides. If the phone is ringing and you don't pick up then that is down to you. If you unplug the phone then that will stop someone calling however much they want to.

What does "level the playing field" mean exactly? Are you asking me to suspend disbelief? If you are I am disinclined for all the reasons already stated. You are offering Christian literature in lieu of Christ directly validating your claims in an unmistakable manner which he could easily do if he chose. And not only that, I have to read your Christian literature in just the right way. With an open heart. I have to level the playing field first.

I was not suggesting the literature as an alternative to the relationship but as a means to that end. But if you think that is impossible or undesirable it may not be a way for you, at least at present. The reason for suggesting an open heart is that if you do read the Bible with the attitude of seeing how many faults or problems you can find with it then you are not as likely to hear God speak through it.

No. My experience has been that the more skeptical I am the more likely I am to arrive at the truth of a great many kinds of claims. But here you are asking me to do the reverse---suspend disbelief. But Christianity has to stand or fall on its merits just like any other truth claim. God's either there or he isn't. I ask to speak to your God, you offer me literature. That's what puts you guys in the pending file.

Well I would say be even more skeptical. Don't just question particular conclusions but question your whole approach to knowing. Pascal once said reason is feeble if it does not go so far as to see its own limitations. The same applies to evidence. This is why I hold a personalist rather than a rationalist approach to knowing. Sometimes it is right to be skeptical and sometimes it is right to be open and there is no rule that overrides personal judgement to tell you which situation you are in.

[SEG]

Think about it like this: I don't have God's cell phone number but he does have mine. Why am I responsible for trying to call him?

Great point Captain! You would at least expect him to send a quick text if he existed and was really interested.

[captain howdy]

Think about it like this: I don't have God's cell phone number but he does have mine. Why am I responsible for trying to call him?

Great point Captain! You would at least expect him to send a quick text if he existed and was really interested.

Here's a possibility I must admit that I haven't considered until this very moment: Maybe he has been trying to call us but can't because he uses AT&T

[SEG]

Lol!

[Claire]

Think about it like this: I don't have God's cell phone number but he does have mine. Why am I responsible for trying to call him?

God's always calling you, but He's not going to force you to pick up the phone.

When you strengthen your body, the more physical you can be, and as long as you eat certain foods, it promotes that healthy, strong body. When you strengthen your soul, the more in tune with the spiritual you become, and as long as you do what's good for it, then you promote that healthy, strong soul.

And, just as there is plenty of tools to help a person with their physical body, there's plenty of tools in the world to help a person with their spiritual side.

Have you ever read or watched an advertisement to a gym where they promised you positive results? And, because you believed in what they were selling, signed up? Did you promise your trainer you'd be committed to the program? Whether away or present at the gym, did you put in the effort to follow their every instruction for the benefit of your body? Did you never abandon your faith and hope when you didn't see the results when you wanted? When you finally reached every goal, because you had come to learn what's truly good for your body and why, did you choose to maintain the lifestyle that got you to that point?

Are you willing to dedicate time, patience, hope, and faith into the strengthening of your soul, as you would your body, so as to function better on a spiritual level? And, bear in mind, not everyone in a gym was at the same physical level when they started, and not everyone has the same obstacles, or areas of weakness to improve, so it'll take longer for some, and different equipment will need to be used, etc. No person's physical body or journey is identical. But, they're all aiming for the same end game, which is to be healthy and strong. It's the same with souls.

[Humanguy]

Are you willing to dedicate time, patience, hope, and faith into the strengthening of your soul, as you would your body, so as to function better on a spiritual level? And, bear in mind, not everyone in a gym was at the same physical level when they started, and not everyone has the same obstacles, or areas of weakness to improve, so it'll take longer for some, and different equipment will need to be used, etc. No person's physical body or journey is identical. But, they're all aiming for the same end game, which is to be healthy and strong. It's the same with souls.

What if you see no reason to be convinced that you have a soul?