How Do Theists Separate Fact from Fiction?

[PsychoticEpisode]

Reading the Virgin Mary thread has inspired me to create this new thread. Hopefully when all is said and done our theists friends can provide the skeptics out there the necessary information that will finally show the difference between what is fact and what is fiction.

So without wasting any time.....

Can a believer please tell us how they know what is factual as it pertains to their belief system. A system includes but is not limited to text, custom & ritual.

Is belief facts an oxymoron? If believers insist on reminding us of how their facts are gospel then I think everyone should know how this distinction is arrived upon.

Do believers base their facts on the most recent data culled from the sciences arena?

If knowing is 'you gotta have faith' then is it even worth discussing?

 

[lightgigantic]

Reading the Virgin Mary thread has inspired me to create this new thread. Hopefully when all is said and done our theists friends can provide the skeptics out there the necessary information that will finally show the difference between what is fact and what is fiction.

So without wasting any time.....

Can a believer please tell us how they know what is factual as it pertains to their belief system. A system includes but is not limited to text, custom & ritual.

Is belief facts an oxymoron? If believers insist on reminding us of how their facts are gospel then I think everyone should know how this distinction is arrived upon.

Do believers base their facts on the most recent data culled from the sciences arena?

If knowing is 'you gotta have faith' then is it even worth discussing?

geez ...... It's not rocket science.

(although maybe it is .....)

Suppose we take rocket science and we assume it is a field of discipline you are thoroughly unfamiliar with, How would you propose to distinguish fact from fiction?

Or by the same token, taking rocket science once again ... suppose you were reasonably familiar with it. How would you propose to distinguish fact from fiction.

Similarly there are two general categories of theists -

1 - those who take belief in the facts by dint of authority ... much like (almost) any layman could say it is not a fact that we can teleport humans and travel faster than the speed of light.

2 - those who by dint of investigation, discipline snd action have a familiarity with the foundation of the issue and thus have a reservoir of knowledge drawn from experience


If you want to further investigate the nature of the #2's experience, it requires a bit of groundwork in theory, terminology and the relationship between the terms.

For instance if one couldn't get one's head around atoms and the nature of their spinning, a discussion on laser cooling atoms would appear rooted in text, custom and ritual.

 

[spidergoat]

The fact is, they don't. Spiritual experience is a fact, we are just starting to be able to measure the changes in brain activity associated with spiritual practices like meditation, but the metaphysical premises of theists are entirely subjective.

 

[PsychoticEpisode]

geez ...... It's not rocket science.

(although maybe it is .....)

Suppose we take rocket science and we assume it is a field of discipline you are thoroughly unfamiliar with, How would you propose to distinguish fact from fiction?

Suppose we take theology and we assume it is a field of discipline you are thoroughly unfamiliar with, How would you propose to distinguish fact from fiction?

I'll show you a rocket if you show me God, fair trade.

Similarly there are two general categories of theists -

1 - those who take belief in the facts by dint of authority ... much like (almost) any layman could say it is not a fact that we can teleport humans and travel faster than the speed of light.

2 - those who by dint of investigation, discipline snd action have a familiarity with the foundation of the issue and thus have a reservoir of knowledge drawn from experience

Slice it any way you want, a theist believes in a god. True there is a wide spectrum of theistic viewpoints. So take the one you're familiar with and tel me how you separate the fact from fiction.

 

[lightgigantic]

Suppose we take theology and we assume it is a field of discipline you are thoroughly unfamiliar with, How would you propose to distinguish fact from fiction?

I'll show you a rocket if you show me God, fair trade.

(Even if we want to work with mere rockets, as opposed to rocket science, namely the explanation of how they work and where they go in relation to orbits, propulsion systems, etc) OK I'm waiting

Show me a rocket
(and to keep in line with the stringent requirements of your OP, no texts allowed thankyou)

Slice it any way you want, a theist believes in a god. True there is a wide spectrum of theistic viewpoints. So take the one you're familiar with and tel me how you separate the fact from fiction.

I'll repeat this again just in case there is some problem with your web browser that caused you to miss it the first time around

If you want to further investigate the nature of the #2's experience, it requires a bit of groundwork in theory, terminology and the relationship between the terms.

For instance if one couldn't get one's head around atoms and the nature of their spinning, a discussion on laser cooling atoms would appear rooted in text, custom and ritual.

IOW try telling me something about laser cooling atoms that's within the purview of my (unqualified) direct perception that isn't relegated to text, etc.


As for the spectrum, its just as wide as any other field of knowledge - namely you have the persons establishing the findings and the persons who accept (or, as in your case, reject) it according to the degree that they esteem such persons

 

[lightgigantic]

The fact is, they don't. Spiritual experience is a fact, we are just starting to be able to measure the changes in brain activity associated with spiritual practices like meditation, but the metaphysical premises of theists are entirely subjective.

Your post is a good example of the folly in approaching a subject while bypassing the groundwork in theory, terminology and the relationship between the terms.

 

[spidergoat]

Oh please, I have studied religion for years. I don't know everything, but what great mystery are you talking about?

 

[lightgigantic]

Oh please, I have studied religion for years. I don't know everything, but what great mystery are you talking about?

Perhaps you can tell me

Whats the (apparently) entirely subjective connection between measurements in brain activity and spiritual practices like meditation?

/grabs popcorn

 

[Bishadi]

the mystery to share, that unravels the whole scope is

that mankind 'created' all words


that will enable each to comprehend, that ALL of us, can experience life, love, equality and even dejavu

but as well, every word we read as the UNDERLYING doctrine is also susceptable to error

ie... no man gave up a rib in his sleep, to make an eve.

that be fact

and nothing in all existence will undo a sin (bad/evil; action); another fact

my favorite FACT is: 'magic aint an option'

so before any kid ever is taught a belief, they must be given the opportunity, to know that no religious material is BY GOD's hand.

ie..not even the tablets have ever been found, and them supposedly were from the burning bush (plant: Euonymus alata)

Do believers base their facts on the most recent data culled from the sciences arena?

i believe the quakers are the closest to any sect that does (they claim, all can add, equally)

otherwise, 'from my experience' NO

 

[Bishadi]

Perhaps you can tell me

Whats the (apparently) entirely subjective connection between measurements in brain activity and spiritual practices like meditation?

/grabs popcorn

don;t forget the "peyote" to have 'that spiritual experience'

read up on timothy leary.............. he had bunches of them

 

[shichimenshyo]

the mystery to share, that unravels the whole scope is

that mankind 'created' all words


that will enable each to comprehend, that ALL of us, can experience life, love, equality and even dejavu

but as well, every word we read as the UNDERLYING doctrine is also susceptable to error

ie... no man gave up a rib in his sleep, to make an eve.

that be fact

and nothing in all existence will undo a sin (bad/evil; action); another fact

my favorite FACT is: 'magic aint an option'

so before any kid ever is taught a belief, they must be given the opportunity, to know that no religious material is BY GOD's hand.

ie..not even the tablets have ever been found, and them supposedly were from the burning bush (plant: Euonymus alata)

What? :bugeye:

 

[lightgigantic]

don;t forget the "peyote" to have 'that spiritual experience'

read up on timothy leary.............. he had bunches of them

sounds like a material experience .....

 

[shichimenshyo]

sounds like a material experience .....

Then what is a spiritual experience? Does it have to be completely removed from any and all physical interference?

 

[Bishadi]

What? :bugeye:

sorry, i know you like it simple and straight.

most of the religious follow their doctrine (and teach) as if GOD gave it to them (their prophets) etc.....

within most of the texts, torah, bible, quran, LDS specifically; god inspired and even sent angels (gabriel) direct, and that is where the literature came from. (per their own literature)

i have read most all of them

 

[lightgigantic]

Then what is a spiritual experience? Does it have to be completely removed from any and all physical interference?

well to begin with it isn't completely dependent on something that is ephemeral (like mescalin or the effects of it)

 

[shichimenshyo]

well to begin with it isn't completely dependent on something that is ephemeral (like mescalin or the effects of it)

Why couldn't a spiritual experience be a result of use of these kinds of substances?

 

[PsychoticEpisode]

(Even if we want to work with mere rockets, as opposed to rocket science, namely the explanation of how they work and where they go in relation to orbits, propulsion systems, etc) OK I'm waiting

Show me a rocket
(and to keep in line with the stringent requirements of your OP, no texts allowed thankyou)

Good Grief! This thread was intended for a person such as yourself to help a lesser being such as myself learn about how theists differentiate between fact & fiction. My reference to text may indicate that I am totally devoid of how to go about it. Since you are the resident expert then I think it falls upon your shoulders to enlighten us, not critique a style of questioning.

 

[lightgigantic]

Why couldn't a spiritual experience be a result of use of these kinds of substances?

If you're after experiences something like these, I guess you could.

I guess it all depends how one wants to play the word spiritual ... which again gets back to terminology, etc
:shrug:

 

[lightgigantic]

Good Grief! This thread was intended for a person such as yourself to help a lesser being such as myself learn about how theists differentiate between fact & fiction. My reference to text may indicate that I am totally devoid of how to go about it. Since you are the resident expert then I think it falls upon your shoulders to enlighten us, not critique a style of questioning.

The problem is that you required that there be no reference to text etc ... which effectively curtails any learning, regardless whether the subject is rocket science or theology.

 

[shichimenshyo]

If you're after experiences something like these, I guess you could.

I guess it all depends how one wants to play the word spiritual ... which again gets back to terminology, etc
:shrug:

I guess so. Now if we don't even have an agreed upon definition of what a spiritual experience is, then how can we go about determining the validity of any such experience as fact or fiction?