Debate me one on one

[Swami]

I am willing to debate one on one on the topic of religious experience and conversion. I accept that that religious experience is able to convert materialists/atheists to religion (or questioning materialism). I have the evidence for this.

Post: each person gets 2 posts

Does any Hardline materialist and atheists want to disagree with my evidence? You don't believe experience can convert??

[Divine Insight]

Does any Hardline materialist and atheists want to disagree with my evidence? You don't believe experience can convert??

Of course it can. But the problem is that it goes both ways. A lot of ex-theists had previously been "converted" to theism via an "experience". But it wasn't a permanent conversion. And if it's not permanent then it ultimately must not have been all that compelling after all.

There are tons of examples of this. In fact, there's a whole society of Pastors who have become atheists.

So this isn't "evidence" for much of anything other than humans can be emotionally persuaded to believe in outrageous things. Ask any secular psychologist. This isn't the slightest bit unusual.

So what's the big deal?

So ultimately I don't disagree with you that people can be emotionally persuaded to believe outrageous things.

But is it evidence for what they had been emotionally persuaded to believe?

Clearly not, and I have PROOF!

Where's the proof? It's in the fact that people have been emotionally moved "by their experiences" to become believers in all manner of religions. In fact, there are even people who have claimed to have experienced fairies. And that's no joke.

If this were only true of one specific religion AND if people who were emotionally moved by experience to believe in it NEVER stopped believing, then you'd have some evidence for something. But those criteria are not met. Therefore all you have evidence for is that humans can be emotionally moved to believe things for a while.

Nothing new there. I wouldn't argue against that.

[Jagella]

I accept that that religious experience is able to convert materialists/atheists to religion (or questioning materialism). I have the evidence for this.

...

Does any Hardline materialist and atheists want to disagree with my evidence? You don't believe experience can convert??

I'll need to see your evidence, but for now I think that a "religious experience" might get some atheists to believe in a god. I understand that some atheists have converted to Christianity as a result of near-death experiences, for example.

[Swami]

[Replying to post 2 by Divine Insight]

"So ultimately I don't disagree with you that people can be emotionally persuaded to believe outrageous things.

But is it evidence for what they had been emotionally persuaded to believe? "

The experiences I refer to involve more than just "emotions". They involve perceptual experiences that are induced through an objective method that filters out the mind. If you experienced yourself you would have known this. Instead you rely on the opinions of others to tell you what the experiences are

Your Western psychologist determine what's valid experience based on ideology and not by examining experience itself.

[Swami]

[Replying to post 3 by Jagella]

NDEs are part of my evidence. I want to debate anyone who thinks religious experiences can never convert an atheist.

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 2 by Divine Insight]

"So ultimately I don't disagree with you that people can be emotionally persuaded to believe outrageous things.

But is it evidence for what they had been emotionally persuaded to believe? "

The experiences I refer to involve more than just "emotions". They involve perceptual experiences that are induced through an objective method that filters out the mind. If you experienced yourself you would have known this. Instead you rely on the opinions of others to tell you what the experiences are

Your Western psychologist determine what's valid experience based on ideology and not by examining experience itself.

But now look at how your argument instantly falls apart. The moment we talk about someone who was converted to a religion via a religious experience but then later recanted, you'll just argue that their experience wasn't "real".

Also, you seem to have totally avoided the issue that people who claim to have strong religious experiences do so in the context of many different religions.

Here's just a couple contradictory examples.

Generically speaking there are Christians who make the claim that they have had undeniably religious experiences. However, they also claim that those experiences include God confirming to them that the Christian Bible is true and that Jesus is indeed his Son.

But wait! There are also Muslims who claim that they have had profound religious experiences that may even have included seeing Muhammad in a vision or whatever, and they have had the experience Allah confirming that the Quran is true verbatim, and no one told them that Jesus was the Son of God.

So now what are you going to argue? That only one of these people had a "true" religious experience?

~~~~~

Here's another contradictory example.

Some Christians, Bishop Carlton Pearson as an example, have had a profound religious experience that God insured them that there is no such place as hell, and that the whole concept is being misunderstood by Orthodox Christianity.

But then the contradiction! There are also Christians who claim to have had extreme religious experience of actually being taken to hell in a dream and assured by God or Angles that hell is indeed very real. They even describe the horrors they saw while there and insist that no one would want to go there.

So who's right? They clearly can't both be right.

So your argument that these kinds of anecdotes are evidence for anything simply doesn't hold water.

You would need to side with only one specific experience and accuse all the others of being faked.

So this can never be made to work for you. All you are doing is displaying the fact that you don't understand what constitutes credible evidence. If you have to pick and choose which stories you accept as being true and which ones you reject as being false, then you don't have any evidence for anything.

Is there a hell or not? We have people who claim to have had profound religious experiences reporting conflicting answers. They can't both be true.

What do you do now? Concede that you've lost the debate? I certainly hope so.

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 3 by Jagella]

NDEs are part of my evidence. I want to debate anyone who thinks religious experiences can never convert an atheist.

And exactly where on earth would you expect to find anyone who would debate against that. Of course people who believe to have had a religious experience will convert to whatever they believe the experience was telling them.

This doesn't only apply to atheists. In fact I recall an interview I once heard on the radio where a person was describing their conversion from Christianity to Islam based on a supposed religious experience they believe they had. So this doesn't just occur to atheists. Religious people do it to.

I don't think anyone would try to argue that people aren't influenced by experiences they believe they have had.

Edited to Add:

The real debate would be whether people being influenced by experiences amounts to "evidence" for what they believe they had experienced.

I think I have already demonstrated the fallacy of that conclusion. Some people claim to have experienced God assuring them there is no hell, while other people claim to have had the experience of having been given a tour through hell.

They can't both be right.

So these kinds of imagined experiences aren't evidence for anything. Q.E.D.

[Swami]

[Replying to post 3 by Jagella]

NDEs are part of my evidence. I want to debate anyone who thinks religious experiences can never convert an atheist.

And exactly where on earth would you expect to find anyone who would debate against that. Of course people who believe to have had a religious experience will convert to whatever they believe the experience was telling them.

This doesn't only apply to atheists. In fact I recall an interview I once heard on the radio where a person was describing their conversion from Christianity to Islam based on a supposed religious experience they believe they had. So this doesn't just occur to atheists. Religious people do it to.

I don't think anyone would try to argue that people aren't influenced by experiences they believe they have had.

Edited to Add:

The real debate would be whether people being influenced by experiences amounts to "evidence" for what they believe they had experienced.

I think I have already demonstrated the fallacy of that conclusion. Some people claim to have experienced God assuring them there is no hell, while other people claim to have had the experience of having been given a tour through hell.

They can't both be right.

So these kinds of imagined experiences aren't evidence for anything. Q.E.D.

The real question for me is if experience has the power to convert, then why have some skeptics here taken issue with my asking them to experience? They should first experience before being critical, and then they can convert from atheism.

[Divine Insight]

The real question for me is if experience has the power to convert, then why have some skeptics here taken issue with my asking them to experience? They should first experience before being critical, and then they can convert from atheism.

What are you asking them to experience? God?

And besides who do you think you are kidding at this point?

You have totally avoided the facts that I have presented.

Some people claim to have had religious experience that confirmed to them there there is no Hell. Other people claim to have had religious experience where they were given a tour of Hell and were assured that it is real.

So what do you do now?

Who's right? Those who claim to have experienced confirmation that there is no Hell? Or those who claim to have experienced a tour through Hell?

You are going to need to choose which of these two groups had a "Real Religious Experience" and which group was just imagining things in their own minds.

So what do you end up with?

Evidence for no Hell?

Or Evidence for Hell?

I think it should be clear at this point that you don't have any evidence for anything other than people tend to imagine different things when it comes to religious ideas.

You claim that meditation is the key.

What about those who meditate and are assured through meditation that there is no Hell. And others who also meditate are assured through meditation that there is indeed a Hell.

What do you do then? Take sides and claim that only the group you prefer to side with had a "Real Experience" while the other group must be mistaken?

The fallacy of your claims are obvious. You are demanding to have evidence for things for which you have no evidence at all.

And your avoidance to address this issue is obvious to all the readers here.

You have totally avoided the issue that people who claim to have had religious experiences come back from those experiences with totally conflicting opinions.

Is there a hell or not?

Who can say? People who have had religious experiences are making both of these contradictory claims. They can't both be right.

Are you going to address this issue? Or just blissfully pretend you didn't see it?

Readers are watching.

[Swami]

The real question for me is if experience has the power to convert, then why have some skeptics here taken issue with my asking them to experience? They should first experience before being critical, and then they can convert from atheism.

What are you asking them to experience? God?

And besides who do you think you are kidding at this point?

I am recommending for all to experience the same thing that scientists are after, consciousness. The only difference is that the experience is of consciousness in its pure form or state. I find that all matter in its purest form, that is, without any mental constructs, without the filter of our senses, are all manifestations of consciousness . Call this realization God.

You have totally avoided the facts that I have presented.

Some people claim to have had religious experience that confirmed to them there there is no Hell. Other people claim to have had religious experience where they were given a tour of Hell and were assured that it is real.

So what do you do now?

You keep saying I am totally avoiding the facts, but I can also say that you're completely avoiding my point. I can explain all of this to you in the most reasonable terms and most would still not completely believe or understand what I'm saying. This is the limitations of "rhetoric" in debate. This is why I recommend understanding my point through 'practical' knowledge (gained from experience). This will answer all of your objections.

I am willing to engage you in 2 posts in the head-to-head section, to further prove my point that mystical or religious experience can convince you to leave your atheism.