this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
63 points (81.2% liked)
Asklemmy
48751 readers
468 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm LDS some people might call us Mormon.
The short of it is I asked God and I felt his presence. Not like any earthly feeling, more like the burning the bible / new testament describes.
But even without any of that I'd still have believed / known. I just, always have if that makes sense? I might've gone a different direction in my beliefs but I'd still have known he's there.
I have always wanted to ask someone who has this opinion how they confront the knowledge that people from every religion have felt the same thing? Some people have felt this way multiple times about mutually exclusive faiths.
That's one of the largest things that led me to be an agnostic atheist (meaning I don't claim to have knowledge, and I hold no belief in a god; I don't disbelieve, it's the ascence of belief). I was raised non-denomination Christian, but I had a good Buddhist friend in high school. It made me curious about other faiths, and they're almost all mutually exclusive, yet every one has people certain they're correct. What are the odds I was born to a family that believed the correct one?
I'm not self-centered enough to believe I'm special and all the other people are just unlucky, so the result is that it's most likely I wasn't born lucky, and neither was anyone else. So many religions have faded out of existence, so the odds are if any are correct they don't exist anymore. Why would I think I happen to find the right one?
I know this is unlikely, but I'd be interested to hear an actual opinion about how that feels, not hearing about what you're supposed to believe (which I've heard before). I think it's interesting to know if it makes others feel the same way I once did or not.
This is why a "feeling" should not be the reason you convert to a religion. You should be skeptical of Christians that argue their conversion on feelings alone. I certainly had feelings that I attribute to the Holy Spirit when I was an inquiring Christian but I frankly tried to ignore or diminish them to stay sober minded. Relying entirely on emotionalism or charism is historically discouraged as you could just as easily be swayed by demonic forces (e.g. prelest). It's one of many critiques of charismatic Protestantism and the LDS church.
Everyone on earth that has adopted or converted to any religion has done so with a feeling as their reason. Nobody has ever converted due to cold hard facts or some research on the afterlife. Proof is unexisting by definition of faith.
Assertion
Applying material requirements to the metaphysical and transcendental
Transcendental Argument for God makes an affirmative pre-suppositional argument for God.
I.. Yes? That's a correct interpretation, but you denied an answer to me. Or perhaps I misunderstood your position, that nobody should ever convert or consider any religion?
I'm saying that your assertion isn't justified (e.g. it's just a subjective opinion). That you can't expect to apply the scientific method to something that transcends the material world and that there are indeed logical arguments for why someone should believe in God as opposed to not believing in God.
I'm an Orthodox Christian.
I don't think you're correct with your argument. Why would someone choose any particular religion? That's the argument. There is no logical argument for that. There are arguments for choose one in general, although logically very flawed. Still, there's no logical argument I'm aware of to choose a specific one.
There is argumentation beyond the transcendental argument to believe, for example, the Christian God. It has to do with prophesy, metaphysics, theology etc
So... Feelings. I would really like to explore this rationale in your mind. Nobody should convert or join any religion on feelings. Yet, prophecy, metaphysics, theology.. So the edge of scientific reasoning but just slightly outside? Or because their father and mother practice it?
To prove you have any good faith in your "critique". State my argument back to me.
My refute: it is always feelings, the alternative is science
Can you explain?
Then the other person stated how there is no logical argument, that you have to use "feelings" (explaining again the same refutal)
What we refer to then is feelings?
This is this discussion so far from my viewpoint. To add to that, I have to say also that it is clearly triggering for you and difficult to discuss. I don't mind but take a breather whenever. It makes for a better quality enlightenment.
( Small aside: The supposition that we don't use science in matters of theology and metaphysics is very important to examine. What do we use? )
Ironically you tried to push this back in my face as if I'm some pedant when it's the most pragmatic way to make sure we aren't talking past one another. If you just said "I have no idea" it would have been a better response.
I've had some great discussions in this thread and everyone is better for it. You haven't bothered to even understand what I'm arguing though so this exchange is a waste of time.
Classic run away tactic. Not even one response just more personal attacks. Okay thanks for trying! It was pretty unpleasant to talk to you.
I never personally attacked you.
You don't really understand what personal attacks means, do you?
I know what asserting without evidence means.
Yeah, because that's what all religious practicioners engage in at every point of their study. I just haven't ever heard someone whine at others for doing so without evidence, since from our adolescence we learn that people don't come back from or report from any afterlife making every single belief about it a guess, aka belief. I don't know what you are smoking to hold these in your head simultaneously but it seems intensely frustrating honestly.
Does your Dad know that you're making epistemologically unjustified arguments on the internet?