Where do you go from here?

Justforfun000 · Post by **Justforfun000** » 2006-04-15 05:18pm

I've been debating with this girl for awhile on a blog board, and we are still relatively civil, and even though we're not quite meeting in the middle, we covered a lot of ground. This last bit back to me is making me reassess how I'm going to speak to her though.

Where do you go from this point when you are getting down to their personal experience mixed with bits and pieces of belief. I'm not stumped or anything, but I'm just not sure the best way to find a middle ground here.....

She last said to me:

[quote]Yes, but there isn't just 1
Yes, but there isn't just 1 isolated phenomena. Many scientists don't want to do studies that are religiously based because it can get controversial. One aspect of my religion is faith. You can't always rely on straight facts to believe something. If we needed 100% accurate facts for everything, people would know few things since there are so many accepted ideas that aren't 100% proven.

Another woman I met is a visionary from Medjugorje. Since she was a child, every single day Mary has appeared to her and told her the word of God. Sure, some people could fake that, but I just don't think so. She is the happiest looking woman I have ever seen in my entire life. She came to our church once and during her speech, Mary appeared to her. It was amazing. She just dropped to her knees and started praying in her language. I doubt you'll believe this, either, but I do not feel that she has lied about everything since she was a child.

Once in our Eucharistic adoration chapel, I myself smelled roses, which is a sign of Mary's presence. My entire youth group was there, but I was the only person who smelled this. You'll probably say it's only in my mind, but I can't just fake something like that with my mind.

Catholicism is one of the only religions who honor the Blessed Virgin Mary, which is why I feel that Catholicism is so special. She's Christ's mother, but most Protestant religions just see her for her womb. God would not choose and unfit woman to carry His son.

Mary is the only mortal who has never sinned. She is also the only being who the devil is terrified of and will never go near. I have been consecrated to Mary, so I wear the Miraculous Medal every day and it definitely helps me through my daily things. If you put a Miraculous Medal near a person who is possessed by the devil, it will literally fly away from the person.

At my youth group a priest did a talk about exorcisms and it's so scary all of the things he's seen. I don't think he's lying. You might, but I don't.

I just don't feel that all these people who are proclaiming God's miracles are lying or just fooled.

peppermintfrost – Sat, 04/15/2006 – 1:51pm
Reply
Your name:
Kpartington

Justforfun000 · Post by **Justforfun000** » 2006-04-15 05:18pm

Shit. I erased my quote tag by accident. Could a mod fix please?

Post by **Surlethe** » 2006-04-15 05:38pm

I would continue by pointing out that simply because someone believes it doesn't make it true. Her friend may believe Mary speaks to her every day, but that doesn't make it objective truth; you could, for example, reason by analogy that you believe the God-Emperor of Man watches over you and protects you from the Xeno scum, but that doesn't make it true, even if you actively pray to Him every day.

In this debate, it looks like there's eventually going to be a point where you'll have to identify the isolated cases of "miracles", etc., with fraud or delusion, and it may be impossible to preserve the civil tone after that: even the most honest Christians tend to balk at being called delusional.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-04-15 05:43pm

Yes, but there isn't just 1 isolated phenomena. Many scientists don't want to do studies that are religiously based because it can get controversial. One aspect of my religion is faith. You can't always rely on straight facts to believe something. If we needed 100% accurate facts for everything, people would know few things since there are so many accepted ideas that aren't 100% proven.

This seems to be the crux of her argument right here, and really a common and vastly overused argument fundies seem to enjoy. First, scientists generally have little problems with controversy. Quantum Mechanics vs Newtonian Mechanics, for example. And Hawking's theories on black holes. Plus the various alternative evolution mechanisms (obviously, not YECs or ID).

For the most part though science isn't concerned so much about being 100% accurate as it is being as close to the mark as possible, with the most accurate explanations, then adjusts as necessary when new data comes into play.

kc8tbe · Post by **kc8tbe** » 2006-04-16 12:22am

If you want to maintain a positive, personal relationship with this person then you should "agree to disagree" and move on. It is rare that a person will change her worldview based on the arguments of others. Hope that she will come to the correct conclusion on her own.

Or, you could tear apart her argument point by point

Yes, but there isn't just 1 isolated phenomena. Many scientists don't want to do studies that are religiously based because it can get controversial.

The main reason scientists don't do religious studies is because most religious claims are non-falsifiable and thus not science. Such things are better left to clergy. Of course, a few religious claims are falsifiable and, if falsified, would create quite some controversy. Many such religious claims, such as those in the fields of geology, astronomy, and biology, have actually been studies quite rigorously by many scientists.

One aspect of my religion is faith. You can't always rely on straight facts to believe something. If we needed 100% accurate facts for everything, people would know few things since there are so many accepted ideas that aren't 100% proven.

Actually, nothing is 100% absolutely proven (except for negations of inconsistencies); i.e. there are no married bachelors) yet somehow we all manage to get on with life. For example, I do not know with 100% certainty that my reply to this post will not set of global thermonuclear war. But I do know this with 99% certainty. Having "faith" in things we are faily certain of (i.e. science) is rational. Having faith in things we are faily uncertain of (i.e. religion) is irrational.

Another woman I met is a visionary from Medjugorje. Since she was a child, every single day Mary has appeared to her and told her the word of God. Sure, some people could fake that, but I just don't think so. She is the happiest looking woman I have ever seen in my entire life. She came to our church once and during her speech, Mary appeared to her.

What about all the people who sincerely believe they have been abducted by UFO's since they were children? Do you believe them too? What about Muslim clerics who claim to have personally spoken to the prophet Muhammed? Many would give up their lives based on this belief. As a Christian, do you believe that Muhammed has spoken with them? How do you separate this woman from those other people?

She just dropped to her knees and started praying in her language. I doubt you'll believe this, either, but I do not feel that she has lied about everything since she was a child.

Just because you "feel" something doesn't mean it's right. Feelings, which are manifestations of our intuitions and instincts, are often correct. But they aren't always. I have been dissapointed by my feelings many times, and if you think hard enough you will probably remember times your feelings have been wrong too.

Once in our Eucharistic adoration chapel, I myself smelled roses, which is a sign of Mary's presence. My entire youth group was there, but I was the only person who smelled this. You'll probably say it's only in my mind, but I can't just fake something like that with my mind.

I personally smell things when I think about them, although I'm aware that most people don't do this. There are plausible explanations for your olfactory experience that do not involve the Virgin Mary. But suppose you actually did "psychically" smell roses; how do you know it was the Virgin Mary and not the Goddess Venus?

Mary is the only mortal who has never sinned.

The Jews interpret the Old Testament as mentioning six mortals before Christ who never sinned.

She is also the only being who the devil is terrified of and will never go near. I have been consecrated to Mary, so I wear the Miraculous Medal every day and it definitely helps me through my daily things. If you put a Miraculous Medal near a person who is possessed by the devil, it will literally fly away from the person.

Can you support any of these claims? Can you construct an experiment that would falsify any of these claims? If not, that does not mean that your claims are false. It does mean that your claims are at best unscientific and at worst irrational.

At my youth group a priest did a talk about exorcisms and it's so scary all of the things he's seen. I don't think he's lying. You might, but I don't.

Just because you think something doesn't make it right. It's ok to make a hypothesis that turns out to be wrong. Learn to challenge and evaluate your own ideas!

I just don't feel that all these people who are proclaiming God's miracles are lying or just fooled.

What about all the people of other religions who proclaim their God(s)'s miracles (most of which are inconsistent with your God's miracles) are true? Are all of them being fooled? How to you separate the faith of the tenants of your religion from the faith of the tenants of other religions?

Zero · Post by **Zero** » 2006-04-16 09:34am

She's not going to change her mind. She's making that clear. If your intent is to argue with her, then do as others have said above. Point out that other religions have claims of miracles as well, that faith is meaningless in assessing whether something is true or not, that only the faithful have ever witnessed miracles, all of which indicates that faith gives a skewed version of reality. However, none of this will really hit her, and it doesn't seem entirely important anyways.

If she's a fundie that was arguing for the validity of creationism and YECism, or maybe that homosexuals are evil, then you can point out that none of this is relevant to the original point, or that even if isolated miracles indicate that a religion may have some validity, that doesn't mean all things that religion believes in are true. If you're just arguing that she should be an atheist too, then why bother? She seems relatively happy with her faith, and if she doesn't take any outlandish positions, it seems that she's harmless with it as well. If that's so (which I honestly have no idea about), then trying to convert her to an atheist is pointless, and would probably make her unhappy anyways.

Molyneux · Post by **Molyneux** » 2006-04-16 11:41am

kc8tbe wrote:
Mary is the only mortal who has never sinned.
The Jews interpret the Old Testament as mentioning six mortals before Christ who never sinned.

Umm...who, if I may ask?
And just for clarity's sake, members of the Jewish faith generally do not believe that Jesus never sinned, either. He was a normal human, if he existed.

kc8tbe · Post by **kc8tbe** » 2006-04-16 01:07pm

Molyneux: My error. Apparently, there are only four (not six) men who have never sinned -- at least according to the Talmud. I could find no mention of Jesse's sinlessness in either book of Samuel, so this is probably a Rabbinic interpretation.

Refer to Wikipedia. The other three men are Benjamin son of Jacob, Chileab son of David (must run in the family), and Amran son of Kohath.

Molyneux · Post by **Molyneux** » 2006-04-16 06:39pm

kc8tbe wrote:Molyneux: My error. Apparently, there are only four (not six) men who have never sinned -- at least according to the Talmud. I could find no mention of Jesse's sinlessness in either book of Samuel, so this is probably a Rabbinic interpretation.

Refer to Wikipedia. The other three men are Benjamin son of Jacob, Chileab son of David (must run in the family), and Amran son of Kohath.

Interesting...realistically unlikely, but interesting. I just find it hard to believe that any human, as humans now exist, could fail to sin at least once in a full lifespan - unless, of course, one did absolutely nothing in that time.