You can say I shouldn't believe in God. However, the burden of proof is on YOU if you want to convince me of that. Don't misunderstand what I am saying. Please let me be clear before jumping to conclusions saying I don't understand how the burden of proof works (although admittedly, I still have some work to do on it, and who knows, perhaps this point will instead just show how little I understand it). I am not trying to convince YOU that God exists. I am stating that God exists. My evidence is personal experiences with him. I have my evidence that shows ME he is real.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
If I claim that I can fly and my proof is that I have personally experienced lifting up in the air and flying, is the burden of proof on you? Do you have to prove that I cannot fly instead of me having to prove that I can? And if you cannot prove that I cannot fly, does that mean you cannot question my ability to fly? Of course not because that would be silly.
If you look at all the things Religions claims to be truth without any proof (how modern science understands the term), the claims are clearly extraordinary and equivalent of me claiming I can fly or turn invisible.
Like you yourself kind of said, you don't understand how burden of proof works.
Well, actually, you're using a bad analogy. He said he's not trying to make you believe in God. So, in your analogy, if you aren't trying to convince me that you can fly(just saying you know you can), and I honestly don't care, there's no problem. If I believe you're insane and wrong, and that you're going to hurt yourself and maybe others because of this mad belief, then it's up to me to try and get you some form of help, whether it's to try and talk to you logically, or whatever.
I don't understand that logic. So you are saying that as long as I don't try to convert anyone to my beliefs about religion, aliens, etc., I can pretty much say whatever I want and people just have to accept it?
If someone says to me that the earth is flat, should I just stay quiet? If I gave him scientific evidence that earth is
not flat, am I doing something wrong?
I think that whether or not someone is trying to convert me, if an extraordinary claim is made, I have the right (or even the responsibility) to question that claim, especially when it was posted on a public forum. Finding the truth is important. If everyone just came up with their own reality, most debates would be pointless and we would never advance to the next level in evolution.
If you post a claims like that on a public forum, you should be able to back it up because others will question that extraordinary claim. You are incorrectly using the word "evidence" which implies something was either proved or disproved. Your own personal experiences with God prove nothing else but the fact that you think you experienced something with God. Now why you think that can be explained in many non-supernatural ways (see my earlier post), all of which are much more likely than some divine intervention.
To me this topic sounds a bit like: "I have no actual evidence that God exists but he does because I say so and I don't care what anyone else says". I guess you are entitled to that opinion but it's kind of weird to post something like that on a public forum. You clearly are not interested in having a debate about it and only want to say that you will believe what you believe no matter what happens or what kind of actual evidence is shown. Even the title suggests that this is your "final word" on the existence of God. The picture below fits pretty well here:
I have actually posted experiences I have had at different times in the forum. All you have said is that you think it is hallucination ect. You ask me if I have considered what I believe to be fake (which I have), so I am going to ask you, could it be that you are the one that has not considered the opinion contrary to what you believe?
I use the scientific approach where I rule out different possibilities by moving from the most logical explanation to the most extraordinary one. If you for example claim that you see angels on a daily basis, I would probably tell you to go see a doctor to determine if there is something physically or mentally wrong with you because seeing angels is not something people usually experience. I'm guessing that you have not seen a doctor after your supernatural experiences, and before you do, there's very little point in me even considering the more extraordinary explanations. It's like if I get a headache, I won't consider "maybe aliens planted something in my head?" before I have seen a doctor and ruled out all other medical explanations.
Difference between atheists and religious people is that atheist will get to the truth eventually, even if that truth is against all logic. If God spoke to me, I would run to the nearest hospital. If after months of testing and treatment, doctors couldn't explain it but I would still hear the voice, I would probably convert to that religion because it would be the only explanation left.
Religious people on the other hand might never get to the truth because they tend to skip the most logical reasons, go straight to "God did it", and keep that theory for the rest of their lives no matter how much contradictory evidence is shown.
Funny part is that even if you provide 100% full-proof evidence that what happened was non-supernatural, it can still be explained by a general "God made it happen" because that can be said about anything without having to provide any kind of evidence whatsoever. That is usually the part where I end the discussion because it's pointless to go any further.
If I had a supernatural experience where aliens abducted me and took me to their home planet, I would try to find a rational explanation for it. Was I dreaming? Did someone drug me? Am I sick? Am I suffering from delusions? etc. No matter how real the experience was to me, it is very likely that there is a simple rational explanation behind it.
The problem is that many religious people refuse to try to find these rational explanations and instead go directly to the supernatural. They do that because it strengthens their belief and makes them feel special because God interacts with them directly. When a religious person survives cancer, it's always God who saved them, not the skilled doctors.
I went through a time in my life where I did not consider myself a christian. I decided to ignore the teachings that I was brought up with, and when I did, God showed himself to me even clearer than ever. Thats when I went from wanting to be a game designer, to wanting to become a youth pastor (low income ftw). I also pretty much do the opposite as to what you are implying religious people do. I actually test my faith quite often. I want to understand what I believe, and why I believe. I also challenge my youth to do the same. I will read things that oppose my view, and visit evangelical atheist sites quite often to test my faith, and always end up strengthened because I come to a new understanding. Also note, I am only replying to the things you said. I am trying to keep true to the point of this article, and (in this one topic at least) not trying to convert anyone, but instead just answering opposing viewpoints.
No offense, but because you are a youth pastor, I would seriously question your objectivity in all religious matters. It is very likely that when something unexpected happens, you would see it as God reaching out to you as opposed to something more trivial like pure chance. Religion looks to be very important to you and it probably even (at least partly) defines you as a person, which is why you unknowingly keep trying to find God in everyday situations. It's basic human psychology.
The way I see it, people will believe whatever they want to believe. If you for example survived some kind of ordeal and was convinced that it was God who saved you, no amount of logic or proof would ever make you think otherwise. No matter what happens or how much the evidence keeps piling up, deep inside you
know the truth, which is basically what this whole topic is about.
Of course I am just guessing because I don't know you in real life, but I think I am correct based on my previous experiences with religious people.
I have always found it weird that when people make extraordinary claims, like being abducted by aliens, they usually get laughed at and labeled as nutjobs, but when a person claims to have seen angels or that God talks to them, it's suddenly ok because it's all part of a religion.
