2009/5/18 omprem <[email protected]> > > OMPREM: To ask for objective proof of religious matter is merely to > assert the primacy of empiricism in areas that are totally beyond the > jurisdiction of empiricism. However, one can experience the truth of > the Divine by employing the methods suggested by the various > religions. >
In your experience, how reliable and trustworthy are these religious methods of knowing the truth of something? Have you found one particular method more accurate than another? It strikes me that the various religions out there have their own claims on truth and they very often contradict each other. Can you explain this? I understand why you would make some kind Gouldian appeal to non-overlapping magesteria. I'm interest to know whether you are actually strict about this in your own reasoning. Very often I see theists, when pushed to explain certain points, breaking NOMA... and thus disappearing in a puff of logic. Back to the drawing board, etc. Ian --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
