Cognitive Filters

[TRANSPONDER]

Originally Posted by hljc

It will be impossible to convince anointed in Christ believers that God is not real , as the living God lives on their spirit and is one with them ............. As these people would never forsake Jesus Christ

And, if they do they were never Really believers in the first place.

Originally Posted by Mr5150

See the below post. >>> I have seen many atheists jump thru hoops and tie themselves in knots in an effort to explain away real evidence.

See above post. ^^^

This is so true. All the arguments in the World don't match up to the power of the Holy Spirit. I know God is real.

I am certainly convinced that it comes down to Faith in he end...which, when you think about it, says that the evidence doesn't really stack up, or you wouldn't need to rely on Faith.

[Nozzferrahhtoo]

Originally Posted by bulmabriefs144

These are called mental filters. I could have hundreds of proofs (or disproofs, depending on how you see that article) of God, and someone wouldn't read it.

The operative words there being "could have". Because while you COULD have proofs of the claims you make on this forum..... your ongoing lack of presenting any of them makes it pretty clear you do NOT have them.

So.... as on a couple of other threads.... you are engaging in fantasy what-iffery.... in that you excuse your refusal to back up ANYTHING you say by simply imagining and making up peoples reactions to your evidence WERE you to present any. It is a cop out narrative employed by many on this forum, most notably JeffBase40.

Originally Posted by bulmabriefs144

Actually, bizarrely, in many cases they wouldn't SEE it. Their brain would just ignore it and pass on by. For instance, you ignored that link without reading, didn't you?

Wrong again. How are you always able to be wrong in EVERYTHING you say? It is a real skill. Clearly however the link is tongue in cheek and little, if anything, in it are meant to be ACTUAL evidences for god or anything like it.

Originally Posted by bulmabriefs144

That's all fine and good. But I'm saying most people have filters that prevent them from appropriately deciding when proof is good enough.

Some filters ARE required. other wise you would just accept anything. For example if I said YOU murdered OJ Simpsons wife and the evidence for this is that apples are green.... you clearly have a filter ( I would hope!!! ) that tells you instantly that this evidence is not only not good enough, but not applicable at all.

So I think we ALL have filters. What you have not done is shown that any one.... say me for example..... has the wrong filters or detrimental filters.

Because it can go two ways. You can sit there accusing people who do not buy the crap you are shoveling as being too filtered. But we can just as easily, and more validly as it happens given your offerings in the past, suggest you have filters that are not good enough. That you are accepting things as "evidence" for which there is NO reason on offer..... least of all from you..... to ACTUALLY consider as evidence for the things you are claiming.

Your issue however is that you apparently think for something to qualify as evidence.... you need only CALL it evidence, and job done.

[Call]

I happen to believe in God, and I have a certain amount of what I consider rational evidence (not only that there is God, but that He actually pays attention to what's going on and occasionally [?] intervenes). However, even though I responded to your post by clicking on the link, after reading about five or six of the "arguments," it became clear that it was not worth my time to even read them all, likewise not worth my time to respond logically to the five or six. Based on the first five or six consecutive non-starters, I reasonably concluded that the whole post is useless. You might want to consider editing, if in fact there is anything useful in the link. At present, I haven't seen anything supporting our position, because THE LINK made it that way.