You're right. The difference is that in math we all share the same subjective experience. In religion there is more variation. (Although for the 90% who are theists, the variation is not as great as many suggest.) So while we can't agree, like we can in math, the "method of proof" is no less valid. I think you'll find that there is more variation than you care to admit. Your "90% theists" are divided into over 4,300 different faith groups, religions, sects, and denominations. (Source: http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.ht ml) There is even variations within those groups. So I think it's fair to say that your "proof" is nowhere near as valid.
Nevertheless, I know what I have intimately experienced over many years. And that is a reflection of objective reality that happens to be shared by billions of other people. I, and those other people, know something about reality that the rest are free to deny, but we still know it to be true. And the fact that you don't share that knowledge or possess the proof necessary to share it, doesn't make our knowledge somehow irrational or without proof. I remember a story about a Roster who believed that he could make the Sun rise. Every morning he would do his little cock-a-doodle-do and the Sun would rise. His objective reality was shared by the whole barn yard. But that didn't make it true, no matter how many believed it.
You are free to believe what you wish, but it is irrational.
Of course, at some point you have to rely on subjective information,but if we are going to argue on that level, then we can prove nothing, After all, you are just a butterfly dreaming you are a person and I don't really exist. At least not that you can objectively prove.
But we both know that's just silly.
In the case of the scientific method or math, it is easy to establish objectivity because EVERYONE'S subjective experience is the same. 2+2=4 no matter who looks at it. Gravity works the same for EVERYONE. Not so with God. Different people have different experiences. It is purely subjective with no objective consistency. You're subjective proof of God is no different from my subjective proof of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Did you even read my comment?
No, subjective proof is generally far stronger than objective proof. For example the proof of the validity of the scientific method, and the proof of the validity of the first principles of mathematics. No it's not.
You need to reread the definition of subjective. Unlike your "proof of the divine origin of scripture" the proofs of mathematics and the scientific method are repeatable and consistent.
There is no proof of divinity of diving scriptures. None. It's just wishful thinking on your part.
The thing about proof of spiritual matters is that it can only be presented subjectively. Thus, my proof of the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster has just as much weight as your proof, because it is subjective.
You are presenting a very weak case. Subjective evidence is shaky at best, and certainly falls far short of proof.
Slashdot Mirror
Seconded.
Of course, at some point you have to rely on subjective information,but if we are going to argue on that level, then we can prove nothing, After all, you are just a butterfly dreaming you are a person and I don't really exist. At least not that you can objectively prove.
But we both know that's just silly.
In the case of the scientific method or math, it is easy to establish objectivity because EVERYONE'S subjective experience is the same. 2+2=4 no matter who looks at it. Gravity works the same for EVERYONE. Not so with God. Different people have different experiences. It is purely subjective with no objective consistency. You're subjective proof of God is no different from my subjective proof of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
You need to reread the definition of subjective.
Unlike your "proof of the divine origin of scripture" the proofs of mathematics and the scientific method are repeatable and consistent.
There is no proof of divinity of diving scriptures. None. It's just wishful thinking on your part.
The Ancestor's Tale and The God Delusion should be required reading in American schools.