Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Professor Wagstaff)
Newsgroups: net.religion,net.religion.christian
Subject: Re: what does it mean to talk to God [a brief attempt at an answer]
Message-ID: <680@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 12-Mar-85 21:17:56 EST
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.680
Posted: Tue Mar 12 21:17:56 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 13-Mar-85 04:08:21 EST
References: <893@topaz.ARPA> <2635@mcnc.UUCP> <> <366@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP>
Organization: Huxley College
Lines: 21
Keywords: Personal experience
Xref: watmath net.religion:5988 net.religion.christian:423

> A cute satire, but there's an important flaw here exists in a lot of
> what you and others say about the role of personal experience.  I've
> read a few dozen articles, the gist of which is, "what makes your
> experience any more valid that the experiences of {Rich Rosen,
> Buddhists, Ubizmologists, ...}?"  The difference is that mine aren't
> made-up examples.
> All that you're doing is saying, "See, I can make up an example of a
> personal experience that clearly has no relationship to reality.
> Therefore no personal experiences, including yours, can be used as
> the basis for anything."  Sorry, but I'm not convinced.

[FLAME ON]
How *DARE* you claim that I made up my example!!!  I really experienced
all the things I described, and who are YOU to claim that it's all
falsified or made-up????

Oh, I see, *you* can claim that MINE are made up, but I can't claim that
YOURS are made up.  Quite a double standard there.
-- 
"When you believe in things that you don't understand, you'll suffer.
 Superstition ain't the way."		Rich Rosen  ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr