Subjective Evidence of Gods

quote:

---

This is rule 5 from the Forum Guidelines:

​

5. Bare links with no supporting discussion should be avoided. Make the argument in your own words and use links as supporting references.

​

Those links which I have followed did not support your point in any discernible way, so if you think they support your point of view then it is incumbent upon you to explain how. What kind of discussion would it be if everyone just posted links? It might look like this:

​

"This says your wrong: http://www.creationistsRus.com."

​

"But this says we're right: http://www.evolutionistsRus.com."

​

"But that ignores the points raised in this link: http://www.evolutionistsRdumb.com."

​

"That link is full of fallacies, described here: http://www.creationistsRfallacious.com"

​

So please, include the evidence supporting your position in your messages and construct your own arguments around that evidence, using links only as references.

---

quote:

---

A Jain version of the story says that six blind men were asked to determine what an elephant looked like by feeling different parts of the elephant's body. The blind man who feels a leg says the elephant is like a pillar; the one who feels the tail says the elephant is like a rope; the one who feels the trunk says the elephant is like a tree branch; the one who feels the ear says the elephant is like a hand fan; the one who feels the belly says the elephant is like a wall; and the one who feels the tusk says the elephant is like a solid pipe.

​

A king explains to them:

​

"All of you are right. The reason every one of you is telling it differently is because each one of you touched the different part of the elephant. So, actually the elephant has all the features you mentioned."

​

This resolves the conflict, and is used to illustrate the principle of living in harmony with people who have different belief systems, and that truth can be stated in different ways

​

Blind men and an elephant

---