Billions of testimonials! Gee I didn't know. Perhaps you can calculate a Bayesian probability for the existence of spirits that have absolutely no energy in their composition, nor do they require energy in any way to perfom any of their energetic animations. Why bother with physics and neurology at all when there's billions of folks that have testified over the ages that all anyone needs to know is that animating spirits, created by god are what enables, drives and moves the nonliving material body.
"who made yours the signally "annointed vision" that shall finally establish the truth of reality, in light of the fact that human beings (in your judgment) have so miserably failed to do so down the ages?"
I use logic. Annoitment is not a logical operation as the councils and others believe when they use it to declare doctrine and fix mysteries as such forever.
"And it is only in the post-modern age that human beings are finally getting the hang of doing this "right?" "
Logic was around before, it just wasn't valued and used. Take the concept of the original sin for instance. It was declared doctrine by the Council of Orange. They declared that whoever rejects the doctrine is guilty of violating Ezekiel 18, the very Biblical chapter that contradicts the Council's declarations of this doctrine and proves it to be a complete falsehood.
Note that the councils of doctrine embrace post modernism's high value for the presence of inherent contradiction in their philosophical constructions.
"Do you want to expunge all of human experience and history on this basis, too, spunkets — or only that part of it that deals with God?"
The KISS principle applies. If the testimony conflicts with reality, it should not be regarded as evidence. In Deuteronomy Moses said God gave him the divorce laws. God later corrected that testimony and said it was not so. God said that what was so was that Moses gave the divorce laws, because of the hardness in the poeple's hearts.
What a strange, convoluted way to put the problem, spunkets! And so tendentious — a real "strawman" argument!
Where did I even suggest that "all anyone needs to know [is] that animating spirits, created by god are what enables, drives and moves the nonliving material body"? The implication being that I am personally "anti-science." So add to the strawman maneuver an ad hominum argument....
Why should I suppose you to be a good-faith correspondent on this issue?
The above italics is not an example of witness testimony from the human past that I alluded to. What I meant was such "records" as cultural and religious traditions; the great myths; written histories; poetry, literature and the arts in general; philosophy; and philosophy's offspring, systematic natural science.
These human activities have been going on for millennia. Do they become worthless because they do not correspond to the "expectations" — the "what everybody knows" doxa — of the thoroughly corrupt, degenerate post-modern climate of opinion, of which you seem to be a self-selected spokesman?
The "kultursmog consensus" utterly devalues the individual human person and all his works....