The biggest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he was God. Then Jesus came along and started saving people from Hell by selling their souls to the Devil.
…it’s probably the crack talking, not him!
…drugs typing? now that’s just crazy talk!
Impious is trying to say that all those religious people are being good in vain!
Ahh. The power of non-empirical “truths”. We can’t know that the statement in the first post is necessarily false (as we certainly can’t “prove” it’s truth or falsity based upon sensory experience alone)—so it might be true…which would serve to cause those who are uncertain or questioning of the “true” nature of reality to go: “Hmmm…maybe?”
Reality is, after all, that which you’re convinced exists.
Jay M. Brewer
superchristianity.com
Does this mean that people who sincerely believe that they are Napoleon Bonaparte, really are Napoleon Bonaparte?
And that people who become convinced that they can fly like birds when they jump from ledges of tall buildings, really can fly like birds when they jump from ledges of tall buildings?
Another problem with believing that reality is only a matter of subjectivity is this: How can the same thing be both one way and another way at the same time?
Say, for instance, that I see a white blob hovering in the distant gloaming and I am convinced that I see a sheet on a clothesline; but someone else who sees the same white blob is convinced that he sees a ghost.
Are we both correct? Can the same white blob be both a sheet and a ghost at the same time?
Reality Check, the obvious answer is that it’s a matter of perspective. If you believe you are Napoleon Bonaparte, then, in your idea of reality, you are in fact Napoleon Bonaparte. However, the men in white coats sincerely believe you aren’t Napoleon Bonaparte, so in their respective realities, this is also fact. The trickier question is whether or not, in some truly ‘objective’ reality, you are Napoleon Bonaparte. Regardless, it can stand that you are definitely Napoleon and definitely not Napoleon.
My “idea” of reality is only my interpretation of reality. My interpretation of reality can be wrong, but reality itself cannot be wrong. I either really am Napoleon Bonaparte and correctly believe myself to be Napoleon Bonaparte OR I am not Napoleon Bonaparte despite my incorrect belief that I am Napoleon Bonaparte. One thing is certain: I cannot both be and not be Napoleon Bonaparte at the same time in the same context.
I think it’s probably more accurate to say “. . . in their respective interpretations of reality,” not “. . . in their respective realities.”
I don’t think so. It is definitely true that no one can convincingly argue that I am both Napoleon Bonaparte and not Napoleon Bonaparte at the same time in the same context because to do so violates one of the laws that make convincing argument possible in the first place, namely, the law of non-contradiction [~(p & ~p)]. If a proposition can be both true and false at the same time then no conclusion can be successfully argued for.
AA, if one’s interpretation of reality is the same thing as reality, then does one’s sincere belief that one can fly like a bird after leaping from the 25th floor of a skyscraper mean that one can really fly like a bird after leaping from the 25th floor of a skyscraper?
I do understand the irony of the OP 
and the fact that the religious could be being good in vain, but if that goodness is innate: then they cannot help but be good, but their souls are destined for hell 
Reality Check: No, I meant in different contexts, or different interpretations of reality. Hence “idea of reality.” Your reality is your interpretation of reality.
Anyone may interpret reality in any way he wishes but this doesn’t change reality. Things are only the way they are and are not necessarily the way that we think or hope or wish they were. Reality and beliefs about reality are two different things.
In concrete terms this means that in the case of the person who sincerely believes that he can fly like a bird if he jumps from the ledge of the 25th floor of a skyscraper, his “idea of reality” will not affect by one iota the fact that he will come crashing down to the pavement below like a stone – that’s reality. Mine, yours, his.
In my “idea of reality” I may believe that he will be suspended in mid-air when he jumps. In his “idea of reality” he may believe that he will fly like a bird.In your “idea of reality” he may come crashing down to the pavement like a stone.
But in “reality,” should he take that leap, he will not do all three. In “reality,” at any given point in time, he will EITHER be suspended in midair OR fly like a bird OR come crashing down to the pavement. That’s reality. Reality is the way things are, regardless of one’s belief about the way things are.
Reply to Reality Check:
Despite the fact that, to an extent, Alun Aedicita answered your questions for me, I was being somewhat rhetorical. Reality is, to an extent, what an individual is convinced exists…regardless of the nature of reality independent of anyone’s belief and perception. This is what I meant. In the context of the opening post created by Impious, his assertion that God is really the Devil, and Jesus is converting all men to the Devil’s service, is an example of this (if such a hypothesis is believed): non-empirical states of affairs, given that they cannot be proven to be true or false, can safely exist as their own “reality” independent of the objective truth behind the situation. Playing Devil’s advocate on the side of atheism, one can claim that this is how belief in God can continue to safely exist.
I understand all that. I just wish you guys wouldn’t say that reality is subjective when clearly what you mean is that interpretaions of reality are subjective. Maybe devils exist. Maybe devils do not exist. But whichever actually is the case, the other, then, is not the case.
One thing that we know is that in external reality devils either exist or they don’t exist but that they don’t both at the same time exist and not exist any more than I can both at the same time fly like a bird from the 25th floor of a skyscraper and not fly like a bird from the 25th floor of a skyscraper.
Nice title, and very poetic content, Impious…
I think the meaning of the content was lost on the hard-core philosophers - no harm intended!