papelindholm

Consider a situation where a person unbeknownst to themselves suffers a brain haemorrhage or develops a brain tumour and starts pervceiving auditory hallucinations.

Consider also a situation where a person unbeknownst to themselves enters a mentally disordered state of say mythomania.

Consider additionally a situation where a person unscrupulously lies about having a numinous experience in order to gain attention even benefits at the expense of the gullible.

Consider yet another situation where a person lies about having a numinous experience in fear of otherwise being ostracized by their family, friends, educational institution and work community.

Now consider a person claiming to have heard the voice of a god.

Is there a reliable method an outsider could and should utilize to distinguish between the situations mentioned above and thereof choose among the most plausible that also comport to the shared reality of which we have numerous empirically thus unequivocally verifiable examples?

Or should we merely go with what seems emotionally appealing within a specific ingroup of generally wilfully illiterate?

...just more reasonably gullible, possibly ignorant, most likely disingenuous and sadly perhaps even desperate zealots with their minds clouded by their own conviction, attempting to fabricate a narrative around disconnected details - not even haphazardly found as depicted but obviously specifically dug after and selected for the prime purpose "documentaries" alike pursue - and then laboriously trying to fit them into the presupposed mould carved out by wishful thinking of the director with the intent to flog off a story for individuals proned to religious woo.

Very disheartening to come to realize such sensationalism riding ghost stories are still produced as if were they valid by any rational standards thus remotely anchored in a shared reality. And heartrending is they have a market.

The makers behind this hokum obviously actively avoid the consensus among the plethora of actual historians, anthropologists, cultural sociologists not to mention honest theologians who all agree on the fact that to this day not one shred of evidence presented, whether but claimed or produced (read: fabricated) to be held up for scrutiny, support the mythos about any such mobilization of any magnitude, especially as purported in scripture, even could have taken place; this further based on every found validated thus far more credible record from that time and area leaving for some reason out such pivotal an event.

As the urge for simple base research is conspicuously absent in the (adult?) minds of the production team behind this embarrassingly poor of an attempt to intentionally falsify known history also ethnical heritage, all in favour of their pet delusion, I fail to see even a smidgen of worth in the mere effort behind conceiving this.