My opponent has unfortunately forfeited their last round. I will now summarise our whole exchange today.
Their main argument can be written in this form:
> This experience can only be explained by the existence of the Holy Spirit.
>I have experienced this
>Therefore I have experienced this which can only be explained by the existence of the Holy Spirit.
I am willing to agree that the proponent did have an experience. However, I don't believe that the explanation PRO gave is actually what happened.
My rebuttal was against the premise: "This experience can only be explained by the existence of the Holy Spirit."
I pointed out how people of other faith explain similar experiences for their faiths as well. So I asked PRO how they determine that their faith is the only possible answer. PRO conceded that they cannot determine that.
Then PRO went on to say that they could not determine the scientific explanation for what they have experienced. Their exact words were:
"So I couldn't create a rational, scientific explanation for the phenomena. So I turned to the spiritual. It seemed to me that it was His Holy Spirit, as I was in a Catholic church. (There's that bias.) I might have missed something, but I do not believe so."
My response to that was simply that, just because you do not know what it is that PRO cannot explain what they experience, that does not mean they can put their God as an answer. The reasonable way to go is to simply say: "I don't know what I experienced." Adding any supernatural explanation without enough good evidence to back that up is unjustifiable. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. That which can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.
PRO mentioned that they once prayed for a job and saw an ad on tv about a job application the next day.
I responded to that by saying that they should now pray to have all terminally ill cancer patients. PRO responded that God would think that their prayer is not sincere. My response was simply that PRO would be praying to have a lot of people to recover and stop suffering. The fact that praying for this did not work simply indicates that prayer only works at the same rate as chance. In other words, prayer does not work.
PRO state that they felt two souls in their body when they were in church. This is a common explanation by many superstitious people. However, there is little evidence to back that experience up. In fact, in most analysed cases, it turned out that the people actually experienced some form of cognitive biases(1).
"The evidence of science, when brought together with an ancient argument, provides a very powerful case against the existence of a soul that can carry forward your essence once your body fails. The case runs like this: with modern brain-imaging technology, we can now see how specific, localized brain injuries damage or even destroy aspects of a person’s mental life. These are the sorts of dysfunctions that Oliver Sacks brought to the world in his book The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat
The man of the title story was a lucid, intelligent music teacher, who had lost the ability to recognize faces and other familiar objects due to damage to his visual cortex."
The article goes into a longer depth but for the sake of the debate here, I will not post the whole thing. You can click on the source linked below to read the whole thing. To conclude, there is no reason to believe that PRO actually experienced a soul but there is even evidence that what they experienced can be better explained by psychological biases. Why go for this highly complex, unjustifiable explanation(with no evidence) when the simplest reason works just fine(PRO only experienced a psychological moment and then attributed all kinds of supernatural experiences to it)?
It is unfortunate that PRO did not respond to the previous round. It seems that PRO also recognised that they are not justified in their beliefs and I was genuinely interested in having a conversation with them. As I said, PRO seems intelligent and I am sure they can get to reason and develop a proper reasoning process that they can substantiate with evidence.
PRO needs to bear in mind that no scientist(actual experts in the field) have been able to prove the existence of souls. In fact, they have been able to disprove souls in many cases. If someone would be able to prove the existence of souls, it would be the experts who have carried out all kinds of experiments. Proving the existence of souls would give them a lot of fame and money. Every news source would talk about them, they would make a lot of money if they could prove that. They have significant reasons to prove such a thing. If they themselves end up not be able to prove souls but instead they are able to prove the non existence of souls in most cases.
"The only medication I take is Vyvanse, 30 mg of it, which CAN cause psychosis, but describes the only hallucinations felt as "seeing or hearing things that are not real. And this side effect is rare, very rare."
As I mentioned, I sincerely hope that PRO is able to get better and recover from whatever they are experiencing. There are plenty of resources available if they are looking for therapy. I will provide some a link below to professional therapists who will be able to help them(2).
This was an interesting conversation. My final advice:
(1) Look at the evidence first and then reach a conclusion.
(2) We only have this one life, there is no time to waste on believing falsehoods and basing one's life on that.