I serve an amazing God

JJHusker1 said:
Sorry if you thought I was presenting my anecdotes as evidence as to why you should agree with or believe me. I was simply explaining why I believe. Those are 2 different things. Everyone has to make up their own mind on this issue. I would never expect someone else to accept it based on my story alone or even hundreds of stories. However, for me, it is quite a lot more than just blind faith.

Anyway what got me started on this particular reply was your mention of seances. Beware another unprovable story coming....About 38 years ago when I was around 4th or 5th grade age, we thoght it would be fun to have a seance in a friends basement. One of the boys had recently lost a grandfather so we tried "contacting" him. Long story short- a baseball got thrown into the middle of the table we were sitting at and we could not come up with any logical explanation from whence it came. We searched the basement and found no one there. The boy said his father was a huge baseball fan. It was extremely weird and creepy. I have never decided what I think even really happened. And no I can't prove it, and no I don't expect anyone to accept that anything supernatural happened. Just a fun story I haven't thought about for a long time.
Click to expand...
No, I understood that. I'm just saying that to me (and presumably to others with a similar mindset) what you consider to be evidence supporting your beliefs is not actually evidence at all. The fact that you consider it sufficient merely highlights the differences between your standards for evidence and my own. Again, that's fine. You're free to believe as you please, but please please please don't describe your rationalizations as "evidence." I realize that this is a bit of semantic quibbling, but I think it's a very important distinction. When I can't explain something with the facts available, I'm not willing to give up and assume that it was the work of some otherworldly entity, whether it's Yaweh, Odin, Vishnu or grandad's ghost, and then call it "evidence."

 
Last edited by a moderator:
JJHusker1 said:
Enhance89 said:
This is all good and all, but it's the same circle of BS that goes on in the other religious forums. Whenever you assert a claim, it is your responsibility to prove that claim, not the responsibility of others to disprove it. You don't see people coming up with hypotheses using the scientific method and then telling someone else on the other side of the fence to prove it wrong. That's not how it works.

Of course, it's the religious person's response to say I can't prove it, it's just a belief/faith, and that's all there is to it. Fine and dandy by my standards, even though I disagree with it.

The real crux of this thread is supposed to be whether or not OP was healed by God.
Click to expand...
I agree with what you're saying to a certain extent however, there are a few minor problems. I have asserted some claims that are impossible to prove. That doesn't automatically make them false. I also realize people do not have to accept my claims. They simply are what they are. It has not been my intention at all to claim that others need to accept them as being true. I would hope some people might believe that I am not making up stories but I fully understand being skeptical. Like I said earlier, I too am skeptical when people make claims like this and I do not accept them as absolute truth unless they can be proven. And actually I think in the scientific world you do see people making claims and people on the other side of the fence attempting to disprove them. In fact I think that happens a lot. You are correct about the crux of this thread but I'm pretty sure there is not a single person (except possibly the OP) involved in this discussion that can get to the bottom of whether or not he was actually healed by God. So that is why the discussion has turned to ancillary issues. My only position on the OP's claim is that I do believe it is possible. Anyone who makes a claim stronger than thinking it is possible or that it is highly unlikely is just blowing smoke because they can't prove squat.
Click to expand...
True, but then you've come full circle back to the idea that just because you can't prove it doesn't mean it isn't true/false. I look at the world around me as evidence that God didn't heal OP. My grandmother was one of the sweetest people in the world - she died of ovarian cancer. Every day, a child is born dead. Hundreds of newborns never make it to their first birthday. The list of unjust occurrences just goes on and on, and is probably longer than the list of people who claim they were miraculously healed.

I don't want to rehash the points I've already made through the pages of this thread, because I've already had to counter them several times. It's just impossible for me to ever believe 'God' intervenes in our lives. If he does, he's criminally unfair. Where do we draw the line as to where God's power starts and stops?

The worst scenario I can think of is this - let's say God really did heal OP. Why, then, did he let thousands of people die, and millions of Americans suffer, by allowing terrorists to destroy two buildings in New York City?

I'm a hard skeptic, and it's things like that which make me believe that whatever is out there simply leaves us to our own devices.

 
muzicman0 said:
someone, quick, prove to me that evolution is real. No assumptions are allowed, and also no observations are allowed. only hard facts.
Click to expand...
Evolution has a mountain of evidence in support of it. Scientific observation is different from lightly drawn conclusions from some story or anecdotal evidence. I don't think you have a good grasp of what is meant by 'evidence.'

The standard we are held to as far as evidence goes is the standard set forth by the scientific method.

Evolution is also the central foundation of modern biology. It's not optional. You don't get biology without it. It's not some tangential, unrelated idea that doesn't have to be right. Of course it's not completely understood, but few things are. A good comparison is let's say, quantum theory. Without it, modern computing does not exist. The fact that I am typing this says otherwise.

Some people don't "believe" in evolution simply because they don't want to, or believe they should not, based on their religion. It's simply denial. How you want to reconcile our knowledge of life and evolution with your religion is entirely your choice, but it's not possible to make a serious challenge to it. A personal lack of understanding is not a serious challenge.

If you really want to learn about evolution, I suggest that you go and learn about it. With an open mind, as science requires.

I also suggest learning about the scientific method, so that you might understand the difference in credibility between empirical documented and reproducible observation, as well as the carefully drawn and limited conclusions based on them, and 'some guy said he saw / did this.' You'll find science is very honest about what it does or does not know, and how well it does or does not know it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
muzicman0 said:
Husker_x said:
Evolution is a fact.
Click to expand...
then prove it.
Click to expand...
Here's the problem with your gambit. Let's say nobody posts anything that you're willing to accept as "proof" of evolution. That doesn't mean that the one god you choose to worship out of the literally thousands of gods in human history is real.

Nor, coincidentally, does the absence of evolution mean there is a god. It could point to aliens. It could point to random cosmic chance. It could point to anything.

Nor, for that matter, does the existence of evolution necessarily mean the god you picked doesn't exist.

Not really sure where you're going with this, but I don't think it's a fruitful avenue. But whatever.

 
zoogies said:
Evolution has a mountain of evidence in support of it. Scientific observation is different from lightly drawn conclusions from some story or anecdotal evidence. I don't think you have a good grasp of what is meant by 'evidence.'
Click to expand...
I have read a lot of the evidence...won't say I understand it all. Most of the evidence takes about as much faith to believe as I have to believe in my God.

Evolution is also the central foundation of modern biology. It's not optional. You don't get biology without it. It's not some tangential, unrelated idea that doesn't have to be right. Of course it's not completely understood, but few things are. A good comparison is let's say, quantum theory. Without it, modern computing does not exist. The fact that I am typing this says otherwise.
Click to expand...
LOL! Modern biology requires evolution? That's assuming you don't believe there was a creator.

Some people don't "believe" in evolution simply because they don't want to, or believe they should not, based on their religion. It's simply denial. How you want to reconcile our knowledge of life and evolution with your religion is entirely your choice, but it's not possible to make a serious challenge to it.
Click to expand...
but I say evolution is a fantasy. So, based on this thread, it is your job to prove it to me...so prove it.

 
The whole discussion is pointless when those arguing from a supernatural perspective don't even possess a passing understanding (as evidenced by the challenge above) of the vocabulary of science, let alone the larger concepts. Their delusions are well protected by a carefully constructed shell of fables, false equivalences, and willful scientific ignorance. Good luck trying to crack that nut.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top