I serve an amazing God

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.
Click to expand...
Haha I agree with what you're saying.

So often it gets turned into "Prove God exists" vs. "Prove God doesn't exist" when that isn't the case at all. It is really "God exists" vs. "There's no evidence that God exists" ...which is a much more rational argument I guess. Why am I still posting here? I must really like you guys because there is almost nothing I hate more than a religious argument

 
Last edited by a moderator:
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...
The answer is simple..... Aliens.

 
3834.gif
 
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.

 
bhamHusker said:
JJHusker1 said:
Hey if you're content calling things BS that you have no direct knowledge of, I suppose you can continue to pass off your anti-anecdotal evidence as fact. I thought maybe you had something of substance in mind that you could offer. Like I believe in creation and everyone knows evolution caused us to be here. You know, something that you stand half a chance at being able to defend. I guess I was wrong, but I apparently not everyone has to have a valid reason to attack someone elses beliefs.
Click to expand...
I had to cut short my previous reply to get my daughter back to bed. The fact is that the things you accept as evidence are simply not evidence. They're great stories, but they're just that. There's nothing to back them up other than "because I (or someone else) said so." You have very different, and significantly lower, standards for evidence than most people who don't believe in the supernatural. That's fine. You're free to believe what you want, but don't sit here and claim that your beliefs are evidence based because they're just not. It's blind faith and nothing more. Calling faith healing, angelic visions, divine revelations (or séances, card reading, big foot sightings, ghost stories, ancient aliens, astrology or ouija board "experiences", etc.) proof demeans the entire concept of evidence.
Click to expand...
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.

 
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.

 
Back
Top