Searching for GOD...

[jakswan]

So, having been told that a baby's cleft palate had spontaneously healed before the very eyes of those present, you can't recall if she gave details of where and when this event supposedly took place?

Did nobody else, hearing this tale, think to ask?

The people she gave this talk to were not sceptics, they were fellow Christians who would naturally assume she was telling the truth. 

That says it all I think. An audience of believers, all wanting to believe, lapping up this narrative uncritically, noone thinking to verify the story with the hospital, all because your agenda is not to get to the bottom of a paradox and discover the truth, but rather to feed your faith, no searching questions asked.

Most 'miracles' take place in India, attributed to some or other Hindu god channeled through a holy man.  The Indian miracle worker Sai Baba has performed numerous unbelievable miracles under the gaze of witnesses, apparently, bringing dead people back to life, making things catch fire through will power and so forth.  If it was Sai Baba invited to address your Ilfracombe event, would you all have accepted his testimony so uncritically ?

Yes takes away any puzzles as to how the Jesus myths started.

[Alien]

Interesting that many consider Vineyard to be a cult, especially in the USA.

Seriously? On what grounds?

[Shaker]

That says it all I think. An audience of believers, all wanting to believe, lapping up this narrative uncritically, noone thinking to verify the story with the hospital, all because your agenda is not to get to the bottom of a paradox and discover the truth, but rather to feed your faith, no searching questions asked.

Bang on the money.

Alan's account makes out that if you're a Christian, when you hear of something outlandish, hugely implausible but potentially checkable you simply turn off your critical faculties, bin the questions and accept it as true just because somebody standing up in front says it is.

[Gordon]

That says it all I think. An audience of believers, all wanting to believe, lapping up this narrative uncritically, noone thinking to verify the story with the hospital, all because your agenda is not to get to the bottom of a paradox and discover the truth, but rather to feed your faith, no searching questions asked.

Bang on the money.

Alan's account makes out that if you're a Christian, when you hear of something outlandish, hugely implausible but potentially checkable you simply turn off your critical faculties, bin the questions and accept it as true just because somebody standing up in front says it is.

Yep - I suppose in a sense they are consistent, since they also just as studiously gullible when it comes to their holy book, and especially those who claim that the Bible is inerrant. It is as if their ability for critical review when applied to their religion is overwhelmed by an unhealthy mix of the fallacies of incredulity, authority and tradition (and probably a few more along the way).

This cleft palate story is no different to the resurrection of Jesus story, since both are unevidenced anecdotes made by interested parties that claim natural impossibilities, so I'd be interested to see if there are any Christians here who doubt the cleft palate claim while, as Christians, they obviously must accept the Jesus one: and if the do reject the former what distinction they are drawing between the two claims that doesn't involve special pleading for Jesus? 

[Shaker]

Good questions, Gord 

[torridon]

That says it all I think. An audience of believers, all wanting to believe, lapping up this narrative uncritically, noone thinking to verify the story with the hospital, all because your agenda is not to get to the bottom of a paradox and discover the truth, but rather to feed your faith, no searching questions asked.

Bang on the money.

Alan's account makes out that if you're a Christian, when you hear of something outlandish, hugely implausible but potentially checkable you simply turn off your critical faculties, bin the questions and accept it as true just because somebody standing up in front says it is.

I like to think of this in terms of suspension of disbelief. Captain Kirk would have enjoyed watching Pirates of the Caribbean most likely.  Mr Spock however would have found it ridiculous, the story lines are implausible, impossible, ridiculous. We humans have this subtle knack of suspending our critical faculties in order to enjoy something, we do it all the time. I can only enjoy a Pirates movie to the extent that I am able and willing to suspend my disbelief in the factuality of the storylines. Alan's Ilfracombe crowd no doubt went to Devon primed into that mindset.

[Alan Burns]

The sceptics on this forum seem happy to write off Ele Mumford's testimony as a deliberate lie.  It takes a lot of courage to stand up and give a witness in front of 2000 people.  It would take an unbelievable amout of courage to tell them a deliberate lie.  I do not know if any people did question Ele about her story.  There was certainly plenty of opportunity for them to ask her, and I am sure there must have been someone in the crowd who did so.

[torridon]

The sceptics on this forum seem happy to write off Ele Mumford's testimony as a deliberate lie.  It takes a lot of courage to stand up and give a witness in front of 2000 people.  It would take an unbelievable amout of courage to tell them a deliberate lie.  I do not know if any people did question Ele about her story.  There was certainly plenty of opportunity for them to ask her, and I am sure there must have been someone in the crowd who did so.

As a principle I would hold anecdotal and personal witness testimony as unreliable.  It is by adopting that critical stance that science has given us the modern world; the motto of the RS is 'take noone's word for it'.  Rather, we subject claims to disciplined scrutiny, and if they stand up, then it is time to take them seriously.  So, if this story of healing were reported in a serious medical journal, then it would be appropriate to take it seriously.

[Shaker]

The sceptics on this forum seem happy to write off Ele Mumford's testimony as a deliberate lie.

Why does it have to be a deliberate lie? It certainly could be, but equally, she could just be a rather gullible woman, led by the burning desire for her beliefs to be true, with no critical thinking skills. In fact I'd say this is a certainty.

It takes a lot of courage to stand up and give a witness in front of 2000 people. It would take an unbelievable amout of courage to tell them a deliberate lie.

It's been done before Al and it'll be done again.

I do not know if any people did question Ele about her story. There was certainly plenty of opportunity for them to ask her, and I am sure there must have been someone in the crowd who did so.

You say "I am sure" but actually you're not, are you? You say "I do not know if any people did question Ele about her story" and then in the next sentence you say "I am sure there must have been someone in the crowd who did so." Which is it? You don't know, or you're sure?

Come on Al, there's a world-shaking medical miracle at stake here. There's a hospital to be traced, there are medical people to be found and quizzed. This story is within reach of being confirmed as a bona fide miracle ... or not. (Which makes me wonder why Mrs Mumford herself didn't alert the media to the presence of this amazing miracle).

Why is it that whenever people airily claim miraculous events (especially so-called incredible healings - claims of which I've encountered umpteen times) they're always hearsay, along the lines of "I heard" or "Somebody said ..." or "Mrs Smith says she saw ..."? Never any hard facts and figures, always handy-wavy vagueness.

[Nearly Sane]

The sceptics on this forum seem happy to write off Ele Mumford's testimony as a deliberate lie.  It takes a lot of courage to stand up and give a witness in front of 2000 people.  It would take an unbelievable amout of courage to tell them a deliberate lie.  I do not know if any people did question Ele about her story.  There was certainly plenty of opportunity for them to ask her, and I am sure there must have been someone in the crowd who did so.

No, the sceptics on the forum merely take the position as an verified claim with no evidence. Further you had said earlier that since the 2000 believers already believed they wouldn't challenge the story. You are now changing your entire position on this,why is that?

[Gordon]

The sceptics on this forum seem happy to write off Ele Mumford's testimony as a deliberate lie.  It takes a lot of courage to stand up and give a witness in front of 2000 people.  It would take an unbelievable amout of courage to tell them a deliberate lie.  I do not know if any people did question Ele about her story.  There was certainly plenty of opportunity for them to ask her, and I am sure there must have been someone in the crowd who did so.

I takes no great courage to tell a deliberate lie, Alan, especially if it is in support of an agenda: the ex-Secretary of State for Scotland has just ably demonstrated this. 

In addition, what is it with this 'witness' label? That she was prosthelethysing doesn't render what she said immune from critical review even if her audience was apparently prepared to suspend their critical faculties specifically in relation to any claims that support their personal religious incredulity.

You say you don't know if people questioned her story so my questions to you are, and bearing in mind that cleft palates don't spontaneously heal and are for the most part are corrected by surgery, why didn't you question her story, and do you actually believe her?

[Shaker]

You'll notice that in a world of the near-ubiquity of camera phones as well as instant social media such as Facebook and Twitter on smartphones and so on and so forth, there's always a convenient reason why hard empirical evidence is never forthcoming ... it's always hearsay piled upon hearsay.

[Alan Burns]

This cleft palate story is no different to the resurrection of Jesus story, since both are unevidenced anecdotes made by interested parties that claim natural impossibilities, so I'd be interested to see if there are any Christians here who doubt the cleft palate claim while, as Christians, they obviously must accept the Jesus one: and if the do reject the former what distinction they are drawing between the two claims that doesn't involve special pleading for Jesus?

You are quite correct, Gordon, to compare this story with the Resurrection.  It is the same power involved, which was also used to heal leppers, bring Lazarus back from the dead, feed 5000 people with five barley loaves and two fish etc.

These miracles done in the name of Jesus are still going on today all over the world.  Even the feeding of the 5000 - see this link
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=275x994

[Shaker]

May just as well close this thread now - Alan's not going to provide a single solitary scrap of anything even within the same postcode as verifiable evidence for his claims and will stonewall any questions, so what's the point in going further? "Credulous people are credulous" is nothing that we don't know already.

[Gordon]

This cleft palate story is no different to the resurrection of Jesus story, since both are unevidenced anecdotes made by interested parties that claim natural impossibilities, so I'd be interested to see if there are any Christians here who doubt the cleft palate claim while, as Christians, they obviously must accept the Jesus one: and if the do reject the former what distinction they are drawing between the two claims that doesn't involve special pleading for Jesus?

You are quite correct, Gordon, to compare this story with the Resurrection.  It is the same power involved, which was also used to heal leppers, bring Lazarus back from the dead, feed 5000 people with five barley loaves and two fish etc.

These miracles done in the name of Jesus are still going on today all over the world.  Even the feeding of the 5000 - see this link
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=275x994

Yikes - is there no end to your credulity, Alan.

edited - to correct original use of 'incredulity' to 'credulity'.

[torridon]

This cleft palate story is no different to the resurrection of Jesus story, since both are unevidenced anecdotes made by interested parties that claim natural impossibilities, so I'd be interested to see if there are any Christians here who doubt the cleft palate claim while, as Christians, they obviously must accept the Jesus one: and if the do reject the former what distinction they are drawing between the two claims that doesn't involve special pleading for Jesus?

You are quite correct, Gordon, to compare this story with the Resurrection.  It is the same power involved, which was also used to heal leppers, bring Lazarus back from the dead, feed 5000 people with five barley loaves and two fish etc..

So when Sai Baba brings back someone from the dead is that also the same power at work ? Or are you going to be selective in the choice of scenarios upon which you are going to bring your critical thinking to bear ?

[Alan Burns]

This cleft palate story is no different to the resurrection of Jesus story, since both are unevidenced anecdotes made by interested parties that claim natural impossibilities, so I'd be interested to see if there are any Christians here who doubt the cleft palate claim while, as Christians, they obviously must accept the Jesus one: and if the do reject the former what distinction they are drawing between the two claims that doesn't involve special pleading for Jesus?

You are quite correct, Gordon, to compare this story with the Resurrection.  It is the same power involved, which was also used to heal leppers, bring Lazarus back from the dead, feed 5000 people with five barley loaves and two fish etc..

So when Sai Baba brings back someone from the dead is that also the same power at work ? Or are you going to be selective in the choice of which scenarios you are going to bring your critical thinking to bear ?

It was not Sai Baba who made himself known to me.
It is not me being selective.
It was Jesus who made Himself known to me.

[Gordon]

This cleft palate story is no different to the resurrection of Jesus story, since both are unevidenced anecdotes made by interested parties that claim natural impossibilities, so I'd be interested to see if there are any Christians here who doubt the cleft palate claim while, as Christians, they obviously must accept the Jesus one: and if the do reject the former what distinction they are drawing between the two claims that doesn't involve special pleading for Jesus?

You are quite correct, Gordon, to compare this story with the Resurrection.  It is the same power involved, which was also used to heal leppers, bring Lazarus back from the dead, feed 5000 people with five barley loaves and two fish etc..

So when Sai Baba brings back someone from the dead is that also the same power at work ? Or are you going to be selective in the choice of which scenarios you are going to bring your critical thinking to bear ?

It was not Sai Baba who made himself known to me.
It is not me being selective.
It was Jesus who made Himself known to me.

Therefore you are being selective.

[Hope]

May just as well close this thread now

I'd agree with you Shaker; in fact a lot of the threads here might as well be closed as soon as they are opened since the debatees tend to be working from dramatically different starting points that can never be reconciled.

[Nearly Sane]

This cleft palate story is no different to the resurrection of Jesus story, since both are unevidenced anecdotes made by interested parties that claim natural impossibilities, so I'd be interested to see if there are any Christians here who doubt the cleft palate claim while, as Christians, they obviously must accept the Jesus one: and if the do reject the former what distinction they are drawing between the two claims that doesn't involve special pleading for Jesus?

You are quite correct, Gordon, to compare this story with the Resurrection.  It is the same power involved, which was also used to heal leppers, bring Lazarus back from the dead, feed 5000 people with five barley loaves and two fish etc.

These miracles done in the name of Jesus are still going on today all over the world.  Even the feeding of the 5000 - see this link
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=275x994

Yikes - is there no end to your incredulity, Alan.

In this case surely 'credulity'

[Gordon]

This cleft palate story is no different to the resurrection of Jesus story, since both are unevidenced anecdotes made by interested parties that claim natural impossibilities, so I'd be interested to see if there are any Christians here who doubt the cleft palate claim while, as Christians, they obviously must accept the Jesus one: and if the do reject the former what distinction they are drawing between the two claims that doesn't involve special pleading for Jesus?

You are quite correct, Gordon, to compare this story with the Resurrection.  It is the same power involved, which was also used to heal leppers, bring Lazarus back from the dead, feed 5000 people with five barley loaves and two fish etc.

These miracles done in the name of Jesus are still going on today all over the world.  Even the feeding of the 5000 - see this link
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=275x994

Yikes - is there no end to your incredulity, Alan.

In this case surely 'credulity'

Yep - my mistake.

I'll correct the post.

[torridon]

You are quite correct, Gordon, to compare this story with the Resurrection.  It is the same power involved, which was also used to heal leppers, bring Lazarus back from the dead, feed 5000 people with five barley loaves and two fish etc..

So when Sai Baba brings back someone from the dead is that also the same power at work ? Or are you going to be selective in the choice of which scenarios you are going to bring your critical thinking to bear ?

It was not Sai Baba who made himself known to me.
It is not me being selective.
It was Jesus who made Himself known to me.

It wasn't Jesus that told you the story of the baby's cleft palate.  It was a human being,with all that implies in terms of fallibility and weaknesses. Sai Baba is another human being, that like Eleanor Mumford, makes grandiose claims.  We have to take a view on what they claim.  My position is consistent, yours isn't

[Walt Zingmatilder]

This cleft palate story is no different to the resurrection of Jesus story, since both are unevidenced anecdotes made by interested parties that claim natural impossibilities, so I'd be interested to see if there are any Christians here who doubt the cleft palate claim while, as Christians, they obviously must accept the Jesus one: and if the do reject the former what distinction they are drawing between the two claims that doesn't involve special pleading for Jesus?

You are quite correct, Gordon, to compare this story with the Resurrection.  It is the same power involved, which was also used to heal leppers, bring Lazarus back from the dead, feed 5000 people with five barley loaves and two fish etc..

So when Sai Baba brings back someone from the dead is that also the same power at work ? Or are you going to be selective in the choice of which scenarios you are going to bring your critical thinking to bear ?

It was not Sai Baba who made himself known to me.
It is not me being selective.
It was Jesus who made Himself known to me.

Therefore you are being selective.

Difficult to know how to pitch this because antitheists tend to hate being questioned but lets start here...................
For you Gordon who is more likely to disturb the peace and intellectual order? Jesus or Sai Baba?

[Leonard James]

It was Jesus who made Himself known to me.

No, Alan, he didn't make himself known to you. The fact is that you simply became convinced that the story told about Jesus was true.

[Rhiannon]

Interesting that many consider Vineyard to be a cult, especially in the USA.

Seriously? On what grounds?

This is one of a few articles by former church members I've found who have experienced cult-like methods in Vineyard churches in the States.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1992-10-25/news/1992299081_1_vineyard-church-church-leaders-300-churches

I haven't seen them in action in the UK but I do recognise this 'God tells me that...' as a form of control from what I've heard of the team from HTB. Alpha isn't all learning about Jesus, get HTB directly involved and its pantomime and smoke and mirrors, and good people suffer as a consequence.

Btw in case anyone missed it from my earlier link, Ele Mumford, Nicky Gumbel and the HTB crowd are buddies. The link also includes something about the cleft lip miracle. I wouldn't let my kids within a mile of any of them.