Searching for GOD...

[bluehillside Retd.]

Hi Susan,

No doubt you are congratulating yourself on a well-crafted
 reply? I am sure there are quite a few who will not agree with you, including me.

I wonder whether he does think that, or if at some level he's realised that he's just fallen off (another logical) cliff? Maybe, just maybe somewhere inside there's a little voice saying, "Oh hang on, in that case my own argument about pre-commitment to a naturalistic explanation would apply to any other claim of the supernatural too - why then should anyone dismiss those ones but not mine or Alan's? Yikes!"

Then again, maybe not...

Ah well. 

 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

And you keep on demonstrating that you cannot back up what you claim. #26530 again.

There is no ‘moral high ground’ on who can claim the truth of their position here. I want to see you justify your claim that Alan has been duped and in what way he has been gullible.

Congratulations on a well crafted reply.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Congratulations on a well crafted reply.

Very droll.

[jeremyp]

The only way for two way interaction to take place is to introduce consciously driven free will, otherwise every event is just an inevitable consequence to previous events, and in the example you give, the conversion of some hydrocarbons into carbon dioxide and waste heat is just part of the deterministically driven continuum of this universe.

Still a two way interaction - deterministic or not.

[Alan Burns]

sounds like you've been duped Alan , you should be ashamed of yourself for being so gullible .

Just a bit more detail.  The woman in question is from a family from our local church community whom we have known and socialised with for many years.  Her eighteen year old daughter said she had never known her mother to walk unaided (without crutches or help) in her living memory.

[Walter]

Just a bit more detail.  The woman in question is from a family from our local church community whom we have known and socialised with for many years.  Her eighteen year old daughter said she had never known her mother to walk unaided (without crutches or help) in her living memory.

oh dear Alan, so not even a first hand experience . You can interpret what you see however you like but don't expect others to see it in the same way ,.

Surely you don't expect me to simply believe what you say , I require evidence that something as incredible as you claim has happened . Why don't you?

[Alan Burns]

oh dear Alan, so not even a first hand experience . You can interpret what you see however you like but don't expect others to see it in the same way ,.

Surely you don't expect me to simply believe what you say , I require evidence that something as incredible as you claim has happened . Why don't you?

Sadly, no matter what evidence I produce, I fear you would find some reason to dismiss it.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Sadly, no matter what evidence I produce, I fear you would find some reason to dismiss it.

That's not true. If you did ever produce some evidence, then it would be taken seriously. Your problem though is that you define "evidence" so widely that it becomes meaningless. "Mrs X had a limp, I prayed for her, the limp went, therefore prayer works" for example isn't evidence for prayer at all for reasons that have been explained to you many times but that you ignore nonetheless.

For what it's worth you're not alone - no-one else has ever managed to produce evidence for gods either, but your contention here fails nonetheless.   

[Stranger]

Sadly, no matter what evidence I produce, I fear you would find some reason to dismiss it.

The point is that one person getting better isn't evidence. How many times do you pray for people who don't get better? Such studies that have been done show that prayer simply doesn't work.

[wigginhall]

I should think that some people who get sick are prayed for, and some people who die also.    AB isn't surely claiming that there is a tendency for them to get better? 

[torridon]

Sadly, no matter what evidence I produce, I fear you would find some reason to dismiss it.

Well because the counter evidence is overwhelming.

I've been to Lourdes.  My son has volunteered as a helper there. I've seen the hundreds of sick and disabled being wheelchaired in at the start of their stay, and the same people get helped to leave at the end of their stay, still wheelchairbound.

So the best you can claim is an erratic god using his power, seemingly at random, healing maybe the one but ignoring the one thousand.  That is not a god I would worship.

[Nearly Sane]

Well because the counter evidence is overwhelming.

I've been to Lourdes.  My son has volunteered as a helper there. I've seen the hundreds of sick and disabled being wheelchaired in at the start of their stay, and the same people get helped to leave at the end of their stay, still wheelchairbound.

So the best you can claim is an erratic god using his power, seemingly at random, healing maybe the one but ignoring the one thousand.  That is not a god I would worship.

That's surely not something you can say. It's also not counter evidence to the actual existence of supernatural claims that some people don't get better, The claim itself is based on no methodology so it's nonsensical to even talk about evidence in that light.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Torri,

Well because the counter evidence is overwhelming.

I've been to Lourdes.  My son has volunteered as a helper there. I've seen the hundreds of sick and disabled being wheelchaired in at the start of their stay, and the same people get helped to leave at the end of their stay, still wheelchairbound.

So the best you can claim is an erratic god using his power, seemingly at random, healing maybe the one but ignoring the one thousand.  That is not a god I would worship.

Or perhaps the best he could claim is a god who when prayed to achieves exactly the same results as any other god, as no god at all, or as sticking a pencil up your nose while reciting the lyrics to pop princess Kylie Minogue’s “I Should Be So Lucky”.

[Alan Burns]

Well because the counter evidence is overwhelming.

I've been to Lourdes.  My son has volunteered as a helper there. I've seen the hundreds of sick and disabled being wheelchaired in at the start of their stay, and the same people get helped to leave at the end of their stay, still wheelchairbound.

So the best you can claim is an erratic god using his power, seemingly at random, healing maybe the one but ignoring the one thousand.  That is not a god I would worship.

There is the presence of spiritual healing too - but if you can't admit to the existence of your spiritual nature, you would not perceive this as evidence - unless you were the one to experience the healing.

As mother Theresa said - the big problem with the affluent west is spiritual poverty.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

There is the presence of spiritual healing too - but if you can't admit to the existence of your spiritual nature, you would not perceive this as evidence - unless you were the one to experience it.

Just out of interest, do you even know what the fallacy of circular reasoning involves?

[Alan Burns]

AB,

Just out of interest, do you even know what the fallacy of circular reasoning involves?

Yes.
I was just pointing out that it is impossible to discuss matters of spirituality with someone who can't even admit to its existence.

[Nearly Sane]

Yes.
I was just pointing out that it is impossible to discuss matters of spirituality with someone who can't even admit to its existence.

This is another one of your attempts to portray peookewhi disagree with you as liars.

[Alan Burns]

This is another one of your attempts to portray people who disagree with you as liars.

No - just genuinely deluded.

[Nearly Sane]

No - just genuinely deluded.

So everyone who disagrees with you is mad? So it's not that they cannot admit it

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Yes.
I was just pointing out that it is impossible to discuss matters of spirituality with someone who can't even admit to its existence.

That's very amusing and still circular. What you said was:

"There is the presence of spiritual healing too - but if you can't admit to the existence of your spiritual nature, you would not perceive this as evidence - unless you were the one to experience it."

You're telling him he has to "admit to the existence" of something in order to accept the evidence for it. Your problem though is that you have no evidence for this supposed "spiritual nature" to be admitted to in the first place. 

Good grief. 

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

No - just genuinely deluded.

Does it not seem odd to you that those who understand reason and logic must be "genuinely deluded" whereas you (who understands neither) isn't?

Could it just be, you know, well... the other way around?

 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

AB,

Just out of interest, do you even know what the fallacy of circular reasoning involves?

You should . Remember philosophical materialism, or physicalism.
Then there was that faux reprieve of the "methodological " which has never actually helped you out.

[Walter]

Sadly, no matter what evidence I produce, I fear you would find some reason to dismiss it.

go-on , try me . You must have some, otherwise people might think you were daft .

[bluehillside Retd.]

You should . Remember philosophical materialism, or physicalism.
Then there was that faux reprieve of the "methodological " which has never actually helped you out.

Such a droll.

[Stranger]

...philosophical materialism ... physicalism...   

I see nobody proposing thos.............. YAWN............. zzzzzzzzzzzzzz