Misconceptions about Me, Baye's, Rigor, Exodus, Evolution

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
David is just saying that a man rising from the dead requires an exception to the known laws of physics. In our experience, nobody has ever risen from the dead and been photographed, videod, studied by modern day medical experts.

[/ QUOTE ]

First, could you define precisely what resurrection is and say which laws of physics exactly would have to be broken for resurrection to occur?

Two - how dead is dead? There was a Russian guy frozen solid for a couple weeks - brought him back, studied him, all that. Define "dead." When is someone REALLY dead so that their living again is considered "resurrection?"

Three - you really can't prove the statement no one has risen from the dead and been studied. You can say you don't know of a case. Again, what would "risen from the dead" consist of?

-prax-

[andyfox]

He said he makes no effort at rigor.

[mrick]

[ QUOTE ]


My point was ultimately that Probability is useless with respect to the likelihood of miracles. What is the chance of all of New York City turning out exactly the same, given that the conditions in the year 10000 BC were exactly as they were, except for some "irrelevant" differences? Zero. But this doesn't change the fact that we do actually observe an actual New York City, and it is the way it is.



[/ QUOTE ]Which is equal to the probability of you -or me- existing as we indeed are, here and now.

But perhaps there needs to be some further clarification : what you describe above is a "tree" of so many "branches" and so many potential new "branches" that it is impossible to predict (=assign a meaningful probability) to any future development "branch"-wise. (How very true. Yet here we are, nauseatingly enough. )

As opposed to incorporating into the "branch" "algorithm" (which BTW is unknown; some hifalooterz call it Life Force) a true miracle, as far as the physical world to the extent that we understand it is concerned. E.g. "What is the probability that in some future 'branch' there will be a big city called New York on the east coast of a country called USA which will be outside the laws of gravity ?" That's currently called called a Miracle and it makes all those "future branches" poisoned with it to fall off the tree.

[tpir]

[ QUOTE ]
Then when we see or hear miracles, we won't tie oursleves into knots "explaining them away" but we won't think of them as miracles anymore.

[/ QUOTE ]
What are these miracles that are being seen/heard?

I followed you on the natural/supernatural line being blurry part of your post, but like, the crying statues are still going to be hoaxes regardless of how far science progresses. (Not trying to be glib.)

Anyway, I am interested in hearing more info about these real miracles you referred to.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
What are these miracles that are being seen/heard?

I followed you on the natural/supernatural line being blurry part of your post, but like, the crying statues are still going to be hoaxes regardless of how far science progresses. (Not trying to be glib.)

Anyway, I am interested in hearing more info about these real miracles you referred to.

[/ QUOTE ]

Problem is, some of the crying statues aren't hoaxes - not that science has been able to prove. One of them generated a lawsuit in Italy by an atheist group against the Church for perpetrating a hoax. (I believe I have that article someplace, if you want a reference.) There was investigation, it's just a statue - plain old plaster, no hidden compartments statue.

In a science discussion, we would all jump bad on any presumptions made pre-investigation. Yet, it is very common for the "it has to be a hoax" presumption to be made.

People take an incredibly unscientific path when dealing with miracles. In science, first phenomena are observed - what we want to know is: how does this work? With miracles it's all like the reaction of British naturalists to the reports of the platypus: "There ain't no sech animal."

If you are interested, read, for a start, The Miracle Detective by Randall Sullivan. If you believe you are impartial, ask yourself: what constitutes proof? What is "miraculous?" What do I believe CANNOT be? And why do I believe what I do believe?

We all believe what we were taught in school or read in a journal or some other place we decide is trustworthy. But you can't personally prove to me anyone ever landed on the moon - you can't even prove it to yourself - you just have faith in the InfoGod that made it part of your reality.

Look at the history of science rife with the insistence by the scientists of the day that some things simply COULD NOT BE. Except they were. I'm not even talking centuries ago, go look up the "proof" that continents cannot drift from the 50s/60s. Longer ago it was mathmatically proven if the human body moved faster then thirty miles an hour it would implode. You think it's quaint? You think we aren't?

I can't tell you a miracle and have it be useful to the discussion. Anyone can say anything on a message board. I can say real investigation, serious time spent researching varieties of those things which make you roll your eyes, may result in a disturbing trend toward belief.

I don't know what you would consider "miraculous" so I don't know what examples to give you. But there is no lack of information if one seeks it out.

[tpir]

[ QUOTE ]
We all believe what we were taught in school or read in a journal or some other place we decide is trustworthy. But you can't personally prove to me anyone ever landed on the moon - you can't even prove it to yourself - you just have faith in the InfoGod that made it part of your reality.

[/ QUOTE ]
I was working on a serious response, but then I got to this part and figured it wasn't worth anyone's time.

As for the moon, like, we left stuff there. I don't have a way to take you there, but the evidence exists. You can bounce lasers off the reflectors they left behind if you have a good telescope. InfoGod approved.

Also, I would definitely like to read the article about Miraculous Statue v. atheists if you have it around still.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
I was working on a serious response, but then I got to this part and figured it wasn't worth anyone's time.

As for the moon, like, we left stuff there. I don't have a way to take you there, but the evidence exists. You can bounce lasers off the reflectors they left behind if you have a good telescope. InfoGod approved.

Also, I would definitely like to read the article about Miraculous Statue v. atheists if you have it around still.

[/ QUOTE ]
I was making a point about the state of "believing," not implying I doubt the moon landing. But let's take your statement. You say if I have the right kind of telescope, I can bounce lasers off reflectors. How do you know? Have you tried it? If you see a reflection, how do you know what it's "bouncing off of?" Sheets of mica or obsidian would probably do as well. Understand I am not challenging your statement as not factual, I am simply saying your fund of facts is a belief system in which you choose to believe what someone has said.

My point is that this is not a bad thing, this is simply the way all of us operate. No one has the time to calculate for themselves the distance from earth to sun and all the myriad other "facts" (which tend to be revised as science and technology evolve) we take for granted in outr lives.

We were brainwashed to do this as children. We were told that there were "right" answers and "wrong" answers and we were humilated and shunted aside and made to feel like outcasts if we did not know enough of the RIGHT ANSWERS. We either believed what we were told or we suffered the consequences.

I'll go look for the article. You get the book from the library. Real miracles abound.

[btmagnetw]

praxis, i really hope that you go to a faith healer the next time you're in a serious accident. oh wait, there's a 0% chance that you'll actually do this.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
praxis, i really hope that you go to a faith healer the next time you're in a serious accident. oh wait, there's a 0% chance that you'll actually do this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was scheduled for surgery. I went to church, not expecting any miracles or healings, it was just Holy Thursday, Catholics go to church then. I was at something we call Adoration. I was healed. I could feel it happen. I didn't believe it until it was confirmed later.

So. Hmmmmm. I wonder if you really have all the absolute answers you are so very convinced that you do.

Edited to add: BTW, if the choice is between doctors and faithful pray-ers - I take the prayers. So much for 0 chance.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]

Also, I would definitely like to read the article about Miraculous Statue v. atheists if you have it around still.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't find it, but it's easy to Google. Anyway, here's the most detailed version of it I could find in English. I wish I was a rich and talented writer, this would make a hilarious and also inspiring movie, I think. It's such a comedy, maybe only appreciated by those who are familiar with the dichotomy between the Church and the Italian government. So, here's a link - it's VERY long, but worth the time: (BTW, I haven't expeienced this or seen the statue so I make no claims except it was pretty thoroughly investigated by both civil and ecclesiastical courts.) This is from 2000, I'm sure there are follow-ups that report the final disposition. Well, unless the battle still rages, you never know!

Madonna of Citivecchia