I Am Innocent

[Dale Dough]

[ QUOTE ]
blah blah the difference between Biblical and extra-Biblical miracles blah blah

[/ QUOTE ]

Cringe.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
Was anything that occurred a miracle? Did the little girl communicate with Mary? Did the sun do circles in the sky?

[/ QUOTE ]
Thing is, "miracle" isn't a word in my present vocabulary except to respond to others who use it. That's because most people mean something like "magic" when they use it. Anyway, I wasn't there. However:

The sun phenomenon has been reported by thousands of people. Did the actual central body of our solar system "dance?" My answer is no, otherwise millions would have seen it. Besides all the other issues related to that.

Did all these people experience a communication by way of light phenomena intentionally created for them by an individual outside of physical reality as we know it? Yeah, I believe that. Happens in many places with these kinds of apparitions. There were more living witnesses to the sun incident at Fatima than there are witnesses to a lot of events we believe as a culture: moon landings, for instance. Ben Franklin and the kite.

Was there communication in a very direct way between the seer and someone who has passed? As I said, I wasn't there, but why not? These things happen all the time to all sorts of people, can't see why this shouldn't be factual.

I'm trying to remember if it was at Fatima that they couldn't lift the children or move them during the apparition...I'm not an apparition expert, I always have to look them up. It's one of my favorite manifestations of the metaphysical. It's very simple and practical and well-documented.

At any rate, while I wouldn't just automatically accept every apparition or miracle story that comes along, this sort of thing doesn't seem very unusual to me. Not common, but not a big deal in terms of acceptance of the actuality of the event.

[Praxising]

[ QUOTE ]
You are definitely right that evidence changes probabilities. How about the ressurection? Got any evidence for that? Or just 1 book that says so?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? You think when bodies die the people in them cease to exist?

[calcbandit]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You are definitely right that evidence changes probabilities. How about the ressurection? Got any evidence for that? Or just 1 book that says so?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? You think when bodies die the people in them cease to exist?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see why you are arguing this. I get your point. Your point is that sometimes extraordinary things happen and people call these miracles but you just think it's something not supernatural that we don't understand it yet.

My point doesn't conflict your point. My point is that you shouldn't beleive extraordinary claims without a very good reason to do so, and the fact that something is written in a book isn't a good enough reason (or at least apply this standard of beleif or non-beleif to all books, instead of just picking 1 book which you beleive that categorically everything in it is true, regardless of the claim).

I don't at all see how my point contradicts your point. IF these outrageous events occured in the first place, I can see how your line of thinking would suggest that there might be a scientific explanation for them. I'm just saying that smart people should assume that outrageous events didn't exist unless they have good reason to beleive so, and then if you decide that they probably existed, then go ahead and try to figure out if it is a miracle or a we-don't-know-what-it-is-acle.

And no, I'm not reading your book. I have like 30 books ahead of it on my to-read list.

[KipBond]

[ QUOTE ]
You think when bodies die the people in them cease to exist?

[/ QUOTE ]

You think when all the trees are gone, the forest ceases to exist?

[luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You think when bodies die the people in them cease to exist?

[/ QUOTE ]

You think when all the trees are gone, the forest ceases to exist?

[/ QUOTE ]

I was trying to figure out why a person would be charged with murder if nobody ceased to exist.

luckyme

[borisp]

[ QUOTE ]
The point is that my scepticism about miracles (Note: rigorously speaking, my points apply only to miracles CLAIMED. I can't really talk about miracles that happen in the middle of the desert that noone knows about) does NOT come from some arbitrary faith in physics or disbelief about God. It stems from studies about prayers, adventures of Houdini, tests of Einstein's theories, knowledge of how humans incorrectly believe in rushes or that they are not paralyaed when they are etc. Period.

[/ QUOTE ]
Examined your beliefs for consistency lately, David?

Hint: when you end your claim with "period," that should suggest to you that a claim made beforehand was a leap of faith.

[soon2bepro]

This has nothing to do with what you wanted to talk about, but if Hugo takes a bet from someone who says they flipped 20 heads in a row, and that person is at least somewhat rational, Hugo's giving money away. This person won't bet on that he flipped 20 heads in a row unless he really did.

It's like this bet a friend offered me once, while we were playing in a home game, he said "I bet you $100 you have AQ" (as he folded his hand). Obviously if I took the bet, it was because I knew I was going to win it.

Btw, I agree with all the other stuff you said about miracles and double lightspeed hand thrown balls.

[borisp]

What if it is my job to monitor those with Hugo's job? What is the likelihood that I experience your version of Hugo's story every single time with every single Hugo?

[andyfox]

It was evidently a sundog or a dust cloud.

I read both volumes. There's no science in either.