Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 62
  1. #41
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    976
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic View Post
    If you're making that claim, then support that it has never happened in human history. Just because you say it has never happened in human history, doesn't make it true.
    I make no claim. I simply state the obvious that the impossible doesn't happen. No one has regrown a limb. No one has ever been cured or healed from retardation, and no one has flown across the the grand canyon by flapping their arms.

    If you know of an instance please by all means reference it.

    To say that all that can't be proven not to have happened than did is silly on its face.

  2. #42
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    West / East Coast
    Posts
    3,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    Quote Originally Posted by TheSparrow View Post
    Guess he wasn't dead. Doctors make mistakes.
    When doctors pronounce someone is dead and flat lines, they don't say generally write on the medical records of the patient that it was a mistake or the instruments made a mistake when the person comes back to life. They generally say, they don't understand the phenomena or why that happened.

    Yet healing is presented in the Bible as evidence that God was real.
    The Bible doesn't present the events of miracles as litmus tests for God's existence. In the OT when the Jews witnessed miracle after miracle during the era with Mosses, many people still chose not to believe in Yahweh. In Jesus time, many people who witnessed the miracles of that time period, still chose not to believe. It would seem God is well aware of this fact -- then and now, that when dealing with the human consciousness, the evidence of miracles does not necessarily result in belief.

    Of course not. It's virtually impossible to prove a negative.
    How is it a negative? It's simply a medical condition that we may not have the full knowledge and complete facts on spanning human history. Thousands of years ago people lived to be hundreds of years old. Obviously, man had a different type of human constitution during that time period than our physiological state today. Man must of been much healthier to live that long when the environment was clearner. Just because we don't have the research and facts of the full span of human history, doesn't mean growing a new limb with God's help was not possible during ages past.

    But it certainly has not happened in modern history.
    Modern history is a tiny slice on the time line of human history.

    But there's no proof it was due to God, or for example Zeus or Buddha.
    A. If a person believes in a Creator,
    B. If that person is terminally ill with a non-operable, life threatening "we, medicine, can't do anything for you" cancer
    C. If that person prays along with her family and community for healing of the non curable, terminal cancer,
    D. And if the cancer disappears ...

    Reason and common sense would point to the cancer disappearing due to the grace of God working in their life.

    I'm not sure what exactly would convince me. If I was in church, and a man with 1 arm walked up during communion, and the priest poured the blessed wine on his stump, and a new arm grew, well that would certainly rock the foundations of my atheism.
    Your atheism might be even more rocked if after watching the priest pour the wine on the man's stump and nothing happened; but in the blink of the eye, your awareness changed and you became aware of God's presence. These sort of epiphanies (Road to Damascus) do happen and, yes, I would say they rock our world when they happen.

    That's nice, but doesn't help us non believers.
    But aren't non-believers suppose to respect the rules of logic and reason?

    Plus, if you'll notice, your 'experiment' and its rules are constructed in a way makes a false outcome impossible.
    "If I'm healed, God did it and therefore God exists"
    Here's where it becomes relevant and important to define God and the different ways grace (energy) can work in our life.

    "If I'm not healed, God exists and could have done it, but didn't for some reason known to him"
    "Or how about .... " if I'm not healed according to my request, I know God exists. I may not understand why God didn't heal my current request. I may not be currently aware of a more significant type of healing that he is doing in my life right now. But I will work on strengthening my partnership with him so my awareness and understanding of this process might be clearer."

    I can just as easily say:

    A. Buddha exists.
    B. I experience Buddha in my life through meditation.
    C. I believe in the power of meditation.
    D. I am blind. It is permanet condition and there is no treatment for my blindness.
    E. I will meditate on my healing.
    F. If I am healed, I will be grateful for Buddha's manifestation of blessing in my life.
    G. If I am not healed based upon my request, Buddha blesses me in other ways.
    H. I know that whether or not Buddha heals my blindness has nothing to do with Buddha's existence.
    I have no problem with that logic, do you?

    Does that help you accept the truth of Buddha's existence and power?
    Would you like me to point out the similarities of Buddha's teachings with Christ's?

    ---------- Post added at 04:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:55 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by kevin View Post
    If you know of an instance please by all means reference it.
    You're the one making the claim that is has never happened. Thus, you're the one that needs to support that it has never happened.

    In order to make a medical claim such as you are making about limbs never growing back, you would need to be aware and have the knowledge of a more complete reference of human history and the different stages of human physiology.

    As I just pointed out to Sparrow, man use to live to be hundreds of years old. Just because we don't understand how that longetivity was medically possible doesn't mean our current knowledge base of human physiology is aware of all known possibilities of human history, including new limbs growing.
    Last edited by eye4magic; November 27th, 2011 at 06:14 PM.
    "The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.” --"The Mental Universe” | Nature
    [Eye4magic]
    Super Moderator

  3. #43
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    976
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic View Post
    You're the one making the claim that is has never happened. Thus, you're the one that needs to support that it has never happened.

    In order to make a medical claim such as you are making about limbs never growing back, you would need to be aware and have the knowledge of a more complete reference of human history and the different stages of human physiology.

    As I just pointed out to Sparrow, man use to live to be hundreds of years old. Just because we don't understand how that longetivity was medically possible doesn't mean our current knowledge base of human physiology is aware of all known possibilities of human history, including new limbs growing.
    Really now. Humans never lived to be hundreds of years old. We don't regrow limbs. We aren't cured of retardation. We can't fly.

    There is real life and there are fairy tails and fantasy. You equate the two. They are not equal. I need not prove that we can't grow a leg back any more that I need to prove we can't fly or that Santa isn't real.

    Sorry to be so blunt, but honestly I keep seeing all these threads about this strange topic just wash rinse repeat. Prove there is no God. Or prove you we can't regrow limbs.

    There may be a God, but that God isn't regrowing human limbs, and doesn't care who we have sex with. There was no giant boat 4,000 years ago. We all didn't speak the same language until 3,000 years ago. We didn't live with Dinosaurs. Your anti logic and disdain for reality is childish.

  4. #44
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,053
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    Just to follow up a bit on what you've said, Kevin . . .

    When eye4magic or anyone else writes something like . . .
    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic
    As I just pointed out to Sparrow, man use to live to be hundreds of years old.[emphasis mine]
    . . . she is relying on nothing more than hearsay to establish her claim that "man use to live to be hundreds of years old."

    There is no medical or scientific evidence that substantiates her claim. There is nothing in recent observation that substantitates her claim. There is no direct evidence of any sort from which a reasonable inference may be drawn to substantiate her claim.

    What she relies upon to support her claim that "man use to live to be hundreds of years old" are the words written by anonymous people living millennia ago, words written in an age when exaggerated claims were commonplace. It's the absolute worst sort of hearsay.

    Few today in the West seriously rely on such "evidence" to substantiate any claim made about the world unless that claim is one they initially came to accept for reasons other than the rational.

    Futhermore, when she writes . . .
    Just because we don't understand how that longetivity was medically possible doesn't mean our current knowledge base of human physiology is aware of all known possibilities of human history, including new limbs growing.
    . . . she's written nothing of significance. This is because our "knowledge base" will never allow us to say with absolute certainty what is true about the world and what is false. Not just currently but at any point in history, all our knowledge base allows us to do is to reasonably believe what is the case and what is not the case.

    Again, no one is talking about what is absolutely certain to be the case. What is being discussed is what should be reasonably believed to be the case. And to believe against all available evidence (as is the case when someone believes that only a couple of millennia ago some men lived to be centuries old) is certainly not a reasonable belief to hold no matter which holy book might argue otherwise.

  5. #45
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,782
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic View Post
    When doctors pronounce someone is dead and flat lines, they don't say generally write on the medical records of the patient that it was a mistake or the instruments made a mistake when the person comes back to life. They generally say, they don't understand the phenomena or why that happened.
    So........therefore........God did it??????
    Please. Medical mistakes happen all the time.

    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic View Post
    The Bible doesn't present the events of miracles as litmus tests for God's existence. ....
    Yet the stories are included, and you yourself seem to be "finding" such "miracles" today and using them as evidence for His existence.

    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic View Post
    .... Thousands of years ago people lived to be hundreds of years old. Obviously, man had a different type of human constitution during that time period than our physiological state today....
    Please support this with evidence. (Hint, the bible does not count as evidence).


    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic View Post
    A. If a person believes in a Creator,
    B. If that person is terminally ill with a non-operable, life threatening "we, medicine, can't do anything for you" cancer
    C. If that person prays along with her family and community for healing of the non curable, terminal cancer,
    D. And if the cancer disappears ...

    Reason and common sense would point to the cancer disappearing due to the grace of God working in their life.
    Not at all. You are starting a premise based on what someone believes, then moving onto subsequent steps with the assumption that the belief necessitates God's existence.

    With 7 billion people in the world, I'm sure this has occurred:

    A. If a person believes in a Vishnu,
    B. If that person is terminally ill with a non-operable, life threatening "we, medicine, can't do anything for you" cancer
    C. If that person prays along with her family and community TO VISHNU for healing of the non curable, terminal cancer,
    D. And if the cancer disappears ...

    Reason and common sense would point to the cancer disappearing due to the grace of Vishnu working in their life.

    And please, Vishnu and the Cristian God are NOT one and the same.

    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic View Post
    Your atheism might be even more rocked if after watching the priest pour the wine on the man's stump and nothing happened; but in the blink of the eye, your awareness changed and you became aware of God's presence. These sort of epiphanies (Road to Damascus) do happen and, yes, I would say they rock our world when they happen.
    It hasn't happened to me, and as for it happening to others, I can point to individuals claiming through personal experience they have percieved the truthful existence of Vishnu. Does that prove Vishnu exists.

    But aren't non-believers suppose to respect the rules of logic and reason?
    Not if they hinge on unproven premises.

    for example:
    If Patty McFiddle believes in leprachauns and prays for them to give him money, and the next day he finds a shiny penny on the sidewalk, does it follow from the "rules of logic and reason" that leprachauns exist?

    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic View Post
    "Or how about .... " if I'm not healed according to my request, I know God exists. I may not understand why God didn't heal my current request. I may not be currently aware of a more significant type of healing that he is doing in my life right now. But I will work on strengthening my partnership with him so my awareness and understanding of this process might be clearer."



    I have no problem with that logic, do you?
    Just the premise (assumptions) that it is based upon.

    Would you like me to point out the similarities of Buddha's teachings with Christ's?[COLOR="Silver"]
    Would you like me to point out the MASSIVE fundamental differences?
    The Sparrow, Member of the God-Awful Atheist Syndicate

  6. #46
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,151
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    Quote Originally Posted by kevin View Post
    Your failure to understand doesn't change the fact that intelligent people have and continue to come to that very conclusion. What evidence out side the new testement is there that he did exist?
    Okay now what I want to do here is unpack the assumptions your question has. As such I'm not going to answer it, because while I could it would ignore the fact that you fundamentally misunderstand the manner in which ancient history works as betrayed by this question.

    What exactly is the New Testament? It is a combination of 27 different texts which arose from multiple strands of oral tradition or were letters written for specific purposes. Now the disparaging view in which oral tradition is held as a role of history is quite shocking given its historical basis. As a reference point here, lets look at Homer. Common consensus is that he composed in the 8th century BCE, now we have more or less in tact the entirety of what he composed 3 centuries later when writing starts to originiate. Indeed so faithful is the text that it preserves the memories of towns (archaeologically proven to exist) that were abandoned a further 3 centuries before Homer composed from older traditions, it preserves an account of a war in which Greeks fought on Asian soil and burnt down a major city in an accurate geographical setting (once again archaeologically proven). However this war also coincides with the decline in Mycenaean culture, what the poem also describes is the annihilation of many of the leading Greeks and huge amounts of man-power, those that did return returned to nigh on civil war or outright civil war (Neoptolomus, Orestes, Agamemnon, Odysseus) or altogether emigrated Greece (Diomedes), the causal links aren't too hard to draw. Now over 6 centuries we retain a faithful picture of the decline of civilisation, a war, and population centres later abandoned and not known to those the poem was for. What we have with Jesus is that within living memory oral traditions arise which went into the gospels (and bits of the epistles), and were reported as existing in the gospels. Now fine we can say there's embellishment in plot and the affairs but to suggest that within this time the whole scenario is fabricated is to fundamentally misunderstand how strong oral tradition is.

    So now let's look at what we know about oral tradition in the gospels. Its likely that the Mark and John are based on two separate traditions. We have a third Jewish tradition as to what happened at the crucifixion (the body was stolen), and we have at least a 4th (possibly multiple others) set up as a rival to Luke in his opening narrative. We then have Paul in his epistles writing independent theology off the assumption at least some of these oral traditions are true. Now, one thing all the traditions have in common is the existence of Jesus, the best (indeed the only sensible way) to explain this is that there was a figure of Jesus. Indeed I think the multiple traditions heavy similarities in theology and factual account is sufficient to rule out the multiple Jesus theory Sig advocated as well (though that is certainly more tenable than outright denial).

    Now with this in mind you should hopefully understand why your question is irrelevant to gathering a factual historicity of a Jesus figure. I could present you more "evidence" but it is probably based on the biblical oral traditions anyway (that is to say Tacitus, Josephus, Suetonius etc.) and therefore useless for historicity discussions. What's more important is the unpacking of what is known from the NT.
    -=]Eliotitus[=-
    "Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future"- Oscar Wilde

  7. #47
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,053
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    The comparison of the New Testament and the works of Homer that you make, I believe, is apt. And FWIW, I believe the NT is every bit as reliable a view of the world as is the Iliad.

  8. #48
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,151
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodriguez View Post
    The comparison of the New Testament and the works of Homer that you make, I believe, is apt. And FWIW, I believe the NT is every bit as reliable a view of the world as is the Iliad.
    I think you've rather missed the point, and in any case haven't engaged with any of the points raised. While rhetorically useful, your response is defunct of substance when it comes as a rebuttal to what I've just pointed out. In any case, when the oral tradition was "composed" for Homer (for want of a better word, the work was original but not independent of source) it was 50 odd generations detached from the war, when we have it written down it was a further 50 generations and yet its accuracy is none the less astounding. Yes there are anachronisms (Jesus' prophecy of the fall of the temple of Jerusalem springs to mind), yes there is divine embellishment fit for purpose (need I say more on the comparison of Jesus), but despite the fact there are only 2 surviving strands of oral tradition (the Homeric and Egyptian alluded to in Herodotus which can barely be described as surviving at all) we have a largely in tact story. With Jesus the oral traditions are developed and preached within two generations and certainly within living memory of some (Paul actually explicitly mentions them in 1 Corinthians 15 whether he's correct about them being witnesses after the fact of the resurrection or not). Moreover Luke expresses a clear concern for preserving the historicity that was present in at least some of these strands in Luke 1 (which would of course have been an anachronism to Homer).

    What's more we have a clearly articulated rival strand from the Jews, a hostile group to Jesus (and this bit is real important) does not question Jesus' existence despite being historical contemporaries in the very same geographic region. On the contrary they say his body was stolen by the disciples, now he has to have lived for that to happen. The oral traditions of the bible have to have a factual historical basis in order for this rival tradition to make any sense whatsoever. The only alternative is to claim that all Jews in Jerusalem at that time were dullards, or in collusion with the Christians about fabricating Jesus. We have significant Jewish conversions (as evidenced by Paul's letters to the Hebrews and Corinthians [where he makes the point the divide between Jew and Greek is non-existent in Christ, I don't remember the verse off the top of my head but can bring it up if you so please]) before the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans so you can't even claim distraction. In light of this it is historically ludicrous to deny a historical basis to the Gospels.
    -=]Eliotitus[=-
    "Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future"- Oscar Wilde

  9. #49
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    West / East Coast
    Posts
    3,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    Quote Originally Posted by TheSparrow View Post
    So........therefore........God did it??????
    What raised Lazarus from the dead in the example you submitted that you seem to be looking for? Did God do it? Maybe Lazurus wasn't really dead, maybe he was just in a deep sleep.

    Earlier you stated: "Jesus also rose Lazarus from the dead. That would be sufficient for me. Someone cold dead and rotting for days in a tomb, revived and repaired to be alive again."

    This Russian scientist was dead, cold in a morgue for three days when he came back into his body from his spiritual experience. He died as a life-long atheist scientist, and when he came back he was not only a believer and a changed man, but he became a pastor.

    Don't you see, you establish a criteria for evidence as you stated in your comment. But when you're presented with similar evidence, it's not sufficient. If this isn't' extra-ordinary, then toss our reason and intellectual honesty.

    Yet the stories are included,
    They're included because they are historical events that took place along with a whole other set of events.

    and you yourself seem to be "finding" such "miracles" today and using them as evidence for His existence.
    I don't require miracles to know and partner up with God. It would seem that you are the one looking for some type of new limb-growing evidence to consider God's evidence/ existence.

    Again, the miraculous does not necessarily result in belief.

    Please support this with evidence. (Hint, the bible does not count as evidence).
    If you don't want to consider the historical events of the Bible as evidence, so be it.

    However, if this is the case, then you have to withdraw some of your arguments.

    Sparrow "but the Bible itself established 'healing' as proof of God's power. Jesus specifically makes the lame walk or the blind see etc. That is healing, specifically repairing of a damaged part of the body."

    If you don't regard the Bible as evidence of historical events, then retract your comment since the Bible, according to you, does not establish healing as proof of God's power; Jesus doesn't make the lame walk or the blind see.

    Sparrow: "Jesus also rose lazarus from the dead. That would be sufficient for me. Someone cold dead and rotting for days in a tomb, revived and repaired to be alive again."

    If the Bible is not evidence of historical events:, then Jesus did not raise Lazarus from the dead. Thus, that can't be sufficient for you because it never happened.

    Why did you even bring the Bible into the debate if it's not evidence of historical events?

    As far as supporting the longevity during the Biblical era here's some references.

    The Scientific Evidence for Biblical Longevity

    7. Josephus, Flavius. Complete Works of Flavius Josephus. Ant. III. 9. Translated by William Whiston. Kregel Publications Grand Rapids MI. 1981.

    8. Hoeijmakers JHJ. Genome maintenance mechanisms for preventing cancer. Nature.411:366-374. 2001.

    9. A second source of radiation is termed background radiation. The source of this radiationcomes from the radioactive decay of the minerals in the earth's crust. This type of radiation and its effects on longevity, good and bad will be discussed later in this paper.

    10. The Cosmos: cosmic rays and magnetic fields. Britannica CD 98 Multimedia Edition 1998.

    11. Photo courtesy of NASA. The edge of a supernova remnant shell as captured by the NASA Space Telescope in this image of the Pencil Nebula. Officially know as NGC 2736 the pencil nebula is part of the Vela Supernova remnant. Sir John Herschel discovered it in the 1840s. Thel ong thin appearance gave it its name. This picture shows the shock wave encountering interstellar gas. This superheats the gases and causes them to glow giving it a rippled-like look.Mendez 34

    12. Aharonian FA. et al. High-energy particle acceleration in the shell of a supernova remnant.Nature. 432:75-77. 2004.

    This paper shows that the supernova RX J1713.7—3946 and its associated supernova remnant shell (SNR) can be directly tied to various cosmic ray showers that occur in the Earth's atmosphere. This supernova has particles accelerated to energies of more than 100TeV. This is the first direct evidence that SNR accelerate atomic particles causing cosmic rays, which then strike the earth. This SNR is an ever-expanding shell of super fast and highly charged particles. The earth's bombardment by these particles would affect the earth, man, biological life, and the
    various chemical processes that take place on it.

    13. Brakenridge GR. Terrestrial Paleoenvironmental effects of a late Quaternary-age supernova. Icarus. 46:81-93. 1981.

    The fluctuation of the amount of cosmic rays striking the earth's upper atmosphere due to a SNR would also affect the atmospheric production of carbon-14 (14C).

    14. Cosmic ray energy is usually measured in units of MeV, for mega-electron volts (million), or GeV, for giga-electron volts (billion). 1eV = energy an electron gains when it accelerates through a potential difference of 1 volt. Most primary galactic cosmic rays have energies between 100 MeV and 10 GeV. A proton with 100 MeV is equivalent to a proton with a velocity of about 40% the speed of light, 10 GeV equivalent to more than 99% the speed of light. Large energy cosmic rays are very rare. Recently the supernova RXJ1713.7-3946 was determined to accelerate particles to speeds of more than 100 TeV (tera = 3 fold or 1,000×billion or 1012eV see reference 12 above) Large energy cosmic rays in the GeV range are high-speed protons with the equivalent energy of a baseball traveling almost 100 mph, TeV cosmic rays would be proportionally faster, theoretically they would be traveling faster than the "local" speedof light. This can be confirmed by the emission of Cherenkov light from the cosmic rayshowers. This Cherenkov light is analogous to the sonic wave created by high velocity objects. The faster than light particles ionize the air and create measurable light.

    15. Betelgeuse Supernova. Artwork by Joe Tucciarone. Used with permission. 2403 West Friday Circle Cocoa, Florida 32926.

    Many scientists believe that the star Betelgeuse a red giant a 1000 times larger than our sun in the constellation of Orion may become a supernova in our lifetime—or at least in the next 10 million years. This picture is a rendering of what the cataclysmic 600 light years away may looklike from the vantage point of our solar system.

    16. Erlykin AD. Wolfendale AW. Spectral features and masses in the PeV region. XII International Symposium on Very High Energy Cosmic Ray Interactions, CERN, Geneva, 15-19 July 2002.

    17. Erlykin AD. Wolfendale AW. High-energy cosmic gamma rays from a 'single source.' Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics. 29:4:718-28. 2003.
    Mendez 35

    18. Another exploding supernova may have lead to the demise of the pre-Adamic world. The Vela Supernova (PSR-0833-45) exploded several tens of thousands of years ago. This could have been one of the factors that lead to the destruction during the war in heaven mentioned in Revelation 12:7. If the earth's atmosphere was nonexistent a SNR shell striking the earth could have affected the decay rates of many of the radioactive minerals that are found in the surface ofthe earth.

    Aschenbach B. Egger R. Trumper J. Discovery of explosion fragments outside the Vela supernova remnant shock-wave boundary. Nature. 373:587-90. 1995.
    Furthermore, the angular offset of the objects' origin divided by the proper motion velocity of 0.049 arcsec yr -1 gives an independently determined age of the Vela SNR of t =18,000 ± 9,000 years. Lyne AG. et al. Very low braking index for the Vela pulsar. Nature. 381:497-98. 1996.…the age derived for the Vela is 22-29 kyr…

    19. Photo courtesy of NASA. This image of 1,500,000°C gas in the Sun's thin, outer atmosphere (corona) was taken March 13, 1996 by the Extreme Ultraviolet Imaging Telescope onboard the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) spacecraft. Every feature in the image traces magnetic field structures. This telescope is of such high quality that more of the subtle details are visible.

    20. Burchuladze AA. Pagava AV. et al. Short-term variations of cosmogenic radiocarbon with solar activity. Proceeding of the 16th International Cosmic Ray Conference. University of Tokyo. Japan. MG3-1:200-5. 1979.

    It now seems established that there exist an anticorrelation between sunspot numbers and production of radiocarbon, at least for the solar cycle with the period of 80-90 years. It is believed that this effect is due to the modulation of galactic cosmic rays by solar wind…This would indicate about 25% variations of the radiocarbon production rate during the solar cycle 19.

    21. The sun's sunspot activity is an indicator of solar output and magnetic strength. Depending on the magnetic strength of the sun more or less cosmic rays would reach the earth. The cosmic rays show an inverse relationship to the sunspot cycle. The sun's magnetic field is stronger during times when sunspots are at a maximum and this shields the Earth from cosmic rays For information on sunspot and their relation to amount of cosmic ray striking the earth see: Eddy JA. The Maunder Minimum. Science. 192:1189-1203. 1976. For information on the effect the sunspot minimum had on the climate and historical records relating to it see:Mendez 36 Beckman JE. Mahoney TJ. The Maunder minimum and climate change: have historical records aided current research? Library and Information Services in Astronomy III. (ed) U. Grothkopf. Astronomical Society of the Pacific. ASP Conference Series. 153:212-217. 1998.

    22. Reiter P. From Shakespeare to Defoe: malaria in England in the Little Ice Age. Emerging Infectious Diseases-Perspectives. 6:1:1-11. 2000.

    23. This is one of the reasons that 14C dates that cannot be historically verified are dubious. For more information on the fluctuations inherent in carbon dating see:
    Mendez AC. Factors affecting 14C dating. Noah's Ark–Early Man Seminars and website. www.amendez.com. 2005.

    24. Cosmic rays not only shorten life spans but they also produce 14C. For more on how the magnetic field of the earth protects us from galactic cosmic rays see:
    Lingenfelter RE. Ramaty R. Astrophysical and geophysical variations in C14 production.Nobel Symposium 12th: 1969:Uppsala Universitet. Wiley Interscience Division. New York. p.513-537. 1970.

    Abstract—"In the present paper we study time-dependent variations in the production rate of C14, resulting from changes in various astrophysical and geophysical factors. The general success of the C14 dating method implies that to a first approximation the production rate of C14 has been essentially constant for the last several millennia. However, a variety of phenomena cause change in the production rate, which in turn may produce measurable perturbations in the biospheric C14 activity. In particular, we shall consider changes in C14 production caused by variations in the terrestrial and interplanetary magnetic fields, leading to changes in the flux of galactic cosmic rays at the earth, and by enhanced fluxes of particles produced by solar flares and by variations in the local interstellar cosmic-ray flux produced by nearby supernova explosions. We calculate the yields of C14 from the interaction of proton, alpha particles and high-energy gamma rays as functions of the incident energy. Using models of the modulation of the cosmic-ray spectrum by terrestrial and interplanetary magnetic fields and of the possible time variations of these fields, we then compute the resultant changes in C14 production. Similarly, from estimates of the rates of occurrences of the solar flares and supernovae and their particle and radiation-flux densities at the earth, we calculate the possible C14-production variations."For more on the interaction of the magnetic field of the earth and cosmic rays see the following:

    Barton CE. Merill RT. Barbetti M. Intensity of the Earth's magnetic field over the last 10 000 years. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors. 20:96-110. 1979.

    Bucha V. Influence of the Earth's magnetic field on radiocarbon dating. Nobel Symposium 12th:1969:Uppsala Universitet. Wiley Interscience Division. New York. p. 501-511. 1970. Labeyrie J. Delibrias G. Duplessy JC. The possible origin of natural carbon radioactivity fluctuations in the past. Nobel Symposium 12th:1969:Uppsala Universitet. Wiley Interscience Division. New York. p. 513-537. 1970.Mendez 37 Merril RT. The Earth's Magnetic Field: Its History, Origin, and Planetary Perspective. Academic Press Inc. London. pp. 100-109. 1983.

    Suess H. The three causes of the secular C14 fluctuations, their amplitudes and time constants. Nobel Symposium 12th:1969:Uppsala Universitet. Wiley Interscience Division. New York. p. 595-605. 1970.

    25. Photo courtesy of NASA.

    26. Illustration courtesy of the United States Geological Survey (USGS). 222Rn comes from the decay cycle of 238U, which occurs in many types of granites and other igneous rocks (220Rn is in the decay cycle of 232Th). As radium decays it is converted into different atoms some being more stable than others. The final end product is lead, which is not radioactive. Radon is a gas and it can mix with atmospheric air and enter closed confined areas such as homes, mines, and caves. 222Rn has a half-life of about 3.8 days.

    27. Hoeijmakers JHJ. Genome maintenance mechanisms for preventing cancer. Nature.411:366-374. 2001.

    The physicochemical constitution of our genes does not guarantee life-long stability or proper function. A perplexing diversity of lesions arises in DNA from…environmental agents such as the ultraviolet (UV) component of sunlight, ionizing radiation and numerous genotoxic chemicals (can) cause alterations in DNA structure, which, if left unrepaired, may lead to mutations that enhance cancer risk.
    28. Nero AV. et al. Distribution of Airborne Radon-222 concentrations in U.S. homes.Science. 234:992-997. 1986.

    29. Many studies have been done where mice have been kept in radiation proof containers at the bottom of abandoned mines and no observable difference in life span was noted. Does this go contrary to the conclusions of this paper? The answer is no! When the earth was destroyed (Genesis 6:13) many factors changed. Human longevity is a complex mechanism that probably will not ever be able to be completely reestablished. What this paper is trying to do is to show a few of the factors that govern longevity have been changed and how they have been changed.
    Showing that something was once possible in the past does not mean it can be duplicated today. The past is more complex than is realized. For example there is strong scientific evidence that the ancient atmosphere held more atmospheric oxygen than it now has. Simply because scientists know this and can prove it by commenting on present day processes does not mean that they will be able to reproduce the ancient atmosphere. It would be ludicrous to expect them to be able to do that—the same can be said for studies dealing with patriarchal longevity.

    Not at all. You are starting a premise based on what someone believes,
    Atheists don't believe. Eight years ago a neighbor of ours (a non-believer) was diagnosed with terminal "can't-do- anything -for-you-cancer" He was given three months max to live. He did not want to undergo therapy and suffer through the chemo the last few days of his life. His family and community prayed for him extensively. He didn't believe anything would save him. He was a true skeptic. His cancer went into submission. Today he is a believer.

    then moving onto subsequent steps with the assumption that the belief necessitates God's existence.
    Belief doesn't necessitate God's existence. Lots of people don't believe, yet they experience God's grace in their lives whether they are aware of it or not. Spirit is Spirit whether or not we believe in the Spirit. The Spirit works in those that believe and those that don't believe -- that's what unconditional love is all about.

    A. If a person believes in a Vishnu,
    B. If that person is terminally ill with a non-operable, life threatening "we, medicine, can't do anything for you" cancer
    C. If that person prays along with her family and community TO VISHNU for healing of the non curable, terminal cancer,
    D. And if the cancer disappears ...

    Reason and common sense would point to the cancer disappearing due to the grace of Vishnu working in their life.
    I have no problem with this, do you?

    And please, Vishnu and the Cristian God are NOT one and the same.
    God is God. One Spirit, different aspects and manifestations throughout the world cultures. I have no problem with Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. Do you? They are all manifestations of the One God, One Spirit. 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 = 1.

    It hasn't happened to me,
    Anything is possible.

    and as for it happening to others, I can point to individuals claiming through personal experience they have percieved the truthful existence of Vishnu. Does that prove Vishnu exists.
    Yes, the Spirit of Vishnu exists. As I began my initial comment on this thread to Sig. ... "Define God (Spirit) if you really want evidence of the Creator."

    Not if they hinge on unproven premises.
    I thought you're the one along with a few others on this thread who have presented a logical fallacy: If an amputee does not grow back a limb when we pray for them, it follows that God does not exist.

    If Patty McFiddle believes in leprachauns and prays for them to give him money, and the next day he finds a shiny penny on the sidewalk, does it follow from the "rules of logic and reason" that leprachauns exist?
    I cannot support that leprachauns do not exist. Can you support that they do not exist?

    Would you like me to point out the MASSIVE fundamental differences?
    The differences are in tradition, practice and some issues pertaining to salvation. The many similarities, and for that matter throughout the world religions, are far reaching.

    World Scripture
    A Comparative Anthology of Sacred Texts

    Ultimate Reality and the Purpose of Human Existence
    Evil, Sin, and the Human Fall
    Salvation and the Savior
    The Religious Life
    Providence, Society, and the Kingdom of Heaven
    Last edited by eye4magic; November 28th, 2011 at 07:23 PM.
    "The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.” --"The Mental Universe” | Nature
    [Eye4magic]
    Super Moderator

  10. #50
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,053
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    Eliotitus, you seem to confuse two persons. You seem to confuse the Jesus of the New Testament and the historical character or characters upon whom the Jesus of the New Testament is based.

    I don't quibble about the alleged existence of an itinerant Jewish rabbi (or two or three such rabbis) who preached a reformist Jewish message around Galilee in the first century upon whom the "Jesus" character in the New Testament is based. I don't quibble about the existence of ANY historical person who is alleged to be the basis for the creation of a latter mythical character. I don't quibble about this because even if it is true it is utterly unremarkable.

    What I and others take issue with is the notion that such historical, once-existing people were born of virgins or performed feats of faith healing or were resurrected from the dead. THOSE claims ARE remarkable and are extremely unlikely to be true.

    So, first, you need to make clear precisely what it is that you are arguing for. Is it your claim that perhaps a charismatic, itinerant Jewish reformist rabbi (or two or three) once lived in the first century in Palestine, a person (or persons) upon whom the legendary figure of "Jesus Christ, son of God" was later built OR is it your claim that there once lived a charismatic, Jewish rabbi in first-century Palestine who was actually born of a virgin, actually performed miraculous acts, and actually was resurrected three days after death?

    Those are two vastly different claims. The first claim is not extraordinary. I have no idea about the claim's actual veracity but it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility that a charismatic jewish Rabbi did live in the first century in Palestin and was the basis of the legendary character "Jesus Christ, son of God" and so from this perspective it's not worth my time to argue to the contrary.

    OTOH, the second claim IS extraordinary. To argue that an actual man was born of a virgin, cured blindness, walked on water, turned actual water into actual wine, satisfactorily fed 500 people with a couple of loaves of bread and a few fish, was resurrected from the dead, etc., flies in the face of everything we today believe to be true about how the world works. I think it is well worth my time to point out that this claim is false and is nothing more than Christian propaganda.

    Next, I don't see the point of lecturing anyone on oral tradition. It is entirely irrelevant to this discussion. Yes, in the ancient world historical, mythical, and other information was communicated from generation to generation by the oral tradition. Yes, such information, due to the particular patterns of rhythym and rhyme used, was communicated in a remarkably accurate fashion.

    So what?

    This in no way gives anyone any reason to believe that the information communicated was true to begin with.

    If I say to B that I saw a man walk on water and B accurately, word for word, repeats that same message to C who in turn repeats it accurately to D and so on until finally Z hears the same message and hears it exactly as I first related it to B, this is not the slightest reason for anyone to believe that my claim is true.

    ---------- Post added at 11:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:42 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic
    Eight years ago a neighbor of ours (a non-believer) was diagnosed with terminal "can't-do- anything -for-you-cancer" He was given three months max to live. He did not want to undergo therapy and suffer through the chemo the last few days of his life. His family and community prayed for him extensively. He didn't believe anything would save him. He was a true skeptic. His cancer went into submission. Today he is a believer.
    My dog had a cancerous tumor on her leg. Our vet told us that the tumor was malignant, likely to spread rapidly, and unfortunately was in a location in which surgery was almost certain to be ineffective. The best we could do, we were told, was to keep the dog as comfortable and pain-free for as long as possible but that eventually the dog, within a matter of a couple of months probably, would have to be put down.

    That was three years ago. The tumor disappeared and hasn't returned. The vet can't explain it.

    Oh, btw, I'm an atheist and never once considered praying to Allah or to any other mythical being for help. Same goes for my wife. FWIW, our dog too is an atheist.

    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic
    Eight years ago a neighbor of ours (a non-believer) was diagnosed with terminal "can't-do- anything -for-you-cancer" He was given three months max to live. He did not want to undergo therapy and suffer through the chemo the last few days of his life. His family and community prayed for him extensively. He didn't believe anything would save him. He was a true skeptic. His cancer went into submission. Today he is a believer.
    This raises an interesting question. I wonder if Eye4 and her community know any amputees (Christian amputees, atheist amputees, or any other kind) worth praying for? Maybe she does. Maybe she'll pray for them. Maybe in a few months we'll read about the miraculous regeneration of an amputee's missing limb after Eye4 and her community prays for the amputee.

    But no one who doesn't enjoy throwing away their money should bet that way because throwing away their money is exactly what anyone who does bet that way will be doing.

    A certain percentage of cancers, even the deadliest of cancers, go into remission whether the patient who has the cancer is a Christian or an atheist or anything else. NO amputee regenerates a missing limb whether the amputee is a Christian or an atheist or anything else. If there exists an omnipotent god who responds to prayer this is a curious fact, isn't it?

  11. #51
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    West / East Coast
    Posts
    3,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodriguez View Post
    A certain percentage of cancers, even the deadliest of cancers, go into remission whether the patient who has the cancer is a Christian or an atheist or anything else. NO amputee regenerates a missing limb whether the amputee is a Christian or an atheist or anything else. If there exists an omnipotent god who responds to prayer this is a curious fact, isn't it?
    Well Rod, if you're comparing those two conditions, a deadly cancer verses a lost limb, it would seem to me that there's nothing profoundly confusing.

    Deadly cancers are life-threatening. Not having a limb is not. People can survive and continue to have awareness without a limb and some people even choose to thrive. So if the spirit of prayer is going to work, saving a life from a deadly cancer or another deadly disease would seem reasonable and not curious.
    "The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.” --"The Mental Universe” | Nature
    [Eye4magic]
    Super Moderator

  12. #52
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,053
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    John 15:7 says: "If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you."

    That doesn't appear to be delimited to only life-threatening conditions.

    Jesus of the New Testament allegedly healed the blind and the lame. Do you think that Jesus (pretending for a moment that he was real) should have concentrated on the more seriously afflicted, as it seems you and your group do, and not have bothered with people with non-life-threatening conditions?

  13. #53
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,782
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    You seem to be getting confused as to my position so I will re-state it again.
    1. The bible quotes miracles of healing supposedly performed by Jesus. IMO, these are included in the text as evidence/proof of God's existence and power. Since the bible is divinely inspired, then it is God's intent to prove his existence to us through miracles of healing.

    2. Since God felt it was appropriate during the time of Jesus to provide evidence for his existence, I would like God to provide evidence now to me today to help convince me of his existence.

    3. You yourself have posted youtube clips and articles to me claiming they are evidence of God's existence, so apparently you also feel healing can be used as evidence.

    4. My only request is that the evidence/example be strong enough to remove doubt of mere medical mistakes to (in worse case) willful deception. None of your examples has convinced me of that,

    5. A specific lack of healing in a given case is not (to me) evidence that God doesn't exist, but instead merely continues to leave me with a lack of evidence that he does exist.

    6. I've given you an example of what would be strong evidence for me, that is the pouring of wine on an amputated stump.


    Is that clear enough?


    What raised Lazarus from the dead in the example you submitted that you seem to be looking for? Did God do it? Maybe Lazurus wasn't really dead, maybe he was just in a deep sleep.
    I agree. I wasn't there to smell his rotting flesh.

    Earlier you stated: "Jesus also rose Lazarus from the dead. That would be sufficient for me. Someone cold dead and rotting for days in a tomb, revived and repaired to be alive again."

    This Russian scientist was dead, cold in a morgue for three days when he came back into his body from his spiritual experience. He died as a life-long atheist scientist, and when he came back he was not only a believer and a changed man, but he became a pastor.
    What part of "rotting" do you not understand?

    Don't you see, you establish a criteria for evidence as you stated in your comment. But when you're presented with similar evidence, it's not sufficient. If this isn't' extra-ordinary, then toss our reason and intellectual honesty.
    Your 'evidence' is not similar enough, see above.

    Yet the stories are included,
    They're included because they are historical events that took place along with a whole other set of events.
    I see. So therefore the bible should also mention Jesus picking his teeth after a meal or going to the washroom.
    Please, they are included to provide evidence of God's power.

    Again, the miraculous does not necessarily result in belief.
    Ok.......so............I'm saying that proper evidence for a miracle would help me believe is all.


    However, if this is the case, then you have to withdraw some of your arguments.

    Sparrow "but the Bible itself established 'healing' as proof of God's power. Jesus specifically makes the lame walk or the blind see etc. That is healing, specifically repairing of a damaged part of the body."

    If you don't regard the Bible as evidence of historical events, then retract your comment since the Bible, according to you, does not establish healing as proof of God's power; Jesus doesn't make the lame walk or the blind see.
    Please re-read the summary of my position above

    If the Bible is not evidence of historical events:, then Jesus did not raise Lazarus from the dead. Thus, that can't be sufficient for you because it never happened.
    You are correct, the story in itself is not sufficient. But what the bible documents is an apparent form of communication between Him and the people on earth, that is, performing acts of healing.
    I'm simply asking for more of such communication, to me, in the present day, with sufficient controls to assure me what is happening is really happening.

    Why did you even bring the Bible into the debate if it's not evidence of historical events?
    see above.

    As far as supporting the longevity during the Biblical era here's some references.
    ...
    ...
    ...
    I see. And all of those changes to radiation levels etc happened in the last 5000 years?
    I'm not going to get into link wars with you, but you know perfectly well I can find equivalent sources counteracting each of your 'supporting evidences'.

    Atheists don't believe. ....
    ??? so ???
    Your logic change starts with the premise of someone who believes. Your statements, not mine.


    Belief doesn't necessitate God's existence. Lots of people don't believe, yet they experience God's grace in their lives whether they are aware of it or not. Spirit is Spirit whether or not we believe in the Spirit. The Spirit works in those that believe and those that don't believe -- that's what unconditional love is all about.
    This statement is lovely and poetic, but contains absolutely no verifiable concrete facts.
    How does one measure "God's grace". How does one tell if something is due to God's grace or not?


    A. If a person believes in a Vishnu,
    B. If that person is terminally ill with a non-operable, life threatening "we, medicine, can't do anything for you" cancer
    C. If that person prays along with her family and community TO VISHNU for healing of the non curable, terminal cancer,
    D. And if the cancer disappears ...

    Reason and common sense would point to the cancer disappearing due to the grace of Vishnu working in their life.
    I have no problem with this, do you?
    Well, you are contradicting yourself. Vishnu and the christian God are not one and the same, so which is true?

    God is God. One Spirit, different aspects and manifestations throughout the world cultures. I have no problem with Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. Do you? They are all manifestations of the One God, One Spirit. 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 = 1.
    Then you have diluted and altered the meaning of christianity to the point where it is no longer christianity. You've made a generic God. I encourage you to start a thread with many of the brilliant christians on this board, like Apok or Spart for example, and tell him that the Christian God and Vishnu are the same God. Good luck.

    Anything is possible.
    Yup, and I'm waiting. I'm not scared of becoming a theist. I just can't fool myself about it is all. I have to have a reason to believe that stands up to scrutiny.

    and as for it happening to others, I can point to individuals claiming through personal experience they have percieved the truthful existence of Vishnu. Does that prove Vishnu exists.
    Yes, the Spirit of Vishnu exists. As I began my initial comment on this thread to Sig. ... "Define God (Spirit) if you really want evidence of the Creator."
    Vishnu <> Christian god. Which is it?

    I thought you're the one along with a few others on this thread who have presented a logical fallacy: If an amputee does not grow back a limb when we pray for them, it follows that God does not exist.
    That's not what I'm asking for. I'm not saying no limb grown proves God doesn't exist, I'm saying a limb growing would help prove to me he might. the reason I don't believe because I have a lack of supporting evidence, not because I have evidence He DOESN'T exist.

    I cannot support that leprachauns do not exist. Can you support that they do not exist?
    See above.

    The differences are in tradition, practice and some issues pertaining to salvation. The many similarities, and for that matter throughout the world religions, are far reaching.
    Wrong.
    Lets talk Buddhism vs Christianity on some CORE foundations.
    1. Jesus is God. There is only 1 God <> Buddha is not God. Buddha is arguably not even a deity. He's just a teacher who discovered the way to eternal peace and bliss(nirvanna) along with many who followed after him.
    2. There is no reincarnation in Christianity <> Reincarnation occurs until you've attained perfection and no longer need to be reborn.
    3. Salvation = joining the christian god in heaven when you die <> Nirvanna = ending the cycle of rebirth through the perfection of oneself over multiple lifetimes.
    4. Salvation occurs through love/acceptance of Jesus <> Nirvanna has nothing to do with "loving" Buddha. It is attained through training of the mind.

    These are huge fundamental differences.
    You can only make Christianity = Buddhism if you remove so much of their essential qualities that they no longer resemble what they are defined to be.

    ---------- Post added at 07:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:51 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic View Post
    Well Rod, if you're comparing those two conditions, a deadly cancer verses a lost limb, it would seem to me that there's nothing profoundly confusing.

    Deadly cancers are life-threatening. Not having a limb is not. People can survive and continue to have awareness without a limb and some people even choose to thrive. So if the spirit of prayer is going to work, saving a life from a deadly cancer or another deadly disease would seem reasonable and not curious.
    So, if they are "equivalent" then why don't we see re-grown limbs?
    The Sparrow, Member of the God-Awful Atheist Syndicate

  14. #54
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    West / East Coast
    Posts
    3,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    Quote Originally Posted by TheSparrow View Post
    You seem to be getting confused as to my position so I will re-state it again. 1. The bible quotes miracles of healing supposedly performed by Jesus. IMO, these are included in the text as evidence/proof of God's existence and power. Since the bible is divinely inspired, then it is God's intent to prove his existence to us through miracles of healing.

    Since God felt it was appropriate during the time of Jesus to provide evidence for his existence,
    If you don't want me to use the Bible as a reference, how do you know God felt, let alone why would you even consider that God felt it was appropriate during the time of Jesus to provide evidence for his existence?

    I'm not trying to be confrontational -- I'm just trying to understand your logic. If you don't want to consider the Bible as a point of evidence (which you asked me not to do, though you brought the Bible into the debate), then how is any reference to the Bible by you not contradictory?

    3. You yourself have posted youtube clips and articles to me claiming they are evidence of God's existence,
    I have no problem with the Bible. I have a high respect for the Bible. You're the one who asked me not use it a reference.

    so apparently you also feel healing can be used as evidence.
    Of course, it can be used as evidence, from my point of view. But if you don't want to consider the Bible as evidence, which apparently you don't, what does it matter what the Bible teaches about God's power. Again, you asked me not to submit the Bible as evidence. If something is not considered as evidence, then isn't it off the table? It didn't happen. If it didn't happen. how can it, even as an example, be brought into the argument?

    More specific evidence I have asked for is to show me proof of healings.
    I have submitted quite a few. I understand you don't find these examples as sufficient. So be it.

    4. My only request is that the evidence/example be strong enough to remove doubt of mere medical mistakes
    Can you support that all the links (examples) I submitted were written up on the medical records by the patient's doctor as a medical mistake?

    None of your examples has convinced me of that,
    I'm not sure you really know what is sufficient to convince you. But that's not really usual. Again, miracles don't guarantee belief.

    I might recommend you consider perhaps a different approach.

    6. I've given you an example of what would be strong evidence for me, that is the pouring of wine on an amputated stump.
    Why wouldn't a sudden change of awareness by you be a stronger case of evidence?

    I agree. I wasn't there to smell his rotting flesh.
    So maybe it didn't really happen since the Bible is not a reference point.

    What part of "rotting" do you not understand?
    He was rotting, turned all blue and very decrepit looking.

    Your 'evidence' is not similar enough, see above.
    Your "similar reference" is not really valid, since it's not on the table as a reference point.

    I'm saying that proper evidence for a miracle would help me believe is all.
    Would a sudden deposit in your bank account for $1 million dollars be evidence for you, if you asked God for it?

    You are correct, the story in itself is not sufficient. But what the bible documents is an apparent form of communication between Him and the people on earth,
    Why does that matter to you if you don't want to consider the Bible as a reference? The Bible also documents man's longevity and a whole lot of other events.

    'm simply asking for more of such communication, to me, in the present day, with sufficient controls to assure me what is happening is really happening.
    If God speaks to man through our inner hearing, do you think you would be sensitive to perceive and recognize his communication with you?

    I'm not going to get into link wars with you, but you know perfectly well I can find equivalent sources counteracting each of your 'supporting evidences'.
    You're welcome to start a thread on the subject to argue and counter this support.

    Atheists don't believe. .... ??? so ???
    Your logic change starts with the premise of someone who believes. Your statements, not mine.
    It was an example. God's grace in our life is not restricted to work through just believers. In that belief and faith certainly play an important role, the agency of grace is not biased but seems to observe the quality of the heart.

    This statement is lovely and poetic, but contains absolutely no verifiable concrete facts.
    The facts are demonstrated through observation and working with all sorts of people, believers, non-believers, in-betweeners. Even the Bible which we're not using as a reference demonstrates how the Spirit of God will work through non-believers.

    How does one measure "God's grace". How does one tell if something is due to God's grace or not?
    Good question Sir. One that has probably been discussed on ODN many times.

    By getting to know the Source, God. By establishing a personal relationship, an intimate, one-on-one relationship with the source of the grace > God.

    Then you have diluted and altered the meaning of christianity to the point where it is no longer christianity.
    Sparrow, you're the one who threw out the Bible, not me.

    You've made a generic God.
    What God would you like to be believe in? What God do you want evidence for?

    I encourage you to start a thread with many of the brilliant christians on this board, like Apok or Spart for example, and tell him that the Christian God and Vishnu are the same God.
    I didn't say they are the same. What does Spirit mean to you?

    Yup, and I'm waiting. I'm not scared of becoming a theist.
    Good, it can happen.

    I just can't fool myself about it is all. I have to have a reason to believe that stands up to scrutiny.
    I think for most believers, truth is the recognizable reason for belief. Can you recognize truth?

    I don't believe because I have a lack of supporting evidence,
    The main concern I generally have with this type of argument when it comes to those seeking evidence for God is the instrument by which one is using to measure and determine the evidence, i.e. the human mind. Some questions you might ask yourself?

    Is the mind unbiased in this regard?
    Is it reasonable when it comes to the possibility of a Creator?
    Is it objective?
    Is it discerning?
    Is it sensitive, intuitive and able to learn to function outside the framework of the five sense, since the Holy Spirit generally communicates with man through our inner faculties and through events in our life?


    Wrong. Lets talk Buddhism vs Christianity on some CORE foundations.

    1. Jesus is God. There is only 1 God <> Buddha is not God. Buddha is arguably not even a deity. He's just a teacher who discovered the way to eternal peace and bliss(nirvanna) along with many who followed after him.
    2. There is no reincarnation in Christianity <> Reincarnation occurs until you've attained perfection and no longer need to be reborn.
    3. Salvation = joining the christian god in heaven when you die <> Nirvanna = ending the cycle of rebirth through the perfection of oneself over multiple lifetimes.
    4. Salvation occurs through love/acceptance of Jesus <> Nirvanna has nothing to do with "loving" Buddha. It is attained through training of the mind.


    These are huge fundamental differences. You can only make Christianity = Buddhism if you remove so much of their essential qualities that they no longer resemble what they are defined to be.
    Do you really think and believe any of those differences matter to the Creator or the Christian or the Hindu who has experienced a life-changing, transformative spiritual experience?

    Do you really think and believe any of those differences matter to the Hindu parent whose child is healed of an incurable deadly disease when the parents pray to Buddha or the parents of the Christian child that is healed of a deadly disease when her parents pray to Christ?

    Many Americans Mix Multiple Faiths
    http://pewforum.org/Other-Beliefs-an...le-Faiths.aspx
    Americans do not fit neatly into conventional categories. A new poll by the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life finds that large numbers of Americans engage in multiple religious practices, mixing elements of diverse traditions. Many say they attend worship services of more than one faith or denomination -- even when they are not traveling or going to special events like weddings and funerals. Many also blend Christianity with Eastern or New Age beliefs such as reincarnation, astrology and the presence of spiritual energy in physical objects. And sizeable minorities of all major U.S. religious groups say they have experienced supernatural phenomena, such as being in touch with the dead or with ghosts.
    Americans turn to Hindu beliefs
    http://articles.economictimes.indiat...e-evangelicals
    WASHINGTON: Americans are becoming more like Hindus and less like traditional Christians in the way they think about God, themselves, and eternity, a Newsweek essay has said, citing new surveys and poll data.

    The first indication of this comes in a poll that shows many Americans no longer believe in the idea that theirs is the only true religion and all others are false, says the magazine's Religion Editor Lisa Miller
    Majority think heaven is open to other faiths
    http://www.truthbook.com/news/labels...20Grossman.cfm
    Most American religious believers, including most Christians, say eternal life is not exclusively for those who accept Christ as their savior, a new survey has found.

    And 80 percent of people with this open view of heaven's gates listed at least one non-Christian group * Jews, Muslims, Hindus, atheists * who may also be saved, according to the survey, released today by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.
    Christians: No One Path to Salvation
    http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...817217,00.html
    Americans of every religious stripe are considerably more tolerant of the beliefs of others than most of us might have assumed, according to a new poll released Monday. The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life last year surveyed 35,000 Americans, and found that 70% of respondents agreed with the statement "Many religions can lead to eternal life." Even more remarkable was the fact that 57% of Evangelical Christians were willing to accept that theirs might not be the only path to salvation, since most Christians historically have embraced the words of Jesus, in the Gospel of John, that "no one comes to the Father except through me." Even as mainline churches had become more tolerant, the exclusivity of Christianity's path to heaven has long been one of the Evangelicals' fundamental tenets. The new poll suggests a major shift, at least in the pews.
    "The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.” --"The Mental Universe” | Nature
    [Eye4magic]
    Super Moderator

  15. #55
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,782
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    I don't see much point in continuing this discussion.
    You are either not understanding my points about the bible, or deliberately misrepresent them.
    I'll try one more time.
    The documentation of specific "healing" events in the bible is insufficient proof for me, because I wasn't there to see it. The healings may have been faked, they may have not occurred at all, or they may be genuine. I don't know.
    My point is, the METHOD of using healing to show God's power is used in the bible to document and support the existence of the Christian God.
    I'm willing to accept the possibility that God heals people (as documented in the bible) and am suggesting that same vehicle of providing evidence could be used to convince me today.

    As for your Russian guy in the morgue for days, I explicitly stated that his flesh need be rotting. You responded with him being "blue" and "decrepid looking". That is not "rotting".

    When asked for a way to measure "God's Grace", you appear to concede it can't be measured and is only available through personal experience. Yet if someone has no personal experience of grace, you blame the person for not being 'sensitive enough, or not waiting long enough'.
    This line of reasoning can be used to 'prove' the existence of anything.
    For example:
    Lets make up an entity called Russels teapot, who is a completely different God from the one you describe. We'll call him Russel.
    When asked for a way to measure "Russel's Grace", I respond it can't be measured and is only available through personal experience. Yet if you have no personal experience of Russel's grace, I blame the you for not being 'sensitive enough, or not waiting long enough'.

    Substitute Russel with virtually any mythical God I can come up with, and voila, a new diety exists.

    Finally, first you claim that all religions are very similar and point to the same God. I gave examples of how Christianity and Buddhism are drastically different. Your response then was that God didn't care. So which is it? Are the religions the same or not, you appear to be conceding they are not.
    The Sparrow, Member of the God-Awful Atheist Syndicate

  16. #56
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    West / East Coast
    Posts
    3,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    Quote Originally Posted by TheSparrow View Post
    The documentation of specific "healing" events in the bible is insufficient proof for me, because I wasn't there to see it. The healings may have been faked, they may have not occurred at all, or they may be genuine. I don't know.
    Ok, I understand that. It would seem that you also don't accept out-of-the norm extraordinary, similar healings that happen today, which is your choice.[/quote]

    My point is, the METHOD of using healing to show God's power is used in the bible to document and support the existence of the Christian God.
    In the Bible people simply witnessed, they observed with their eyes a healing or miracle such as a lame person walking or a blind man seeing, or a dead person being raised from the dead. From this observation, some people believed it was the power of God and some people did not. I've pointed out numerous links similar circumstances (healings) and there are many, many more. However, I accept and understand this is not sufficient for you.

    Miracles were not sufficient for many people who observed them in the Biblical era and throughout history. It was only sufficient for some people back then. Obviously, God is aware of this equation within the human consciousness. Miracles do no always result in belief, which is understandable. The drama of life goes on.

    I'm willing to accept the possibility that God heals people (as documented in the bible) and am suggesting that same vehicle of providing evidence could be used to convince me today.
    What vehicle are you referring to?

    When asked for a way to measure "God's Grace", you appear to concede it can't be measured
    Measured as with physical instruments? Grace is an aspect of the Holy Spirit. We measure it by the certainty of our feelings, our mind, our awareness, our heart, our common sense, our ability to reason. I realize some of these types of measuring instruments are not something the atheist likes to consider to determine evidence of the Divine. Nevertheless, it would appear that they are valuable assets we have been given to navigate and work with in the physical world. They also help us discern good from evil, right from wrong and life's direction.

    and is only available through personal experience. Yet if someone has no personal experience of grace, you blame the person for not being 'sensitive enough, or not waiting long enough'.
    I made no such comment. I suggested some questions that you could ask yourself in order that you might make sure that you're as objective as possible in your search for Divine evidence.

    In the physical sciences, the scientist must be objective and unbiased as they examine the physical evidence. In the spiritual sciences, when we want to work with the Spirit of God, it does not appear to be any different. We have to be willing to clear out all preconceived expectations.

    As far as waiting, I don't think we have to wait. God seems to be more than willing to enter our life immediately. If anything, I would say his grace is waiting for us to allow him into our life.

    This line of reasoning can be used to 'prove' the existence of anything.
    How about his reasoning:

    1. You are a student.
    2. You have a very strong and natural desire to be a theoretical physicist one day.
    3. You develop the goal and objective to work and study under the best teacher in this field.
    4. You begin a search to find the best teacher, expert in this field.
    5. You find him/her.
    6. Because of your passion and interest in the subject, it makes sense that you get to know as much about this professor as possible. (You want to know what his brain knows, how he thinksor at least a portion of how he things.)
    7. So you embark on a search/research project.
    8. You study all his papers, books and research material that is available.
    9. You assess it all, carefully and objectively, with no preconceived ideas.
    10. You move to the college town where the professor is teaching and register in his classes.
    11. After a while, he observes your sincere and earnest interest in the subject, and he befriends you and gives you more of his time.
    12. He begins to tutor you, one-on-one because he sees that you really have a strong desire to learn more then the average student in his class.
    13. You become good friends over time, experiencing ups and downs in the relationship.
    14. After a period of time, with many learning curves, you graduate from his course.
    15. You get married and have children.
    16. He helps you find an position in a college close to your home.
    17. You're on the way to becoming a theoretical physicist and you did it by establishing a life-long meaningful relationship with one of the best in the field.
    18. Years later you reflect: It wasn't always easy. You didn't always understand his methods; you trusted his expertise, knowledge and wisdom throughout the years as you worked with him.
    19. You wouldn't replace the experience for anything in the world.
    20. You could never imagine this experience happened to you -- but it did.
    21. Now, you'll soon be in a position to mentor your own students.
    22. The cycle continues.

    Let's translate that to a methodolgy for establishing a relationship with God:

    1, You are a student of life.
    2. You have a strong desire to find evidence of God and/or become aware of God's Presence in your life.
    3. You develop a clear goal and objective (write it down) to work with those who are experts in this field.
    4. Since you brought Jesus Christ into this debate, let's say you choose Jesus as your expert teacher/mentor.
    5. Since the man Jesus is not in the physical anymore, you decide to research those experts, scholars, disciples, students, throughout history and today who have known Jesus Christ and/ or been in your similar circumstance.
    6. You make a list of all these people and their published works and papers. (There are many)
    7. You research and study these publications and works by those who have known Jesus Christ, assessing and analyzing them all objectively and carefully.
    9. You study the methodology these students of life have followed to know Jesus. You notice a consistent pattern.
    10. You experiment and put into practice some of these methods.
    11. You try the methods in your life, but nothing interesting happens.
    12. Your research shows this is not uncommon as those who have known Jesus throughout history, went through the same ups and downs.
    13. You reassess, self-reflect, internalize, surrender worn out old ideas, let go of unhealthy doubt.
    14. You keep studying and putting into practice by living the methods you are learning.
    15. Suddenly you have a break through doing the most mundane task, like cleaning your house.
    16. Your awareness starts to change.
    17. As the months move on, you notice that you are able to observe old things in a new way.
    18. As you pray to God now, versus before, you being to feel with certainty that your are connecting with God.
    19. Your relationship with God has started.
    20. A new chapter in your book begins.

    Finally, first you claim that all religions are very similar
    I stated that there are many similarities and pointed to a source that supports this.

    I gave examples of how Christianity and Buddhism are drastically different. Your response then was that God didn't care. So which is it?
    My response was in regard to the subject of this thread and our discussion. We've been discussing the evidence of healing miracles and the power of God. Thus, since you brought into the debate, Buddha and Vishnu, I asked you, with regards to the subject of this thread why those differences matter when it comes to: The Christian or the Hindu who has experienced a life-changing, transformative experience or the Hindu parent whose child is healed of an incurable deadly disease when the parents pray to Buddha or the parents of the Christian child that is healed of a deadly disease when her parents pray to Christ.

    The way I see it, those differences don't matter in these circumstances. What matters is that the child in healed, right?

    Comparative religions is a interesting topic and yes, religious legalism does like to point out the differences instead of the similarities.
    "The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.” --"The Mental Universe” | Nature
    [Eye4magic]
    Super Moderator

  17. #57
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,782
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    I followed your multi-step analogy until #15.

    Essentially this (and the rest of your post) boils down to the only real evidence you have for God is some sort of personal experience or revelation.

    And, much like you're "impossible to have a negative" healing evidence, it works like this.

    If you "listen" properly, you will hear/feel/become aware of God. - Therefore God exists.
    If you "listen", but don't hear/feel/become aware of God, you're just not doing it right. God exists.

    Can't you see how this "evidence" is completely useless.

    This line of logic can be used to support anything I can make up. Unicorns, leprechauns, fairies.
    It isn't evidence for anything. Its just a scenario carefully crafted to have no possible negative outcome.

    If you "look" properly, you will hear/feel/become aware of Leprechauns. - Therefore Leprechauns exists.
    If you "look", but don't hear/feel/become aware of Leprechauns, you're just not doing it right. Leprechauns exists.

    Do you accept the above as evidence of Leprechauns?
    The Sparrow, Member of the God-Awful Atheist Syndicate

  18. #58
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    West / East Coast
    Posts
    3,530
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    Quote Originally Posted by TheSparrow View Post
    Do you accept the above as evidence of Leprechauns?
    Can you support that Leprechauns don't exist?

    [edit]
    Essentially this (and the rest of your post) boils down to the only real evidence you have for God is some sort of personal experience or revelation.
    If you come to know something with a certainty, without any doubt how is that not evidence?

    Thanks for debatting Sparrow...
    Last edited by eye4magic; November 30th, 2011 at 03:43 PM.
    "The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.” --"The Mental Universe” | Nature
    [Eye4magic]
    Super Moderator

  19. #59
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wheaton, IL
    Posts
    13,847
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    Quote Originally Posted by TheSparrow
    If you "look" properly, you will hear/feel/become aware of Leprechauns. - Therefore Leprechauns exists.
    If you "look", but don't hear/feel/become aware of Leprechauns, you're just not doing it right. Leprechauns exists.

    Do you accept the above as evidence of Leprechauns?
    It depends on what kinds of evidential standards you have. Consider the fact that relatively few people have seriously asserted that they have heard/felt/become aware of leprechauns, whereas many people--people that you and I would probably consider reasonable, thoughtful, intelligent, and careful--have seriously asserted that they have heard/felt/become aware of the existence of something like God.

    Now, maybe that means nothing to you, but establishing what reasonable people actually think and believe might have bearing on whether a belief is reasonable.
    If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe. - Soren Kierkegaard
    **** you, I won't do what you tell me

    HOLY CRAP MY BLOG IS AWESOME

  20. #60
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,782
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Analogy of Atheism

    Quote Originally Posted by eye4magic View Post
    Can you support that Leprechauns don't exist?
    Thanks for dodging the question by trying to shift the focus, I'll take your non-answer as a concession.

    If you come to know something with a certainty, without any doubt how is that not evidence?
    Its not evidence for anyone else. I saw an interview with a woman on TV who swore with absolute certainty that her child was a hybrid of a human and a yucca plant. She was absolutely sure. Does that make it true?

    ---------- Post added at 06:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:14 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by CliveStaples View Post
    It depends on what kinds of evidential standards you have. Consider the fact that relatively few people have seriously asserted that they have heard/felt/become aware of leprechauns, whereas many people--people that you and I would probably consider reasonable, thoughtful, intelligent, and careful--have seriously asserted that they have heard/felt/become aware of the existence of something like God.

    Now, maybe that means nothing to you, but establishing what reasonable people actually think and believe might have bearing on whether a belief is reasonable.
    Well, if we are going to resort to populism, given the amount of people in India, there are probably as many Hindu's who have experienced their God as there are Christians who claimed to have experienced the Christian God. Not the same God, both can't be right.
    The Sparrow, Member of the God-Awful Atheist Syndicate

 

 
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Atheism
    By Aspoestertjie in forum Religion
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: December 9th, 2008, 06:48 PM
  2. An analogy to describe belief.
    By Supaiku in forum Religion
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: December 3rd, 2005, 02:42 AM
  3. Atheism....
    By Mr. Hyde in forum Religion
    Replies: 202
    Last Post: March 15th, 2005, 09:59 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •