On the assumption that you missed my question, Fr0d0, here it is again:

(September 20, 2011 at 3:43 pm)Stimbo Wrote: So why do nearly all religious followers claim that they have such proof? In many cases, it's not only proof, it's undeniable proof.

If you don't have an answer, or don't want to, that's fine - saying "I don't know" is not a sign of weakness and I'm sure nobody will think any less of you for it. An acknowledgement of some kind would be nice though.

Reading isn't your strong point El, I know.

Hey Stimb. I thought yours was actually a statement rather than a question. I'm a Christian yeah? ... I've known very many Christians, and I've never ever met anyone to profess what you state. Maybe you could dig me up one?

We need to be accurate with words though. What people here insist on as proof for God is independantly verifiable proof. Of course that is a logical impossibility, but they want the answer anyway. It's like asking for a square circle... the impossibility of the question won't stop them in their quest for it. Meanwhile... on planet earth, there are a host of questions left unanswered.

Answers that they, in their skeptical, open mindedness are completely blind to. They use completely illogical reasoning to justify this, and when challenged, can never explain their position. Because of course you can't. It's illogical.

Fr0d0 Wrote:Hey Stimb. I thought yours was actually a statement rather than a question.

Not a problem, easy mistake to make. Sometimes I have trouble making myself clear, even to me. I thought the question mark was a bit of a clue, though.

Fr0d0 Wrote:Maybe you could dig me up one?

Only one?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZuRn3Hr5mM

I agree with you about being accurate with words. So let's not make the mistake of confusing proof with evidence. You (generalising) aren't required to prove the existence of a god; if you want anyone else to accept your claims, just present some evidence for consideration. That's all.

It's how scientific advances have been made throughout history. The evidence ought to be strong enough to withstand scrutiny, and should also be consistent with other pieces of evidence so as to fit together like some sort of puzzle made up of separate interconnecting pieces resulting in a uniform picture (there really should be a name for such a puzzle that we could use as a shorthand for that rather long-winded description). And if such evidence does do that, it reinforces the initial claim. Eventually, the claim may be awarded the distinguished title of "theory".

By the same token, if an individual piece of evidence is later discredited, or perhaps clarified by further research, it doesn't demolish the theory; rather, it can actually work to strengthen it, by removing or reinforcing some weak point.

The guy in the vid is talking about science - the subject isn't anything to do with science... therefore that isn't a discussion on Christianity.

So what did you just start talking about Stimb? What has the supernatural got to do with science?? You just steamrollered over the subject. I obviously didn't make myself clear either... did you see this bit: "independantly verifiable proof" <--- this is what you cannot logically have, or your subect is not in fact supernatural, by definition.

So try that again from the top.

Did you miss the bit where the caller says he can prove his god's existence using physics and biology? If you have a problem with discussions of science in any context, maybe you should take it up with people who make these sort of claims. You're the one shifting the gears of the discussion. You asked for someone who claims to have proof of the supernatural and I provided one. The caller chose to couch it in scientific terms all by himself, of his own free will; I'm fairly certain that nobody had a gun to his head. However, I'm a reasonable sort of chap, so if you didn't like that guy, let's try another:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3Dj9_2G3j8&NR=1

As I indicated, I am quite lenient when it comes to matters of evidence versus proof. Offer me something I can evaluate myself and I'll consider it. If I find it as convincing as you do, I'll probably end up altering my own beliefs to accommodate it in some fashion.

I'd just like to add that even phenomena outside the natural universe must have at least some measurable effect on reality, however limited such effects may be; if they don't or can't, they can be safely disregarded altogether - they wouldn't matter. Nor could they possibly be examined to claim their existence by anyone, including you and your fellow believers.

However, if you are defining the parameters of discussion in such a way that no proof/evidence of any kind will be offered because it lies outside those parameters, then that is special pleading and effectively the end of the dialogue. There can simply be nothing to discuss for either side; I can examine nothing, you can claim nothing and expect to be taken seriously.

Put more simply: that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

What has the supernatural got to do with anything except imagination?

It's a long video Stimb and I wasn't going to watch it all. I did get the bit where the guy said that, and that was enough... I concede that there are people who argue such things, but, without watching it, I can offer an angle on that: Assuming God exists, then everything in existence is from God: ie proof of him. To me that isn't proof, and that would certainly fail to satisfy the scientific method.

On the subject of theology, science has little or no bearing. (Hey, I'm not going to bother with the secnod video either unless you want to raise another point)

Yes [Christians] are claiming that there is a measurable effect on reality, but proving that effect empirically would not be possible for it to actually be supernatural. For you to dissmiss the subject you would have to jettison every other form of evidence than your strict scientifically sound one. It isn't that there is no evidence, just evidence that the materialist will not entertain.

I think it is about time we gave up the belief in "Magic" fr0d0 don't you??

*slaps Kitchie* (because she likes it! )

Hi Guys seems like you are suggesting there is no proof any where of Gods existance. i.e. God does nothing, so you should not believe in God seems to be the common thread. However I will bring up this site that I have mentioned else where it shows 100% verfiable cases of divine healing http://www.wcdn.org/wcdn_eng/case/divine_case_e.asp. I.e. Christians prayed and God answered, according to what is written in the bible this is possible today.