(November 15, 2015 at 2:24 pm)Lek Wrote: The natural sciences are one of the ways we understand our world and our universe. Since all supernatural intervention becomes testable and measurable by science, are you saying that if God reveals his existence to me, and I come to know him, I must be able to show you in a scientific manner that this really happened? I am not to trust my experience unless science can prove it? And you will completely disregard my testimony if it violates the laws of nature?
It's not that I don't trust you or the sincerity of your testimony. But the brain is not perfect, nor is it always giving us an accurate image of reality. To put this into perspective for you: every year, dozens of people report having seen UFO's or extraterrestrials visiting earth. However, when we actually examine these instances beyond just one witness's testimony, we find that there is virtually always a rational explanation behind it that is NOT aliens. Now, if we were to take these people's word as gospel truth, everyone would freak the fuck out, correct? We'd all be thinking we're going to be invaded.
It works the same way here. For most things, testimony is reliable. If you told me you witnessed a car accident, or a person survive a heart attack, I'd have little reason to not believe you. Since both of those things are in the scope of natural laws. However, when it comes to the shit that goes beyond the natural order, yes, I will always want further proof, as you would if someone told you they had seen a unicorn.
To steal a quote from Christopher Hitchens: "What is more likely? That the laws of reality have been suspended in your favor, and in a way that you approve, or that you've made a mistake?"
