(June 28, 2016 at 1:42 pm)Irrational Wrote:(June 28, 2016 at 1:30 pm)SteveII Wrote: That's simply not true. An event is not simply the probability of A in respects to B or Pr(A/B). Modern probability calculus indicates that we need to consider the background information and the probability that A would happen if not B (and other such comparisons). So the calculation is really Pr(A/B&E) where E stands for various evidences and background information.
For example, what is the probability that the crippled man would have walked when commanded to "rise, take up your bed and walk" if a miracle had not happened? Probability goes way up when you look at it properly.
To remove ambiguity, have the letters represent certain events so we can examine what exactly you're arguing. What does A stand for in this case? And what do B and E stand for exactly?
And also, how the hell would the probability of a crippled man standing up and walking when requested to do so go way up if a miracle had not taken place? Do you mean it'll become no longer extremely low probability? Perhaps we'll get the answer when you clarify what you're arguing exactly.
I simple do not have the time to reword something and post it here. If you really want to know, click the second link.
John Earman wrote a book on this as it related to miracles.
http://www.amazon.com/Humes-Abject-Failu...0195127382
I found out about it from the debate between Bart Ehrman and WLC. If you want to know the whole argument, click on WLC First Rebuttal.
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/is-there-...#section_3
