Evidence for a god. Do you have any ?

[SteveII]

---

No. I was granting the concept to you for the sake of your example about miracles so that I could investigate the method by which you distinguish a natural cause from a supposedly supernatural cause, what ever that actually is.  In response, you gave me a fallacy, plus some bizarre reasoning about how particles behaving strangely under a microscope wouldn’t be a miracle, but strangely-behaving particles not looked at through a microscope would be. (?)

I stand by my statements earlier; that the concept of a supernatural event or object has no coherent, meaningful applicability to reality, as the word is defined by what it is not, rather than what it is.  And, that there is no reason to think that anything interacting with, and leaving behind evidence in this world, is not a part of it.  If it’s a part within the whole of this world, and it is evident, then it would fall under the purview of scientific inquiry.  

I’m still waiting for you to explain how you determine that a cause for an event can’t be explainable by science, and I’m still waiting for you to tell me what a supernatural thing is, using positive descriptors. As I said before; you are trying to create a new and entirely separate category of things using the knowledge gaps of a category of things that already exists.  Can you please describe in detail the mechanism behind a ‘something other than natural, but we don’t know what it actually is’ cause, generating detectable, physical effects within the natural world, yet itself remaining completely undetectable?

---

First, I want to point out the bold to Mister Agenda. It would seem I understood your position perfectly.

Second, you throw around the word fallacy a lot. What did I say that you think is a logical fallacy.

I don’t, actually.  And I try not to unless I’m fairly confident that I’m correct in my charge.  Even then, we all make errors from time to time. That’s how you hone a skill. I’ve already explained to you exactly which fallacy I believe you committed, but I’ll get it:

If a whole church is praying for a little boy (like my brother-in-law) who had a brain tumor and on the morning of his surgery he had a CT scan for the surgeon to map his cuts, there was no tumor. Never came back. That might be a miracle.

So, again; rare medical phenomena happen.  How do you rationally determine that the cause can’t, and never can be explainable via science, versus a natural cause that science can and may be able to explain at some point in the future?  Because, people prayed first? I know you know what a ‘post hoc ergo propter hoc’ fallacy is.

I said "might be a miracle". I can't have used the fallacy unless I was making an argument. I was explaining the the probability that if anything is a miracle--context can be a clue--not proof. 

Many words are defined by what it is not. 'Darkness', 'evil', 'cold' off the top of my head.

You’re right.  We also have the words, “light”, “good”, and “warm”.  I can tell you what these things are by describing their characteristics.  If someone asks me what light is, I don’t need to default to, “well, it’s not dark.”  What positive descriptors do we have for the supernatural?  That’s what I’m asking you for.

You may have missed the point of the three examples. Each of them is defined by what they are not--entirely. You can't flip it around. If you ask what is 'light', darkness is not part of the definition. What positive descriptors do you have for darkness, evil or cold?

That is not to say we can't know more about what is supernatural. If you believe in the supernatural, you probably believe in entities like God, angels, human souls, demons and places like heaven and hell. Descriptions of what is supernatural help firm up the concept. Here's a good example: if we have a soul, then by definition it is more than the sum of our electro-chemical processes and is considered supernatural right? Further, we believe we have free will and can act with intentionality. We (our soul) effect the physical world by deciding to direct our bodies to do something. There--supernatural causation. Even if you don't believe it, it is coherent.