Miracles and Anti-supernaturalism

[BettyG]

I think you are making a religion out of science. Science can only tell us about physical things. It is limited in its ability to tell us about truth. It cannot be used to explore metaphysical things. Only reason, logic and intuition are appropriate tools for metaphysical topics.

We can only perceive physical things, though. If it's non-physical then we can't say it exists at all. So hey, if you want your god to be completely inaccessible and beyond everything, then cool; I have no reason to believe he exists at all, neither do you, and your entire claim falls apart. The only thing we could really say is that, since your "reason, logic and intuition" have led you to believe in an imaginary friend that nobody can see or hear, your ability to be rational is suspect.

However, if you're claiming, as you were in the OP, that god causes things to happen in the world as miracles, then congrats, because you've made a claim that's testable by science, and hence falsifiable. Good show.

So, which is it? Is your god distant and ineffective in the world, and therefore not rationally justifiable? Or does he actually do things here, in which case he's potentially falsifiable, and so far falsified?

Perhaps it would be helpful to know how I define metaphysical. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics
We all know that love, mathematics, existence, and time are real, but they are not physical. These are just a few examples. We can intuit love, faith and experience aging. We use reason and logic to study math. We cannot hold existence in our hands, yet we exist.

Refer to one of my previous posts where I give a critique of David Hume's position on miracles.

Apparently, we are defining miracles differently. I am not saying anything about the statistical probability of an event happening. We are discussing my definition. Miracles are an act of God in time and space.

---

I think you are making a religion out of science. Science can only tell us about physical things. It is limited in its ability to tell us about truth. It cannot be used to explore metaphysical things. Only reason, logic and intuition are appropriate tools for metaphysical topics.

Miracles(supposedly) are physical phenomena. Therefore, science is the tool to use to discern them from natural ones.

I am defining them as events in time (history). Miracles are an act, not a result of an action.

---

I think you are making a religion out of science. Science can only tell us about physical things. It is limited in its ability to tell us about truth. It cannot be used to explore metaphysical things. Only reason, logic and intuition are appropriate tools for metaphysical topics.

Reason and logic cannot lead one to the supernatural, because no honest knowledge can be attained from logic and reason which cannot be ultimately grounded in physical reality. Intuition is not to be trusted. It only ever leads to truth by accident.

Science describes the foundations of all information we can honestly call knowledge. If an assertion cannot be grounded in reality, it is no better than a blind guess and should not be taken seriously by anybody. If it is impossible to test and confirm independently (and no, correlating blind guesses do not count as independent confirmation), it is a lie to call it knowledge.

You are using a much narrower definition of reality than I am. There is more than what meets the eye.