Miracles and Anti-supernaturalism

[Esquilax]

I think God doesn't give us so much evidence that we would be forced to believe in Him.

Well, happily, in the real world there is no amount of evidence that forces anyone to believe anything!

Seriously, does anyone who makes this argument actually live in the same world the rest of us do? We live on a world we know to be roughly spherical, we've been into space to see it, and still we have people who believe it's flat. We sent back images from our guys on the fucking moon, and still people believe it was faked. Go down the list, every last thing in human history has had some stupid ass group denying it: creationists, 9/11 truthers, heliocentrists, anti-vaccine advocates, doomsday preppers, rapture believers, conspiracy theorists, and people who think Jersey Shore is entertainment.

If there is one thing that the world should have taught us all, it's that there is no level of evidence that can ever force all of us to accept reality.

I think He wants that to be a free will choice based on trust and humility.

What's humble about thinking that the universe was constructed solely with you in mind? What's trustworthy about a god that burns you forever for not believing in him?

There is enough evidence to believe if we choose to accept it. The paradox is that I have to believe in order to understand, not the other way around.

So, I have to believe in this concept I have no evidence for before I'll get the evidence? And you're actually broaching this as an argument?

Okay...

It has to start with love, not absolute, total knowledge. I have to know in whom I trust, which is why I choose to be Catholic. It is the original Christianity, not a spin off based on some 16th century or later guy's theory.

Your christianity is just a spin off of Judaism, and don't you forget it.

[Silver]

There is enough evidence to believe if we choose to accept it. The paradox is that I have to believe in order to understand.

First, there is absolutely no evidence. What you consider evidence is merely blind faith, closing your eyes to reality and accepting that something is real when there is no evidence for its existence. Much the same way a child believes there is a monster under his bed that no one else can see except for him. If the boy was to tell his parents you just have to have faith that the monster is there, then you can bet those parents are not going to close their eyes to reality and believe in the monster just because. Even if the boy informed his parents that the monster would punish them if they did not believe in it, the parents are still not going to forgo with logic to believe in that which is absolutely absurd.

Why theists cannot make the distinction between the monster under the bed and god has only to do with cognitive dissonance. It seems more beneficial to them to tenaciously hold onto a silly belief for the sake of comfort than to face the reality that the belief is wrong.

If one has to believe in order to understand, then that belief is not based on rationality or reality. It is instead based on the illogicality of faith, as well as the mere fear and comfort associated with the belief that is the precise opposite of knowledge.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

I think God doesn't give us so much evidence that we would be forced to believe in Him. I think He wants that to be a free will choice based on trust and humility. There is enough evidence to believe if we choose to accept it. The paradox is that I have to believe in order to understand, not the other way around. It has to start with love, not absolute, total knowledge. I have to know in whom I trust, which is why I choose to be Catholic. It is the original Christianity, not a spin off based on some 16th century or later guy's theory.

Except that, at it's heart, that's precisely what Catholocism is.

What, you think that dogmas/doctrines of Catholocism today is the same as it was 'way back when'? It's an organisation made up of people, people that disagree and change their opinions all the time. That religion that you follow today bares little resemblence to the one that began all those years ago.

I thought you had left. No response to anyone else's points I see. Good to know Are you still here talking to us because you dislike us, like you said back on page 10?

Can I ask a question? Just how disingenuous are you?

[Cyberman]

There is enough evidence to believe if we choose to accept it. The paradox is that I have to believe in order to understand, not the other way around.

So, I have to believe in this concept I have no evidence for before I'll get the evidence? And you're actually broaching this as an argument?

I've actually lost count of how many times I've said this, here and elsewhere, but it's well worth repeating until that happy day it stops being true:

Atheist - "I'll believe it when I see it."

Theist - "l'll see it when I believe it."

[Tonus]

I think God doesn't give us so much evidence that we would be forced to believe in Him. I think He wants that to be a free will choice based on trust and humility. There is enough evidence to believe if we choose to accept it.

The Bible chronicles many occasions when god made his existence plain to people, and those people did not consider it sufficient to accept him as their sovereign. The Bible tells us that angels in heaven --beings that we would think had the ultimate experience of knowing god directly and seeing him exercise his great power and his perfect qualities-- gave up their position in heaven because they were smitten with Earth women.

God, even when he is present, does not make a compelling case for serving him according to his own book. Why would anyone worry that if he made himself known today we would be robbed of our free will and forced to make a specific choice?

[Esquilax]

The Bible chronicles many occasions when god made his existence plain to people, and those people did not consider it sufficient to accept him as their sovereign. The Bible tells us that angels in heaven --beings that we would think had the ultimate experience of knowing god directly and seeing him exercise his great power and his perfect qualities-- gave up their position in heaven because they were smitten with Earth women.

God's ultimate adversary Satan knows he exists, and doesn't worship him either. And there's no shortage of christians who'll proclaim their personal experiences with god too; I wonder if Betty's arguing that all of them have been forced into their worship, too?

[ronedee]

AGAIN! You obviously didn't read the article.... Which was documented at that time in history!

The 200,000 "hibakusha", or most all had effects from the blast(s)! The Jesuts had NONE!

Tsutomu Yamaguchi, was 3 miles from the Hiroshima blast... The Jesuits? 8 BLOCKS from it!

Call me a liar, twist this up any way you want, but this was for those looking for "miracles" (like the thread title indicates) of: God and prayers! Not some competition about people that survived the blast!

I need nothing to sustain my faith, but the promise already given to us.

I believe in God's [plan]: Beit 4 Jesuits surviving an Atom bomb, or millions dying in a tsunami. Nothing matters when you trust in God.

Because, in the end it comes down to our eternal spiritual lives with Him. It doesn't matter whether it's a minute of life, or 93 years! Our physical bodies will die.

And you chose not to believe in an afterlive...Or do you? You flip-flop like fish on the grill when it comes to nailing down atheism. (i.e. the insructable) "I don't know if there is a God?".."But I know there's no PROOF of God!"

As I've said, over and over again here. YOU DON'T WANT ANY PROOF! You have all the answers. It's all about "subtraction", and discredit.... By any means possible.

[Faith No More]

Jesus Christ, use your indoor voice.

Exclamation points don't make what you say any more valid.

[Silver]

YOU DON'T WANT ANY PROOF!

Wrong. It is not our fault that you have no proof to offer.

[Esquilax]

AGAIN! You obviously didn't read the article.... Which was documented at that time in history!

The 200,000 "hibakusha", or most all had effects from the blast(s)! The Jesuts had NONE!

Tsutomu Yamaguchi, was 3 miles from the Hiroshima blast... The Jesuits? 8 BLOCKS from it!

Wait... something's missing...

Call me a liar

Oh, right! Yes, now I know why I'm doing that! Not only are you brushing Eizo Nomura under the rug again because you don't have a rebuttal, thus making you a liar by omission at the very least, there's also no possible fucking way you could know the medical status of each and every Hibakusha, and brushing it off with "or most all of them" just means there were some that did not face complications from the blast, and thus invalidate your miracle claim anyway!

twist this up any way you want

You mean like ignoring specific rebuttal cases brought against you because they're inconvenient, and twisting the ones that you might have some case for to enhance what anemic argument you do have while reducing the parts that disagree with your presupposition- namely that just one single non-catholic that survived unscathed would put your claim of a miracle to rest- with handwaving?

Twisting this up like that?

but this was for those looking for "miracles" (like the thread title indicates) of: God and prayers! Not some competition about people that survived the blast!

Uh huh. And if you're claiming that this is a miracle, and then are shown specific proof that it is not... then it is not a miracle, and thus beyond the purview of this thread.

Honestly, I don't mind playing mythbusters with crap like this, I find it fun. I'd just hope you'd be more forthright than to just block your ears to anything that disagrees with you.

I need nothing to sustain my faith, but the promise already given to us.

It's probably good that you don't need anything, because you won't get anything approaching evidence, that's for sure.

I believe in God's [plan]: Beit 4 Jesuits surviving an Atom bomb, or millions dying in a tsunami. Nothing matters when you trust in God.

Which I'm sure is great comfort to the thousands that died. How nice, that you don't feel any discontentment over that.

And you chose not to believe in an afterlive

People don't choose beliefs. It's not a process you can control... though you're living proof that one can shore up incorrect beliefs against all of external reality by just repeating them loud enough.

...Or do you? You flip-flop like fish on the grill when it comes to nailing down atheism.

You want simplicity, go play with fucking blocks. You want to live in the real world, you're going to have to accept that people are complicated and don't all fit into neat little categories.

Also, stop using this argument until the day you've united the thirty thousand denominations of your religion into one whole, okay? Otherwise, you just look like a hypocrite.

As I've said, over and over again here. YOU DON'T WANT ANY PROOF! You have all the answers. It's all about "subtraction", and discredit.... By any means possible.

And as I said, abandoning actual credible argument in favor of just reinterpreting the motivations of those opposing you is egotistical, childish, and ineffective in the extreme. Now quit having your tantrum and come back with something real.