infinitehope wrote: Sir, your laughter is unbecoming. And uncival. You make a great case for not being Christan if thats how Christans treat people with serous questions. My whole eternity is at stake and you mock me because you do not have an answer for me. Sir, I pitty you. Its easy to test any human, or molecules, etc. Yes, we go looking for them. We use a metholigiy to find and TEST them. We cant do that with God. Why not? I'm holding God to the SAME standards as I do anything or everything else. If I (for whatever reasion) did not know who the presendet was, I could find out. If I am not sure what I am made out of, I can find out. We can test anything other then God. We can pretty much deside the issue on big foot, he does not exist. If anyone wants to claim he does, they must prove it with data. Mainly a big foot. Alines have never visitided earth. Anyone that wants to prove that must show evedance of them doing it, any alien artifict could do that, materals, videos, etc.Spirts are not testable.Prayer is not testable.God is not testable.Nothing supernatural is testable, at all. Why not? Can anyone answer this simple question with a real answer?
infinitehope wrote: Spirts are not testable.Prayer is not testable.God is not testable.Nothing supernatural is testable, at all. Why not? Can anyone answer this simple question with a real answer?
gralan wrote: Quote from: infinitehope Spirts are not testable.Prayer is not testable.God is not testable.Nothing supernatural is testable, at all. Why not? Can anyone answer this simple question with a real answer? hello infinitehope,There are several things going on with what we term as reality, is there not? We treat Time as if it is a property, when actually it is only a measurement of movement or of decay which is always relative to what it is measuring. Time has no physical properties you can directly observe separate from the actions it measures which is known by other identification labels.Why is it the appeal to empirical evidences gets confused with varying standards of proof which have no validity because all such proofs are field-determinate? For example, you cannot prove I am or am not an individual person. Perhaps I'm writing as the avatar for a small group of people who answer together under this identity called "gralan". How can I prove one way or another conclusively with empirical evidences that would fit your standard?Do you have an actual standard that differentiates between varying reliablitiy of proofs? Do you recognize even the hard sciences use varying canons of proof?I would welcome discussion, if you wish substantive dialogue -- although I cannot say I will add much to a positive conclusion or acquisition of awareness since I am just a mere person. I've tried to follow the thread but it appears there are several standards being used.If there is truth, and proof, the difficulty is not infinite regress for such is a difficulty of human logic which is external from that which it attempts to apprenehend. Either something "is" or "is not", or there is no meaning even to having a conversation about it.I welcome, as always, emails to my account; hoping that someone will enlighten me in my ignorance.
Spirts are not testable.Prayer is not testable.God is not testable.Nothing supernatural is testable, at all. Why not? Can anyone answer this simple question with a real answer?
infinitehope wrote: Why is God totaly untestable? Not only does the Bible say we are not alowed to, but any test I've seen into (prayer) gives about the same result as you might expect to see from chance alone. No "unexplainable" miricals happen as a result of any prayer tests so far. Here are a couple of exmples: regrowing of limbs, or brain tissue. Knowalge of fucture events that are confermed (more then once)both would be just inpossible to explain away as natrual or other. Regrowing of body parts or brain tissue is just pyhyiscaly inpossible for the body to do, more so on larger scale. Knowing fucture events with confermation has long been saught after by goverments of the world. Prophy is in the bible. Why not alow such prophy to take place here and now, repeatable, so that we can varyfy it as a real thing?Now, in one or both cases prayer is our only link to the devine. In one case, healing we have promices thoughout the bible that say if we pray in Jesus name that we will have it fullfilled, praying for healing of someone else, AND having that healing be something unmestakably miricalus would help skeptics to put down there sketpicsm towards mirical events. If said event only happened when Chirstans prayed, and no one else, even better.So... why not? Why will this not happen?
Alexander wrote: God is testable, but it isn't likely that theists and atheists will agree on any test, because no matter what the results are the theist will have an explanation for why it is that way.