Author Topic: Bible healings don't count  (Read 4167 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Bible healings don't count
« Reply #87 on: July 04, 2013, 09:18:07 AM »
I was being polite by negating the validity of the poll. rather than the reading skills of the poster.
You failed to post a link to the actual results of the poll. 

 I can be lazy sometimes.  It's a failing of mine.

Offline wright

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1938
  • Darwins +83/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "Sleep like a log, snore like a chainsaw."
Re: Bible healings don't count
« Reply #88 on: July 04, 2013, 11:54:16 AM »
Over a dozen co-workers signed on to the paper on cold fusion.  Way before any media.  In fact, media is the goal of every researcher. It pay the bills.

I certainly won't dispute that. But my point is the researchers involved leapfrogged independent investigation (presumably because they were confident in it backing up their initial results) directly into the media spotlight, and paid with their credibility.

My point is that any theories about the past that can't be re-tested are currently in the "Cold-Fusion" state.   100's of researchers (or one) need to duplicate the process to get the same results.  This is impossible with any theory about history.  You never know if you have duplicated the original conditions.   "Scientific History" only goes as far back as the date on a notebook.   That's why there is no such phrase as "scientific history".

Science can only look forward. Not back.

Cold fusion has been quite thoroughly dis-proven to most specialists' satisfaction, AFAIK. I'm sorry, but I need another example, because it's still unclear what you mean by "scientific history".

You apparently don't dispute that geology is a field that can be used to investigate the past in terms of finding mineral resources, for instance. Do you dispute the use of spectrographic analysis in determining the composition of stars and nebula? Those are certainly past events that science has been investigating successfully for decades. So science can most definitely look back and investigate the past.

You've made a very general statement; I'd appreciate some more specifics. Do you dispute the Battle of Gettysburg? The Permian-Triassic extinction? The Big Bang? Under what circumstances does the past become opaque to the scientific method?
Live a good life... If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid.
--Marcus Aurelius

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5080
  • Darwins +586/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Bible healings don't count
« Reply #89 on: July 04, 2013, 12:34:57 PM »
I can be lazy sometimes.  It's a failing of mine.
Well, it's certainly cost you here.  What you did post was an article that blatantly misrepresented the results of the study to suggest that a substantial majority of scientists were religious (Christian).  I find it impossible to believe that the first study would disagree so sharply with a study that was done by the same person just five years later, which found that the number of atheistic scientists outnumbered the number of Christian ones, even if you included the ones who have doubts or only believe sometimes.  In fact, when you just look at natural scientists, it's even worse; the percentage of atheistic natural scientists as a whole outnumbers the total number of theistic natural scientists, including those who believe in a non-God higher power.  And that doesn't include the number of agnostic scientists, who aren't sure but don't think we'll ever find out.  Even among social scientists, that's over 60% of scientists who either don't believe in gods or aren't sure if they exist; with natural scientists, that's over 2/3 of them.

So much for your assertion that the majority of scientists are religious.

Offline Graybeard

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6775
  • Darwins +543/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: Bible healings don't count
« Reply #90 on: July 04, 2013, 08:45:21 PM »
Jesus is God.  Likely He alone had the ability to connect Man with God.  Him being the only physical manifestation of the true God.   There is a good chance that He alone could heal the Spirit so it could be one with God.
I still have no idea what "healing the spirit" is.

What is "the spirit" and why does it need healing?
Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Bible healings don't count
« Reply #91 on: July 07, 2013, 02:10:54 PM »
Jesus is God.  Likely He alone had the ability to connect Man with God.  Him being the only physical manifestation of the true God.   There is a good chance that He alone could heal the Spirit so it could be one with God.
I still have no idea what "healing the spirit" is.

What is "the spirit" and why does it need healing?

In your spiritual existence, if you have a need or desire, it is just "there."
You can think things into existence.

We are spirits trapped in the material world as we know it.
God "is relationship".    All the properties of being in fellowship. that is what God is composed of.    MAN, on the other hand has chosen not to be in fellowship with God.

Because of this separation,  we are stuck in the material world.   Hope that helps a little.

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: Bible healings don't count
« Reply #92 on: July 07, 2013, 02:14:55 PM »
I can be lazy sometimes.  It's a failing of mine.
Well, it's certainly cost you here.  What you did post was an article that blatantly misrepresented the results of the study to suggest that...

No I didn't.   People asked for some backing for my opinions.
I went out and found some backing for my opinions as was requested.
My opinions are not found in the opinions of others.