Author Topic: Minimum facts approach to the resurrection? A secular response?  (Read 2321 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Aaron123

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2733
  • Darwins +77/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: Minimum facts approach to the resurrection? A secular response?
« Reply #116 on: January 25, 2014, 10:34:13 AM »
You guys want proof right in front of your faces, right? That's what life is: proof.

How is life not a miracle? Childbirth certainly couldn't evolve in steps, nor could it evolve all at once.

Think about how petty this sounds: "Hey God, I know you created the universe and all, but can you defy gravity for me please?"

Once again: a backhanded acknowledgement that miracles do not occur.


About that last remark; why not?  Defying gravity should be trivial for an omnimax being.
Being a Christian, I've made my decision. That decision offers no compromise; therefore, I'm closed to anything else.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: Minimum facts approach to the resurrection? A secular response?
« Reply #117 on: January 25, 2014, 09:42:41 PM »

How is life not a miracle?


Because:

mir·a·cle noun \?mir-i-k?l\ 

: an unusual or wonderful event that is believed to be caused by the power of God

: a very amazing or unusual event, thing, or achievement



Given that life is commonplace within this earth, it, by definition, isn't one.

Your attempts to define Yahweh into existence makes all the sense of:

I am the great and powerful Oz, capable of miracles. You see life around that's a miracle...therefore I have mighty powers.

An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2553
  • Darwins +206/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I did haz jeezusburger™
Re: Minimum facts approach to the resurrection? A secular response?
« Reply #118 on: January 26, 2014, 08:57:37 PM »
Your attempts to define Yahweh into existence makes all the sense of:

I am the great and powerful Oz, capable of miracles. You see life around that's a miracle...therefore I have mighty powers.

He knows that. He's a troll.
I strive for clarity, but aim for confusion.

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1845
  • Darwins +318/-6
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: Minimum facts approach to the resurrection? A secular response?
« Reply #119 on: January 27, 2014, 11:25:16 AM »
Define supernatural.  Give a description of 'supernatural' that can help distinguish natural phenomenon and supernatural phenomenon.  Give a description of 'supernatural' that can help distinguish supernatural phenomenon from non-existent phenomenon.
If we think of the supernatural as in the 'real world' then it makes sense really. The 'natural' world is not something less than the supernatural, rather the natural world is limited by laws, dimensions, etc. it is the supernatural plus limitations, like laws, dimensions, etc.

We can't just start flying through the air because it defies the laws of physics. The supernatural doesn't merely break the laws of physics, it just isn't limited by the laws of physics to begin with.

The natural world exists within the supernatural world, but with limitations that simply don't exist for the supernatural. The natural world is the supernatural plus restrictions that makes it into what we define as the natural world. The supernatural doesn't simply break these restrictions, rather the restrictions weren't there to begin with.
This is not helping me to distinguish between 'natural' or 'supernatural'.  I think the primary problem is that I don't understand how to distinguish between 'supernatural' and 'not real'.  I suspect that you and I can agree that if something does not fit as a 'natural' phenomenon, that means that it is potentially either 'supernatural' or 'not real', yes?  Perhaps start there.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."
- Eddie Izzard

Offline wheels5894

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2442
  • Darwins +106/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: Minimum facts approach to the resurrection? A secular response?
« Reply #120 on: January 27, 2014, 11:38:02 AM »
yep, this certainly doesn't help. However, it seems that Spinner knows a lot more than he is letting on as he tells us that

Quote
The supernatural doesn't merely break the laws of physics, it just isn't limited by the laws of physics to begin with.

Now this is something we have not heard before and suggests that Spinner has actually been there and checked it out.  After all, how else could he know about the laws of physics in an area where most people have never been and some even don't think exists? I am most intrigued, Spinner. Can yiu tell us more about this place?

Now Spinner tells us, in effect, that our natural world is a sub-set of everything

Quote
The natural world exists within the supernatural world, but with limitations that simply don't exist for the supernatural. The natural world is the supernatural plus restrictions that makes it into what we define as the natural world. The supernatural doesn't simply break these restrictions, rather the restrictions weren't there to begin with.

which is really interesting but I am sorry to say, I need to know more. As one of quite a few people who have never been there and who don't even know where this supernatural is, I'd like to know how one gets there - you know, means of travel, direction, that sort of thing.

However, leaving that aside, since none of us here, apart from Spinner of course, have managed to even work out where this larger and unlimited area is, it seems to me that jdawg is right and that we need to know how to distinuish the supernatural as described by Spinner and the universe without this supernatural. Now that is hardly asking much, Spinner.
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Online nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6199
  • Darwins +782/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Minimum facts approach to the resurrection? A secular response?
« Reply #121 on: January 27, 2014, 04:41:34 PM »
You know how whenever we test for the supernatural we find nothing? We have yet to get a reasonable way to tell the supernatural (but shy or capricious or d!ckheaded) from the non-existent.

We certainly don't have any evidence of a good, caring, loving, desperate-to-communicate with-us supernatural being.....makes you wonder. &)
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: Minimum facts approach to the resurrection? A secular response?
« Reply #122 on: January 29, 2014, 12:28:58 PM »

I personally believe it is because when people have a comfortable life, they forget about God and give into material gains. When someone has nothing in their life, they are more likely to

 grasp at straws and accept a mental opiate to placate their lously lot in life.
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Online SevenPatch

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 602
  • Darwins +92/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • A source will help me understand.
Re: Minimum facts approach to the resurrection? A secular response?
« Reply #123 on: January 29, 2014, 12:40:32 PM »

I personally believe it is because when people have a comfortable life, they forget about God and give into material gains. When someone has nothing in their life, they are more likely to

 grasp at straws and accept a mental opiate to placate their lously lot in life.

Yes!  I'd like to add that it is easy to see why Christianity is so appealing to accept as well, after all, Jesus said "The meek shall inherit the Earth".
"Shut him up! We have a lot invested in this ride - SHUT HIM UP! Look at my furrows of worry! Look at my big bank account, and my family! This just HAS to be real!" - Bill Hicks

Online nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6199
  • Darwins +782/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Minimum facts approach to the resurrection? A secular response?
« Reply #124 on: January 29, 2014, 05:43:27 PM »
Jesus must have meant that wealthy people will inherit all the stuff on the earth, while the poor people will just get a pile of dirt.  :P
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Online SevenPatch

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 602
  • Darwins +92/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • A source will help me understand.
Re: Minimum facts approach to the resurrection? A secular response?
« Reply #125 on: January 29, 2014, 11:06:06 PM »
Haha, good point nogodsforme.

Although, land is valuable depending on where it is located.  At least that was the plot of Superman (the one with Christopher Reeve).
"Shut him up! We have a lot invested in this ride - SHUT HIM UP! Look at my furrows of worry! Look at my big bank account, and my family! This just HAS to be real!" - Bill Hicks