« Last post by BibleStudent on Yesterday at 02:34:51 PM »
when evidence is presented and labelled as weak, the response is that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” or something similar. That is an extraordinary claim in itself, highly subjective in nature, and with no evidence to support whether it is valid or not.
Actually it is a mathematical statement, meaning that low prior probabilities have to be offset by high evidential probabilities.
I assume you are referring to Bayes Theorem which has been used to produce probabilities that both favor the claims that “God exists” and “God does not exist.” I indicated that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” is a subjective assertion. Please convince me that I am incorrect and that this “mathematical statement” is not subjective in nature….and please try to refrain from letting your bias influence the outcome.
Your nonsense statement about this shows that you are rationalizing excuses to believe whatever you want.
Now, this is an “extraordinary claim” and an undeserved ad hom. What provoked this and what "extraordinary evidence" can you offer to support your claim that I am “rationalizing excuses to believe whatever you want”?
Claiming that the Christian god is the only explanation shows that you are rationalizing the answer you want to have.You are doing it again. You don’t know me from Adam and yet you are stating something about me that you couldn’t possibly know to be true. It’s very odd that you make these sort of comments.
I can think of many explanations for coincidences in life. People have a natural habit of reading too much into coincidences and rationalizing the explanation they want.
True enough I suppose but, so what? Are you suggesting that every mysterious occurrence is a mere coincidence? If so, please provide evidence……or….if this is just your opinion then admit so and let’s move on.
If there is a chance of one in a billion that a certain event happens to someone today, it will happen to a bunch of people every day. Rare events happen to people all the time. Every time you pass a different car on the road, that is an extremely rare event. What was the chance that you would be there and see that exact car at that exact time?
I am quite certain that this is utter nonsense but if you’d like to formulate something that you feel is a little more convincing, I’ll refrain from assuming what you think you are pointing out. Please make sure you define “extremely rare event” and use some numbers to validate your claim. Also, make sure you factor in the numerous variables that determine whether my passing of a “different car” qualifies as an “extremely rare event.” Certainly the chance that I will pass my neighbors car on the road is more likely than if I pass a car operated by someone who lives on the other side of the country who visits the town I live in once a year.
Impossible miracles never happen.LOL. Obvioulsy. Nice tautology, though.
Claimed miracles are always events which can happen naturally. No training is needed to identify the impossible.If you are strict materialist (an illogical position) then I suppose this may seem true. Besides, miracles are methodologically unscientific so I don’t know how you would ever go about determining if one actually occurred or not.
Belief is not an efficient way to gain knowledge.This does not make sense. A belief is the expression of the knowledge one possesses.
Belief is a faulty construct as you have shown above with your misunderstanding of the meaning of extraordinary evidence and your excuses to yourself for ignoring the need for extraordinary evidence.We can come back to this one after you have demonstrated that I erred in referring to extraordinary claim/extraordinary evidence as being subjective in nature.