Let's cut to the chase. Do you have any evidence?

[no evidence no belief]

I feel like we've been beating around the bush for... 6000 years!

Can you please either provide some evidence for your supernatural beliefs, or admit that you have no evidence?

If you believe there once was a talking donkey (Numbers 22) could you please provide evidence?

If you believe there once was a zombie invasion in Jerusalem (Mat 27) could you please provide evidence?

If you believe in the flying horse (Islam) could you please provide evidence?

Walking on water, virgin births, radioactive spiders who give you superpowers, turning water into wine, turning iron into gold, demons, goblins, ghosts, hobbits, elves, angels, unicorns and Santa.

Can you PLEASE provide evidence?

[assisigirl]

Has anyone seen NENB around, or NEBE, as I affectionately call him (NoEvidenceBringEvidence)

Nebe's question from assisigirl


What did you know about Balaam's Donkey, before you included it in your OP.
(nothing/something/a lot/wrote a book about it, what?)

The only evidence I need are links to Forum Posts by you that display any knowledge of the afore mentioned quadruped. If you have many posts regarding this beast of burden, then three links will do to posts that pre-date the OP.
If your answer is D'oh, then no links necessary

assisigirl: At this stage, am I to conclude that the answer is in fact 'D'oh?

[assisigirl]

Hi Sonofason,
I feel compelled to attempt to save you from a state of error. You will most likely resist my efforts, but however. Your postings regarding 'laughter at the damned' are very sad. They are an exact parallel to the worst quotes of Islam that we see constantly on this forum from fundamentalist Muslims.

More importantly these sentiments are at total loggerheads with any, any, Jesus that a sane person could extract from a reading of the NT. You say that the Holy Spirit is a Comforter and a spirit of Jesus but try to realise that this is a person who mixed with the poor, the downtrodden , the sick and the sinful.

This guy admonished a sinful woman by telling her to 'go and sin no more'

He did not need the props of scaremongering and you are bigger than this as well.

You have erred in a very human way here, Zeal for your Father's house has overcome you. People take things to the enth degree, look at medical researchs efforts to overcome death, look at human sport searching for the ultimate winner and look at your poor self. You have run out of runway in your efforts to fly. Now you dwell with the other creatures in the scrub grass. Repent, is the word that is commonly used here. Do not persist in attempting to retain the untenable.

[Star]

Has anyone seen NENB around, or NEBE, as I affectionately call him (NoEvidenceBringEvidence)

Nebe's question from assisigirl


What did you know about Balaam's Donkey, before you included it in your OP.
(nothing/something/a lot/wrote a book about it, what?)

The only evidence I need are links to Forum Posts by you that display any knowledge of the afore mentioned quadruped. If you have many posts regarding this beast of burden, then three links will do to posts that pre-date the OP.
If your answer is D'oh, then no links necessary

assisigirl: At this stage, am I to conclude that the answer is in fact 'D'oh?

Maybe if you articulated your point of view more effectively, you'd have better luck.

[assisigirl]

Star:Maybe if you articulated your point of view more effectively, you'd have better luck.


assisigirl: Let me get this on tape, Star, if I was a better writer, NENB would be more likely to answer a simple question. Is it not more likely that the answer is, in fact D'oh and that the OP is a nonsense.

[scourge99]

Wow, this thread has degenerated into a bunch of incoherent, inflammatory ranting and really shows that this forum has a huge troll problem. It sucks how this forum (which used to be a great place for intelligent and thought provoking discussions) has turned into a haven for trolls.

As a Christian, I would say that there is evidence for my supernatural beliefs but this evidence is inconclusive. The evidence available does not, and probably never will, prove Christianity to be true beyond a reasonable doubt. However, the evidence available does establish that these supernatural beliefs are reasonable, warranted and logical.

For example, if I claimed that the 49ers will win the superbowl I would cite evidence such as player stats, scores, league history, etc to support my claim. The evidence available does not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the 49ers will win with absolute certainty. The evidence simply shows that there are good reasons to believe that the 49ers will win, and that believing in the 49ers is not completely far fetched and irrational.

Ok, that's an argument worth looking into. I applaud you for admitting that you cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt the claims of Christianity.

Let's look into the details of your more nuanced position, and specifically your comparison between the 49ers winning and a supernatural claim in the Bible. Unless you object, let's discuss the resurrection/ascention specifically.

So, what does each claim have going for it, and what does it have against it? To determine if it's reasonable to hold a belief we must look at it in detail.

A 49ers victory.
Evidence in favor of it: It doesn't violate the laws of physics. Believing that it will happen does not require the total collapse of everything we know about medicine, biology, chemistry, physics. etc. It's not physically, chemically, biologically, medically impossible as per our understanding of physics, chemistry, biology, medicine - an understanding that must have something to it, otherwise we wouldn't be able to perform heart transplants, travel to mars, have free videochats across the globe, etc.

Also, it is INEVITABLE that one of the teams will win. There are 32 NFL teams. That alone, means that there is a 3% of them winning. They are ranked 9th as of the end of the 12th week of the season which means that it's quite unlikely that the bottom 16th ranked teams might win. So if we assume they are competing with the top 16 teams, that gives them a 6% chance of winning. These are just figures I'm pulling out of a hat, just to get an idea.

Evidence against it: The fact that other teams are trying to win also.

All in all, one could make the case that based on a more in-depth study of statistics, players performance, etc, one could hold the belief that the 49ers could win, and that such belief is not entirely far-fetched and irrational. It's still more reasonable to assume they will not win, but no one would consider either belief crazy.

The resurrection:
The resurrection is the notion that a decomposing maggot infested brain-dead, heart-dead cadaver with all organs failed, with whatever blood left in it after multiple arterial wounds completely clotted in the veins, came back to life, strolled around town and then flew into the sky.

Evidence for it: Some people wrote down that somebody told them that they saw it happen. A bunch of people believed them.

Evidence against it: It is medically, biologically, chemically, physically impossible as per our understanding of medicine, biology, chemistry and physics.

Also, unlike the 49ers which are one of 32 teams of which one will of necessity win, the resurrection is one among millions of supernatural claims none of which must of necessity have happened.

Every single piece of relevant empirical evidence tells us with as close to conclusive certainty as humanly possible that corpses do NOT fly into the air, unless thrown by a catapult, and if so, they usually fall down shortly thereafter.

If you wish to argue that it's not far-fetched or irrational to believe in flying corpses, this is what you have to demonstrate:
That it's not far-fetched and irrational to believe that everything we know about medicine is wrong in the most fundamental of ways, but that somehow we are able to perform heart transplants.
That it's not far fetched and irrational to believe that everything we know about biology is wrong in the most fundamental of ways, but that somehow we are able to establish paternity through DNA testing, create vaccines that save millions of lives, etc.
That it's not far fetched and irrational to believe that everything we know about chemistry is wrong in the most fundamental of ways, but that somehow we are literally able to transform iron into gold (albeit at a cost that makes it economically unfeasible)
That it's not far fetched and irrational to believe that everything we know about physics is wrong in the most fundamental of ways, but that somehow we are able to split the atom, put satellites in orbit, travel to planets millions of miles away.

Thoughts?

Well it's clear you have an anti supernatural bias otherwise supernatural events wouldn't be extraordinary to you.

You also have a bias against personal testimony. It's obvious that the best and most reasonable explanation for the testimony in the bible is that its true! The same is true for Near Death Experiences!

[McCulloch]

Well it's clear you have an anti supernatural bias otherwise supernatural events wouldn't be extraordinary to you.

You also have a bias against personal testimony. It's obvious that the best and most reasonable explanation for the testimony in the bible is that its true! The same is true for Near Death Experiences!

I have yet to meet a Christian who accepts both the virgin birth that we read in Matthew and the conception of Cesare Augustus by the God Apollo that we read in Suetonius. They generally also reject the miracle stories of Muhammad, Buddha and other religious figures.

It is certainly not obvious that the best and most reasonable explanation for the testimony in the New Testament is that it is true. That is why we debate it.

Now, if every Hindu or Muslim who had had a near death experience came face-to-face with Jesus and turned from the errors of his or her religion, then you might have a point. However, generally speaking, the memories created in the brains of those who experience near death trauma, seem to validate their own expectations and beliefs. I think that an anti supernatural bias is justified.

[scourge99]

Well it's clear you have an anti supernatural bias otherwise supernatural events wouldn't be extraordinary to you.

You also have a bias against personal testimony. It's obvious that the best and most reasonable explanation for the testimony in the bible is that its true! The same is true for Near Death Experiences!

I have yet to meet a Christian who accepts both the virgin birth that we read in Matthew and the conception of Cesare Augustus by the God Apollo that we read in Suetonius. They generally also reject the miracle stories of Muhammad, Buddha and other religious figures.

Well that's because the supernaturalism of Christianity has strong evidence and testimony in its favor while other supernatural claims do not. Its uniquely testified by several witnesses and independent historians.

It is certainly not obvious that the best and most reasonable explanation for the testimony in the New Testament is that it is true. That is why we debate it.

Everything is debatable. Philosophers and scientists debate the meaning and implications of the facts. But Christianity is the best explanation of the facts. Lots of historians agree.

Now, if every Hindu or Muslim who had had a near death experience came face-to-face with Jesus and turned from the errors of his or her religion, then you might have a point. However, generally speaking, the memories created in the brains of those who experience near death trauma, seem to validate their own expectations and beliefs. I think that an anti supernatural bias is justified.

well clearly not all experiences are legitimate. But all these near death experiences point to the truth of an afterlife and a soul even if there are discrepancies. Christianity is a worldview compatible with these facts and other phenomenon . Atheistic scientism is not.

[Sonofason]

[Replying to post 2189 by Artie]

Honestly, I have to some extent. I can't say that I've had any of their brains scanned, but I have met quite a few of them, and have drawn my own conclusions. And from what I see, people who experience the Holy Spirit are always vested in Christ. And there is a wide range of people who experience the Holy Spirit seemingly ranging from the crazy to the most sane of individuals. It appears to me that sanity has absolutely nothing to do with it.

And there is also a wide range of people who experience alien abductions. Why should we consider your claim that some Christians actually experience the "Holy Spirit" any more valid than the claim that alien abductees actually experience aliens without any actual evidence for the existence of the "Holy Spirit" or aliens no matter how many claim to experience them?

That would be difficult for me to judge, as I have never met an alien nor any person who claims to have been abducted by aliens.

[no evidence no belief]

The problem is you don't know everything about science and medicine. When you do, then you can tell me that it is impossible for the dead to live again.

Ah ah! Got you! Argument from ignorance! I haven't seen somebody make that mistake in a while!

"We are ignorant of the totality of scientific knowledge, therefore corpses can come back to life and fly into the sky".

That is as nonsensical an argument as the kind of stuff that cavemen would make:

"I don't understand what lightning is, therefore it's a the farts of a gigantic man in the clouds"

If a human being could be cloned, and if the memories of the person were salvaged by some means, don't you think it possible for the dead, even long dead persons to live again? I do.

You are absolutely right that it is possible that an entity exists with the ability to cause slabs of decomposing maggot infested meat to turn into operating human beings who then fly into the sky.

It's possible.

Here is the questions: Do you have any evidence that such an entity exists?

And I believe that God knows all science. He knows all possibilities, even the possibilities that you nor science will never know.

Please Sonofason. No Dungeons & Dragons lore. I don't care how powerful Gandalf is, how wise Aragorn is, how agile Spiderman is, and how knowledgeable of science God is. You have to demonstrate that these entities are real before we discuss them in more detail.

[assisigirl]

NENB:Ah ah! Got you! Argument from ignorance! I haven't seen somebody make that mistake in a while!


assisigirl:I have, it was you Stan!

Still no donkey evidence.

In deference to the oncoming festive season I have decided to lower the evidence bar. Any of the following are now acceptable.

1.A picture of you NENB riding a donkey.
2.An ancestral connection of any sort (to Balaam of course)
3.A faxed receipt corresponding to a donation to any 'Donkey Sanctuary'.

Happy Christmas