Can the supernatural be detected by science?

[4gold]

Let's say you had me in a controlled laboratory environment, and every single blind person that I touched could instantly see, or that every amputee I touched would instantly grow limbs, or that every time I stepped on water I did not sink...what scientific evidence would suggest that the supernatural exists?

My argument is that science is only useful to disprove a philosophical claim, not to prove one. I have about a dozen arguments that I prefer for the existence of God, but none are scientific. All involve reason and philosophy, instead.

[Bust Nak]

There's no reconciliation necessary. Christianity does not allow for free will (God supposedly knows the future, only those who are written in the Book of Life are saved), therefore Christianity is bogus. This is supported by the fact that, while there is wisdom and history in the Bible, there are no supernatural events/revelations that don't rely completely on hearsay.

I don't understand what you are saying here, perhaps you could rephrase?

Both choices are based on blind-faith based belief, that is, belief in the complete absence of reasoned evidence/facts supporting those beliefs. And since both beliefs are baseless, moral choices are still made under free will, though blind-faith beliefs are forms of self-deception--which isn't immoral, but it isn't virtuous either.

Right, but that doesn't change my point - someone is far more likely to be on their best behaviour, if they believe they are being watched, than if they believe they are alone, regardless of whether these beliefs are blind-faith based or evidence based.

Does it make any sense that the Israelites who had just seen God deliver them from Egypt, with that God in the pillar of cloud/fire parting the Red Sea and leading them in the desert, to, with that pillar still at hand, worship a golden calf?

No, it doesn't make any sense. Hence my point - those who have seen God deliver people from Egypt, with that God in the pillar of cloud/fire parting the Red Sea, have their freewill significantly influence by God, would be far less likely to disobey God than those who hasn't seen any of that.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 57 by Bust Nak]

Good luck getting theists to agree to your version of God with that specific testable feature.

Hmmm....
Hmmm...

So you think that theists will only agree to find God with non-specific or untestable features?

In all the rational world, not material, not theoretical, not even spiritual, all the rational world, there is only one thing that is not detectable under those circumstances.

Nothing.

Was this your point? I confess if it was - you have rather profoundly influenced me, and, well, wow.

[ThePainefulTruth]

There's no reconciliation necessary. Christianity does not allow for free will (God supposedly knows the future, only those who are written in the Book of Life are saved), therefore Christianity is bogus. This is supported by the fact that, while there is wisdom and history in the Bible, there are no supernatural events/revelations that don't rely completely on hearsay.

I don't understand what you are saying here, perhaps you could rephrase?

If our fates are written in the Book of Life, our lives are predetermined and therefore free will is impossible.

Both choices are based on blind-faith based belief, that is, belief in the complete absence of reasoned evidence/facts supporting those beliefs. And since both beliefs are baseless, moral choices are still made under free will, though blind-faith beliefs are forms of self-deception--which isn't immoral, but it isn't virtuous either.

Right, but that doesn't change my point - someone is far more likely to be on their best behaviour, if they believe they are being watched, than if they believe they are alone, regardless of whether these beliefs are blind-faith based or evidence based.

Exactly, they're on their best behavior, but not doing what they might be doing if they weren't being watched. The object is to find those who are on their best behavior when they AREN'T being watched. And if there is no evidence either way that we're being watched or not, any believe about God is irrelevant. Sure, we can lie to ourselves and say we're certain there's a God watching us, but deep down we still know that's a lie.

Does it make any sense that the Israelites who had just seen God deliver them from Egypt, with that God in the pillar of cloud/fire parting the Red Sea and leading them in the desert, to, with that pillar still at hand, worship a golden calf?

No, it doesn't make any sense. Hence my point - those who have seen God deliver people from Egypt, with that God in the pillar of cloud/fire parting the Red Sea, have their freewill significantly influence by God, would be far less likely to disobey God than those who hasn't seen any of that.

Yet they did worship the inanimate idol, with the powerful God that has just saved them by parting the Red Sea being visible and watching them, which makes no sense. They're dissing God to His face, why?

[Neatras]

[Replying to post 63 by ThePainefulTruth]

That's because those Hebrews were polytheists. Monotheism centered around a singular Yahweh didn't even exist yet.

The Exodus myth itself is meant to push the majesty of the Hebrew war god Yahweh. Out of the pantheon, there were other gods. In all likelihood, the Hebrew people depicted were worshiping another of their pantheon, when dedicated Yahwists pushed for more power. It wouldn't be for several hundred years before Yahwists eventually twisted their old tales, conjoining Yahweh and a type of father god Elohim, eventually producing an amalgamation. Monotheism was born long after the tale of Exodus, so contextually speaking, it made sense they worshiped other gods; unlike the narrative pushed by modern theists, it wasn't a choice between the almighty omnimax god of all and some random idol thrown together to spite their only deity. It was simply them setting aside worship of their war god for their fertility god, or any number of beings they wished to invoke. The scriptures are written as a way of presenting the pantheon as an old paradigm that Yahweh's dedicated people wiped out very violently (killing what, 11/12ths of the entire camp?) And imposing their god as the ultimate leader. So even the commandments are left dripping with polytheistic undertones.

[H.sapiens]

There's no reconciliation necessary

when dealing with a mythology.

[ThePainefulTruth]

[Replying to post 63 by ThePainefulTruth]

That's because those Hebrews were polytheists. Monotheism centered around a singular Yahweh didn't even exist yet.

Even if they were still polytheists, why would they abandon the pillar of fire and smoke for a inanimate golden calf? That was sort of the point of Exodus, Moses monotheistic model supplanting polytheism.

The Exodus myth itself is meant to push the majesty of the Hebrew war god Yahhttps://www.facebook.com/groups/DeplorableUs/pe ... 8949354weh.

That still doesn't explain the Hebrews turning their backs on the Pillar of Cloud and Fire for a metal idol.

[Monta]

[Replying to post 66 by ThePainefulTruth]


"That still doesn't explain the Hebrews turning their backs on the Pillar of Cloud and Fire for a metal idol."

Why are you be surprised?
OT prophets spoke words from God and were ignored.
Jesus spoke and he was ignored.
We would do exactly the same today.

[Bust Nak]

So you think that theists will only agree to find God with non-specific or untestable features?

Yes. The moment they agree to testable feature, is the moment they open themselves up to falsification. Those who were careless enough to make specific, testable features will either back track, or start their journey to disbelief.

In all the rational world, not material, not theoretical, not even spiritual, all the rational world, there is only one thing that is not detectable under those circumstances.

Nothing.

Was this your point? I confess if it was - you have rather profoundly influenced me, and, well, wow.

Is that a good wow or bad wow?

[Bust Nak]

If our fates are written in the Book of Life, our lives are predetermined and therefore free will is impossible.

I understand and agree with you, but do you think our fates are written in the Book of Life, and hence have no free will?

Exactly, they're on their best behavior, but not doing what they might be doing if they weren't being watched. The object is to find those who are on their best behavior when they AREN'T being watched. And if there is no evidence either way that we're being watched or not, any believe about God is irrelevant. Sure, we can lie to ourselves and say we're certain there's a God watching us, but deep down we still know that's a lie.

Right, to aid in that objective, one would want the test subject to think they are not being watched, so any revelation would be counter productive in that search.

Yet they did worship the inanimate idol, with the powerful God that has just saved them by parting the Red Sea being visible and watching them, which makes no sense.

All the more reason to think the narrative is false.

They're dissing God to His face, why?

They think it was the golden calf that parted the Rea Sea? They think golden calf is God's preferred way of being worshiped? Or maybe none of it happened at all.

[Monta]

[Replying to post 69 by Bust Nak]


"They think it was the golden calf that parted the Rea Sea? They think golden calf is God's preferred way of being worshiped? Or maybe none of it happened at all."

Money is the root of all evil.