My Verification Challenge

[AV1611VET]

People can be fooled by stories more easily than by their own eyes - and even their own eyes can fool them.

Only to a point.

That's why magicians had a code never to reveal their secrets.

But all that stuff has been exposed now.

 

[Gottservant]

How would you verify it?

Just in response to this: my interpretation is that there was a mist over the sea and the disciples for whatever reason, saw an apparition in that.

Mistaking it for Jesus, they forgot that only mist - and the like (light things) can hover above water.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

That's why magicians had a code never to reveal their secrets.

But all that stuff has been exposed now.

As have the stories. But people are still fooled by them.

 

[The happy Objectivist]

Matthew 14:22 And straightway Jesus constrained his disciples to get into a ship, and to go before him unto the other side, while he sent the multitudes away.
23 And when he had sent the multitudes away, he went up into a mountain apart to pray: and when the evening was come, he was there alone.
24 But the ship was now in the midst of the sea, tossed with waves: for the wind was contrary.
25 And in the fourth watch of the night Jesus went unto them, walking on the sea.

How would you scientifically verify Jesus walking on water, even if you were there when He did it, and had the technology at your disposal that you have today?

(Keep in mind the ship is being tossed with waves.)

You have all the equipment and knowledge at your fingertips.

How would you verify it?

I wasn't there when he supposedly did this and I would try to verify it since verification presupposes that existence has primacy and the story of Jesus assumes the primacy of consciousness. I would be guilty of stealing concepts. And I wouldn't accept anyone else's supposed verification for the same reason.

 

[AV1611VET]

I wasn't there when he supposedly did this and I would try to verify it since verification presupposes that existence has primacy and the story of Jesus assumes the primacy of consciousness. I would be guilty of stealing concepts. And I wouldn't accept anyone else's supposed verification for the same reason.

That's why I said in my OP: "even if you were there when He did it".

 

[The happy Objectivist]

That's why I said in my OP: "even if you were there when He did it".

But that's not possible, since I live now. You're not getting my point. The principles underlying science are incompatible with the idea of miracles.

 

[AV1611VET]

But that's not possible, since I live now. You're not getting my point. The principles underlying science are incompatible with the idea of miracles.

Now you know why I call these things "challenges," don't you?

 

[The happy Objectivist]

Now you know why I call these things "challenges," don't you?

I do understand but do you understand that your question for your challenge is a loaded question. It assumes that Jesus walking on water happened and now it's a matter of determining whether it was a trick or a miracle. Even if I or anyone else can't scientifically verify this, even if they were present, doesn't mean it is a miracle. It just means we can't say why it happened. I think that your challenge is flawed. You should have asked how this claim could be verified scientifically. It can't. It's completely arbitrary, i.e., not supported by any evidence either perceptual or conceptual.

You might legitimately wonder why I responded at all. It's because I am an advocate of reason as man's only means of knowledge.

 

[Kylie]

Now you know why I call these things "challenges," don't you?

The thing is, though, your "challenges" are usually along the lines of, "Take these two completely incompatible ideas and make them compatible." Then, when people point out that they are incompatible, you say, "Now you know why they are challenges."

They're not challenging. We just conclude that one of the ideas is wrong. And when one of the ideas is a story from the Bible or some other religious idea, and the other idea is reality, the only rational conclusion is that reality is NOT the idea that's wrong. That leaves the religious idea. You only think it's a challenge because you don't want to admit that religion (or, more specifically, your interpretation of religion) is wrong.

 

[Sorn]

But that's not possible, since I live now. You're not getting my point. The principles underlying science are incompatible with the idea of miracles.

Has that been scientifically proven??!!

 

[AV1611VET]

I think that your challenge is flawed. You should have asked how this claim could be verified scientifically.

I did.

I even underlined the word "scientifically" in the OP.