Taking Questions on Embedded Age Creation

[Kylie]

I don't have to show what most scientists working in the mode of Methodological Naturalism already know (or should know).

The fact is: We can't control for God as a variable...................................................

Then God is completely unfalsifiable, isn't he?

That doesn't match with the claim in the Bible that I presented. After all, Jesus didn't say, "If you pray for the mountain to move, it will move, but only if God feels like it."

And if God is unfalsifiable, I see no reason to believe that he exists. Just the same as I don't see any reason to believe anything else that is unfalsifiable.

 

[Kylie]

You couldn't see why.

It doesn't matter if we can see WHY.

We only need to see that IT DOES.

If we see that IT DOES jump up and throw itself into the sea, then we'll know that something is going on that our natural laws can't explain. And we'll be able to figure out the connection between praying and mountains jumping into the sea.

"That's funny, every time someone prays for the mountain to jump into the sea, it actually happens! There's no laws of nature which would account for this, so something unusual is happening. But the fact remains, we can see that something is happening that science can't explain!"

 

[AveChristusRex]

I commend 2PV, AV and truthpls for defending the faith, though I really see no end to this discussion, as it could go on for another 2,000 posts and nothing be solved because we are all, equally, stone-set on our beliefs, I pray for those who argue against the faith, as all Christians should. God bless!

 

[Kylie]

If you're actually going to hold that to the standards of scientific testing, you'll have to get a lot more specific.

What specifically are you testing?

The Biblical claim that pray can result in a mountain throwing itself into the sea, as presented in Mark 11:23. "For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith."

What is your null hypothesis?

That the prayer will not cause the mountain to be thrown into the sea.

What are your criteria for a "mountain"?

Miriam Webster defines a mountain as, "a landmass that projects conspicuously above its surroundings and is higher than a hill."

What are your criteria for a mountain to have "moved" (such as distance, timeframe, mechanism, etc.)?

The Bible doesn't give a time frame. I'd say the timeframe should be faster than we can reasonably expect the mountain to make such a movement through natural means (such as erosion, plate tectonics, etc).

As for distance, the Bible's claim says, "into the sea." So, the nearest sea/ocean.

Mechanism is irrelevant, as long as it is not by the hand of humans. For example, if someone uses explosives to dislodge the mountain, and it falls into the sea that way, then I wouldn't count that, as it happened as the result of explosives, not prayer.

And since everyone seems to agree that we're testing God, you'll have to define "God" in an empirically meaningful way, complete with abilities, traits, etc. so that we can determine what potential outcomes are potentially within God's skill set and which one's aren't.

No, I'm testing the claim in the Bible.

It's perfectly possible for God to exist even if the claim I am looking at fails the test.

 

[truthpls]

It doesn't matter if we can see WHY.

Yes if you only see natural then it will be natural explanations. That will not do for a supernaturally caused event

We only need to see that IT DOES.

You can't. The lot of science is to see nothing more than the physical.

If we see that IT DOES jump up and throw itself into the sea, then we'll know that something is going on that our natural laws can't explain. And we'll be able to figure out the connection between praying and mountains jumping into the sea.

He does not always work in ways you demand. Nor does He work for those who have no faith. So unless men have a lot of faith, you can probably but real estate in a mountainous area. If they did have a lot of faith, you can still relax. Why would they try to whack you by moving the mountain on which you live?

"That's funny, every time someone prays for the mountain to jump into the sea, it actually happens!

No. Never heard of that even. Maybe people do not have that much faith yet in this mortal body as a rule. So much for your ability to test that with the natural.

There's no laws of nature which would account for this, so something unusual is happening. But the fact remains, we can see that something is happening that science can't explain!"

By the time some have great faith to do that, my guess it will be in or after the millennium. There will be no natural only science then. So much for your ever having a hope of testing it.

 

[truthpls]

I commend 2PV, AV and truthpls for defending the faith, though I really see no end to this discussion, as it could go on for another 2,000 posts and nothing be solved because we are all, equally, stone-set on our beliefs, I pray for those who argue against the faith, as all Christians should. God bless!

For what if some did not believe, shall their unbelief make the faith of God to no effect? I think it is good for the truth too be told, even if many will not accept it.

 

[BCP1928]

Yes if you only see natural then it will be natural explanations. That will not do for a supernaturally caused event

You can't. The lot of science is to see nothing more than the physical.

I think the point is that science could see that an event has no determinable natural cause.

 

[Kylie]

Yes if you only see natural then it will be natural explanations. That will not do for a supernaturally caused event

I think you need to read what I posted.

I very clearly said that there would be NO NATURAL EXPLANATION for such an event.

You can't. The lot of science is to see nothing more than the physical.

At this point I can only conclude you are deliberately saying falsehoods, as I have told you countless times that this is not true and stated very clearly numerous times that science is about what is TESTABLE, regardless of whether it is natural or not.

He does not always work in ways you demand. Nor does He work for those who have no faith. So unless men have a lot of faith, you can probably but real estate in a mountainous area. If they did have a lot of faith, you can still relax. Why would they try to whack you by moving the mountain on which you live?

Always with the excuses as to why it doesn't work.

Interesting that you feel the need to provide such excuses BEFORE the attempt was even made. It's like you suspect it won't work or something!

No. Never heard of that even. Maybe people do not have that much faith yet in this mortal body as a rule. So much for your ability to test that with the natural.

So you are claiming that no one alive today doesn't have the amount of faith that is the same as the smallest seed?

By the time some have great faith to do that, my guess it will be in or after the millennium. There will be no natural only science then. So much for your ever having a hope of testing it.

More excuses, and this time at the cost of claiming that there are no faithful people today.

 

[Kylie]

...because we are all, equally, stone-set on our beliefs...

I'm certainly not stone set in my beliefs.

I'd be happy to change my beliefs in a split second.

And it only takes one little thing to do it, too.

Evidence.

That's all. Just some testable, verifiable evidence.

 

[AV1611VET]

That's all. Just some testable, verifiable evidence.

Expecting evidence, when no evidence was generated, will insure you'll waste your time looking/begging for nothing.

 

[Kylie]

Expecting evidence, when no evidence was generated, will insure you'll waste your time looking/begging for nothing.

If there's no evidence, why should anyone believe it?

 

[Aaron112]

(True) Faith (In Jesus) IS A GIFT.

 

[AveChristusRex]

If there's no evidence, why should anyone believe it?

Well, since your married, lets use a different example: How do you know a husband truly loves their wife? You can observe his actions like gifting, protecting, and nurturing, but those actions themselves aren't proof of love. They could be done out of duty, habit, or expectation. The belief that he truly loves his wife, and is not cheating, or doing it out of habit or expectation, or anything else, ultimately rests on faith.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I'll point out that it was abundantly clear what I was referring to the whole time, as I was literally quoting the particular interpretation I was referring to when I said the things you claimed were me not referring to someone's interpretation.

I am saying that the Bible makes a claim. That claim, as it is written, can be scientifically tested. If a person holds the position that the Bible is meant to be taken literally, then it follows that they believe the claim as written is literally correct, and that claim can be scientifically tested.

And I'm saying that if we apply fuller applications of reading and interpreting----------like your and my English teachers taught us in English class in high school------------no one would think that when Jesus says "faith can move mountains" that He was actually referring to geological upheavals.

I'm sure there are many such people out there in the world.

So it's not just one person, but many. I'm sure you know that there's another passage in the Bible which claims that true believers can handle venomous snakes without being in danger, and there are several sects of Christianity who hold that to be literally true, leading to people getting bitten and dying because of it. I'm sure you don't need specific sources to support this claim, as these events are generally widely known and reported on, but I'll be happy tom provide several such sources if you wish.

In any case, there are many who believe these easily testable claims made within the Bible are true.

I don't have that much time, as I have a family and a full time job to worry about as well, and frankly I hold them to be more important than this website.

"I think you can learn."

Wow.

And I can think you can learn to talk to people without being patronising.

I think in order for someone to be an authority in a particular field, then there needs to be some objective truth about that field.

Considering that when it comes to the Bible there are lots of different "authorities" who have completely different interpretations to each other, it seems to me that this is impossible.

I mean, all the world's authorities on cancer treatments are in agreement, right? All the world's authorities on hydrothermal power generation are in agreement, right? So why don't we see the same agreement in the world's authorities on Christianity? Why are there so many different sects of Christianity?

That's a lot of questions, Kylie? They can be answered by those who study both History and Hermeneutics. Differences of interpretation infest almost EVERY field of human life, and Christianity is no exception. For the life of me, I'm not sure why anyone would expect Christianity to be easily amenable to agreement among every person who either hears or reads about the Gospel Message.

So, "authority" requires agreement among all of those people who are considered an authority. And religion just doesn't have that. Not that I've seen.

Ok........................ Well. I apologize for my apparent patronizing. But I think the Bible is a more complex book historically and culturally than what you've been told.

Also, please note, Kylie, that hardly anyone here on CF, even among your fellow atheists, think that Methodological Naturalism is optional.

May I suggest you expand your academic horizons? Wouldn't the folks at Starfleet Academy suggest that you do the same?

 

[truthpls]

I think the point is that science could see that an event has no determinable natural cause.

Nothing they can determine by using only the natural. Sad

 

[truthpls]

I think you need to read what I posted.

I very clearly said that there would be NO NATURAL EXPLANATION for such an event.

Big deal, all that means is science would have no explanation at all. Add that to the long list. Five mysteries the Standard Model can’t explain

...science is about what is TESTABLE, regardless of whether it is natural or not.

Science can only test the natural

So you are claiming that no one alive today doesn't have the amount of faith that is the same as the smallest seed?

No one we know about. Maybe you know a few you could point us to?

More excuses, and this time at the cost of claiming that there are no faithful people today.

Not having faith to make MT Everest fly thousands of miles does not means people are faithless or not faithful.

 

[BCP1928]

Nothing they can determine by using only the natural. Sad

That's correct and what we've been trying to tell you all along. Science can test the supernatural by discovering an event or phenomenon for which there appears to be no natural cause.

 

[truthpls]

That's correct and what we've been trying to tell you all along. Science can test the supernatural by discovering an event or phenomenon for which there appears to be no natural cause.

That is observing the natural. Not seeing the spiritual cause. If they observed Jesus walking on water they would not change the theories about gravity

 

[BCP1928]

That is observing the natural. Not seeing the spiritual cause. If they observed Jesus walking on water they would not change the theories about gravity

That's correct. Science can only observe the natural. If the supernatural as a direct effect on the natural then science can observe that effect.

 

[truthpls]

That's correct. Science can only observe the natural. If the supernatural as a direct effect on the natural then science can observe that effect.

Effect, not cause. You also cannot be there to test and repeat miracles. You're hooped any way we look at it