Taking Questions on Embedded Age Creation

[Kylie]

Do you believe that God would fail Kylie's academic test?

Why don't you pray for the mountain to be moved, and we'll see for ourselves?

 

[Kylie]

The 'can' depends on first meeting a condition. Jesus put it in perspective. 'According to your faith be it done unto you' There are degrees of faith. One person might have little faith and feel they need to just eat herbs rather than meat for example. Having a promise about what we could be and will be one day is inspiring. It is not some natural only test though. Nothing remotely similar.

This doesn't really address what I said, does it?

Try to understand that science only sees and deals with the natural. They could see the physical event that was caused by God, but would not see His hand behind it. They might see a man that was healed of cancer, but would not give God the glory for the healing. They would dig in their little bag of natural only possible causes, and grab something there.

And again you repeat the false claim that science deals only with the natural.

It's getting to the point where you've been told it's wrong so often that it can't be passed off as anything but deliberate.

 

[Kylie]

But isn't that Kylie's point?

She's [incorrectly] saying that Jesus told us how to test our faith:

Simply employ mind over matter, and God will respond accordingly.

So when Jesus said, "if you have faith like a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move, and nothing will be impossible for you," he didn't actually mean it literally?

You wanna open up that can of worms, AV?

Fine.

How, given a passage from the Bible, do we determine objectively whether that passage is meant to be taken literally or figuratively? What is the process we use to make this determination, AV?

 

[Kylie]

I know this is self-evident, but I do want to point to Luke 22:42: "Not my will, but yours be done" and Matthew 6:10: "Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven." Moreover, Job 42:2: "I know that you can do all things; no purpose of yours can be thwarted." The idea that "mind over matter" guarantees a divine response conflates faith with magical thinking, which is explicitly condemned in Scripture (Deuteronomy 18:10-12).

The belief that God must act based on our thoughts or desires is presumptuous and forgets the difference between Creator and creature. This is pride, and "Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall" (Proverbs 16:18).

In such a case, it was incorrect of Jesus to say, "If you do this, then the result is guaranteed to be that."

 

[Kylie]

I don't. I haven't commented on this because it's really just a thought exercise with no implications for actual day to day science.

But since we're effectively talking about scientifically testing God, the answer is no, it can't be done. That's because God, by definition, can do absolutely anything imaginable, including rerouting time and creating false realities.

So when someone notices God says his followers can move mountains, it isn't an empirical test of God to see if any mountains have been moved. It could be that we don't know God's standards for a follower, it could be that some followers did move mountains but God supernaturally hid it all, it could be that God changed His mind, and so on.

No matter what outcome we get, the answer can always, always be "God just made it look that way" and there's no empirical means to determine if that's true or not.

I get what you're saying, and I generally agree with you. But in this case, I am talking specifically about the claim, "If you pray for the mountain to move, then it WILL move."

That claim is indeed testable.

Pray for the mountain to move, and then see if it moved.

 

[Kylie]

Well, if there are no suddenly moved mountains then there is no testable evidence.

I would suggest that the mountain not acting in the way that it was claimed the mountain would act is evidence that the hypothesis was wrong.

Allow me to present an example...

There are liquids which are used as pH indicators. If you have a substance, you can add a drop of indicator and it will change colour. Based on what colour it changes and how deep the colour is, you can determine if it is an acid or a base, and what the pH is.

But if you add such an indicator and there is no colour change, then we don't say there is no testable evidence. We say this is evidence that the substance is neutral in pH.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why don't you pray for the mountain to be moved, and we'll see for ourselves?

You want me to ask God to turn stones into bread, while I'm at it?

 

[Kylie]

So science cannot test the supernatural.

In this particular case.

Believers in the supernatural have long done their best to ensure that their claims are unfalsifiable, just so they can avoid having their claims tested.

But that doesn't mean that ALL supernatural claims are untestable.

 

[Kylie]

You want me to ask God to turn stones into bread, while I'm at it?

That's up to you.

Why aren't you willing to put your faith to the test by pray that the mountain be moved?

 

[truthpls]

This doesn't really address what I said, does it?

Yes it does. Having faith does not mean mountain moving faith

And again you repeat the false claim that science deals only with the natural.

Obviously it does

It's getting to the point where you've been told it's wrong so often that it can't be passed off as anything but deliberate.

Pretend all you like

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I don't see why not, if the claim about the supernatural gives some testable prediction.

View attachment 359644

Observation: People pray.
Question: Why do people pray?
Hypothesis: People pray because they believe it will aid them, such as in recovery from illness, guidance in difficult times, etc.
Prediction: Prayer will allow people to move mountains, as claimed by Jesus in Matthew 17:20.
Experiment: Get people to pray for a mountain to move, and see if it happens.

Now we just have to wait for the results!

And you studied Research Methods and the Nature of Science at which university?

 

[Kylie]

And you studied Research Methods and the Nature of Science at which university?

Irrelevant.

There is a supernatural claim and I have demonstrated how it can be investigated by applying the scientific method.

Your ad hominem attacks are irrelevant. ("You can't believe Kylie, she hasn't had a formal education in a scientific field!")

 

[Kylie]

Yes it does. Having faith does not mean mountain moving faith

The passage is very clear. It associates the required amount of faith with a mustard seed, which the Bible refers to as the smallest of all seeds.

It is clearly saying that if you have even the smallest amount of faith, you can do it.

Stop making excuses.

Obviously it does

I have demonstrated repeatedly why this is wrong.

Pretend all you like

All you have is the same tired claims you repeat again and again, despite being shown they are wrong.

 

[AveChristusRex]

Why aren't you willing to put your faith to the test by pray that the mountain be moved?

Deuteronomy 6:16: "Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God, as thou temptedst him in the place of temptation."

 

[AveChristusRex]

I get what you're saying, and I generally agree with you. But in this case, I am talking specifically about the claim, "If you pray for the mountain to move, then it WILL move."

That claim is indeed testable.

Pray for the mountain to move, and then see if it moved.

Christ’ statement in Matthew 17:20 is not a promise that any specific prayer will yield the exact outcome desired; rather, it is an illustration of the power of faith in God to accomplish His will. You also forget 1 John 5:14: "If we ask anything according to His will, He hears us." Finally, faith is not a contractual guarantee for miracles, miracles occur according to God’s wisdom and purpose, not merely human desires: "Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see" (Hebrews 11:1).

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Irrelevant.

Hardly. It's very relevant.

There is a supernatural claim and I have demonstrated how it can be investigated by applying the scientific method.

Your ad hominem attacks are irrelevant. ("You can't believe Kylie, she hasn't had a formal education in a scientific field!")

I'm sorry, but it doesn't sound like you're qualified as either a scientist or as a philosopher to make the call as to when an ad hominem has been committed and when it has not. Moreover, you don't show any evidence that you can cite support for your "scientific assertion."

If you can't support your own statement, you need to shut up.

 

[Kylie]

Deuteronomy 6:16: "Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God, as thou temptedst him in the place of temptation."

So Jesus meant that we can pray for a mountain to be moved, and it will happen, unless it's done to tempt God, which is every time, so it will never happen.

And how is praying for a mountain to be moved a temptation?

 

[Kylie]

Christ’ statement in Matthew 17:20 is not a promise that any specific prayer will yield the exact outcome desired; rather, it is an illustration of the power of faith in God to accomplish His will. You also forget 1 John 5:14: "If we ask anything according to His will, He hears us." Finally, faith is not a contractual guarantee for miracles, miracles occur according to God’s wisdom and purpose, not merely human desires: "Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see" (Hebrews 11:1).

So Jesus meant that we can pray for the mountain to move, and it will move, as long as it's God's will that the mountain moves, and it never is.

How convenient that you have a built in excuse to justify why these amazing things never happen.

 

[Kylie]

Hardly. It's very relevant.


I'm sorry, but it doesn't sound like you're qualified as either a scientist or as a philosopher to make the call as to when an ad hominem has been committed and when it has not. Moreover, you don't show any evidence that you can cite support for your "scientific assertion."

If you can't support your own statement, you need to shut up.

I have shown exactly how the claim is testable using the scientific method.

Your attempts to cast doubt on my credibility based on your perceived opinion about my scientific understanding are very revealing of what kind of person you are.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I have shown exactly how the claim is testable using the scientific method.

Your attempts to cast doubt on my credibility based on your perceived opinion about my scientific understanding are very revealing of what kind of person you are.

I don't accept the inadequacy of your presentation of your test proposal, and I reject it for more than one reason. In fact, no one educated here has to accept it.

Maybe stick to your piano playing, Kylie? If you think you can take me on in debate, you BETTER have your sources lined up and in good order.

So far, all you have to offer are your own loose predilections (and grievances) by which to assert your supposed application of science. I'm not impressed. Do better.