That's no fun (re: front-loading claims)

[Astrid]

What I was explaining is that we don't know enough details to be able to predict such evidence.

Let me try again. "The whole world was covered with water."

So is that the whole known world for one person? We don't know.

Only God would know that or how deep the water was.
Info presumably came from that source.
Or is just made up.

But as water does flow, it wont cover the highest
hills unless it finds its level everywhere.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

What I was explaining is that we don't know enough details to be able to predict such evidence.

So you don't have an explanation. IOW, the event is unexplained.

Let me try again. "The whole world was covered with water."

So is that the whole known world for one person? We don't know.

Sure - we don't know exactly what was meant. But we can say that the hypothesis that it literally meant the whole world was incorrect, because that hypothesis is falsified by the evidence.

 

[Astrid]

So you don't have an explanation. IOW, the event is unexplained.


Sure - we don't know exactly what was meant. But we can say that the hypothesis that it literally meant the whole world was incorrect, because that hypothesis is falsified by the evidence.

That isn't evidence of what the author meant.

 

[essentialsaltes]

That isn't evidence of what the author meant.

Regardless, we have used evidence to determine the scope of a (hypothetical) supernatural event. It was not worldwide.

It did not interrupt Egyptian society.
It did not kill the dinosaurs.
and so on

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

That isn't evidence of what the author meant.

I agree.

 

[SkyWriting]

So you don't have an explanation. IOW, the event is unexplained.


Sure - we don't know exactly what was meant. But we can say that the hypothesis that it literally meant the whole world was incorrect, because that hypothesis is falsified by the evidence.

"The whole world" was that of the writer.

 

[SkyWriting]

Only God would know that or how deep the water was.
Info presumably came from that source.
Or is just made up.

But as water does flow, it wont cover the highest
hills unless it finds its level everywhere.

But God did not write one word of the Bible.
It was written by 40 authors.
Each author gives a different perspective inspired by God.

 

[SkyWriting]

Figured Id be no good at it.

So, self-analysis is good.

 

[SkyWriting]

That's a case where the event left no evidence - not what I was talking about.

OK. Lets assume His feet were wet. It adds one data point.

 

[Astrid]

But God did not write one word of the Bible.
It was written by 40 authors.
Each author gives a different perspective inspired by God.

I know the story.
But what kind of inspiration leads one to write things
that are not true, i dont know.
Or why people are satisfied believing things that are not so.
I dont get that.

 

[SkyWriting]

I know the story.
But what kind of inspiration leads one to write things
that are not true, i dont know.
Or why people are satisfied believing things that are not so.
I dont get that.

What makes you think anyone would write what is not true for them?
That's really hard to do. Really hard.

 

[Astrid]

.

 

[Astrid]

What makes you think anyone would write what is not true for them?
That's really hard to do. Really hard.

What makes ya think i thunk?
Anyway thats not it.
Whatever people may think is inspiration
from god(s) has no bearing on truth.
If what someone writes is fiction dressed as fact,
Ive no interest in it.
Joseph Smith ( says he was) inspired.

I totally disagree with what you say is hard,
Its not. Politicians, cult leaders-
And dont overlook the element of self deception.
The easiest person for you to fool is yourself.

 

[Astrid]

So, self-analysis is good.

Theres a lotta tele - psychs on the web. Ya ever notice.

 

[SkyWriting]

Theres a lotta tele - psychs on the web. Ya ever notice.

I never have. Would that number be more than 3000?
Because there were more than 3000 in my high school.

So when you say "a lot" it'll have to be a bigger number than my High School.
If it's under 3000, then it is not very many at all. Cause I have never stumbled across any of my High School mates, randomly.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

"The whole world" was that of the writer.

Possibly - we don't know; it may well have been a story with an oral tradition before being written down.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

OK. Lets assume His feet were wet. It adds one data point.

That's weak evidence for the claim, but also evidence for a number of mundane hypotheses that would have higher prior credibility.

Given the claim that someone had walked on water, consider the likelihood that their feet would be wet if they had walked on water - it's not clear - it could equally be the case that they'd walked on water and returned with dry feet, evidence that they had not been in the water.

Given the same claim and being assured that their feet were wet, consider the likelihood that you'd conclude that therefore they had walked on the water - again, it seems unlikely; their feet could easily be wet from bilge water, paddling, puddles, dangling their feet in the water, etc.

OTOH, there are numerous reasons for wet feet (or dry feet!) that are far more credible.

 

[Astrid]

Possibly - we don't know; it may well have been a story with an oral tradition before being written down.

Examples of why I dont trust / have faith in what the bible says.

 

[SkyWriting]

That's weak evidence for the claim, but also evidence for a number of mundane hypotheses that would have higher prior credibility.

Given the claim that someone had walked on water, consider the likelihood that their feet would be wet if they had walked on water - it's not clear - it could equally be the case that they'd walked on water and returned with dry feet, evidence that they had not been in the water.

Given the same claim and being assured that their feet were wet, consider the likelihood that you'd conclude that therefore they had walked on the water - again, it seems unlikely; their feet could easily be wet from bilge water, paddling, puddles, dangling their feet in the water, etc.

OTOH, there are numerous reasons for wet feet (or dry feet!) that are far more credible.

Thank you. Exactly what I'm saying. Checking to see if His feet are wet or not is hardly relevant since we can't know the conditions that happen during a supernatural event.

So it's impossible to support or deny any supernatural event scientifically.


"Did Jesus turn this jug of water into wine?"
--"Well, is it red now?"
"But are we expecting red or white wine?"
--"I dunno, the story doesn't mention it."

 

[SkyWriting]

Examples of why I dont trust / have faith in what the bible says.

You should go by personal experience.
--Answered Prayer