juvenissun
... and God saw that it was good.
- Apr 5, 2007
- 25,452
- 805
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Plus it also says "Do not put the Lord your God to the test..."
More like a revelation. But anyways, you didn't provide any way to test the Unicorn existance. So again, how would you test it?
You have not described any test, you merely suggested background reading! Where is your test? How will your test be carried out? What phenomena are you looking for? How will you record your data?So, it is not an invisible pink one. Let's say it is an invisible one.
I would try to study rhino first. And I want to know whether is there any other creature known to have a central horn on the head. What is the biology to have a single horn instead of two horns.
Then I will read historical literatures about unicorn.
How long would it take one to do the above? Once it is done, then I would say the person would either abandon the idea (falsified), or develop the next strategy to test the possibility. If you do not know anything about a unicorn, how could you do any significant test?
Don't be daft. You've describe Greek philosophy, not modern science.This is only an example. The point is that anything could be tested as long as one knows enough about it. This is true in science.
Unless, of course, the Bible is a mere piece of fiction, and the Christians are deluded, but well-meaning, individuals.It is also true in any other knowledge/idea. So, in order to test the existence of Christian God, one need to know the Bible well and to be acquainted with a few good Christians (as samples).
You have not described any test, you merely suggested background reading! Where is your test? How will your test be carried out? What phenomena are you looking for? How will you record your data?
gluadys said:This is only an example. The point is that anything could be tested as long as one knows enough about it. This is true in science.
Don't be daft. You've describe Greek philosophy, not modern science.
gluadys said:It is also true in any other knowledge/idea. So, in order to test the existence of Christian God, one need to know the Bible well and to be acquainted with a few good Christians (as samples).
Unless, of course, the Bible is a mere piece of fiction, and the Christians are deluded, but well-meaning, individuals.
Because I am a dumb. Edited, with apologiesHow come my name is appearing above quotes from juvenissun's post?
You have not described any test, you merely suggested background reading! Where is your test? How will your test be carried out? What phenomena are you looking for? How will you record your data?
I think 'dumb' is an understatement, but I see your point.To do a test is very very easy. The question is the quality of the test. You do not understand what I have said.
I knows nothing about unicorn. But I can test it. For example, I will read info about unicorn all day and see if I would dream about an unicorn in sleep. If I don't, then unicorn does not exist.
It is a dumb test, but it is a test.
I think 'dumb' is an understatement, but I see your point.
Nope, I'm fairly sure he means "understatement."Thanks. But I think you meant "overstatement".
If you do not know anything about a unicorn, how could you do any significant test?
So, in order to test the existence of Christian God, one need to know the Bible well and to be acquainted with a few good Christians (as samples).
You cant, thats the point. And it is true of concepts like an omnipotent being (how can you test if a being is really omnipotent?) or Lastthursdayism (which claims that the world was created last Thursday, but with the appearance (including history, memories, ) of an older world).
Likewise, if you claim the existence of a being which cannot be seen, heard, smelt, and cannot be detected by any (reliable) means, then the existence of such a being, as well as its properties (its shape, gender, color, ) cannot be tested, and your claim is unfalsifiable.
But this is not enough: if I'm not mistaken, the Bible claims that God is omniscient. how would you test it?
So what? The faith of those Christians or the Bible do not qualify as a tests. Remember that we’re talking about being “falsifiable” (does falsifiability exist in English?) in the context of Science. You cannot consider the Bible as a sufficient test of the existence of the Christian God anymore than you can consider ancient Greek writings as valid tests for the existence of Zeus or any other god of the Greek mythology.How do you know it is not enough? Ask a few good Christians, they WILL tell you it is more than enough.
Here I disagree: if by definition God (or at least some of His characteristics) is out of reach of any test we could imagine, then even before reading the Bible you can know that the claim is not falsifiable.So, the only way to know if it is enough is to study the Bible well enough on yourself.
[FONT="][FONT="]It is NOT asking too much to do that IF one REALLY wanted to test it. if a scientist wanted to test a new theory, they will devote a significant part of their life to become familiar with the current understanding FIRST. The way they test the scientific theory is NOT FOR EVERYONE TO IMITATE. For example, you may think the speed of light is falsifiable or not falsifiable. Either way, it would take more than a Ph.D. for one to develop any test on that. The existence of God is more profound than the speed of light. Then how much should one prepare in order to test His existence?
[/FONT]
So what? The faith of those Christians or the Bible do not qualify as a tests. Remember that were talking about being falsifiable (does falsifiability exist in English?) in the context of Science. You cannot consider the Bible as a sufficient test of the existence of the Christian God anymore than you can consider ancient Greek writings as valid tests for the existence of Zeus or any other god of the Greek mythology.
Here I disagree: if by definition God (or at least some of His characteristics) is out of reach of any test we could imagine, then even before reading the Bible you can know that the claim is not falsifiable.
[FONT="]
I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
No matter how much knowledge you think is required to fully describe God (and if I understand Christians correctly, we humans cannot fully know Him, which in itself is an unfalsifiable claim), my claim is that some of the properties attributed to God (or any other concept for that matter) are by definition untestable. For example, the claim that He is omnipotent and omniscient.
[/FONT]
Here I disagree: if by definition God (or at least some of His characteristics) is out of reach of any test we could imagine, then even before reading the Bible you can know that the claim is not falsifiable.
You negated the result of any test before you even test it.
The bottom line is that those who said that God is not testable is, in fact, not willing to make the test at all.
No, I did not do this: I said however that some properties of God were not testable, and I asked for example how you would test God's omnipotence or omniscience. You didn't provide any mean of doing this so far.
There is a type of proof in science (math too?). If you could not prove something is wrong, then that thing is right.
In a positive way, if we see something happened beyond our comprehension (we called it miracle, a lot of them described in the Bible), that also provides ONE or a few positive tests to the omnipotence of God. Even one test could not justify a generalization, but it is a test, and the omnipotence of God can be tested.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?