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.
The problem with the question is two fold.
One, the term 'supernatural phenomenon' is too vague.
Two, the term 'prove' is rather loose as well. What is 'proof' of Juliet's love to Romeo may not convince his parents. What is proof to a conspiracy theorist is not so convincing to a scientist or even a prosecuting attorney.
"Convince" is better.Two, the term 'prove' is rather loose as well. What is 'proof' of Juliet's love to Romeo may not convince his parents. What is proof to a conspiracy theorist is not so convincing to a scientist or even a prosecuting attorney.
"Convince" is better.
"Proof" is for mathematics and whisky.
tacdon: What would be sufficient evidence to prove that the higgs boson exists?
quantona: A proper definition of "the higgs boson" would be a good first step.
tacdon: People have different definitions of what the higgs boson is. Whatever floats their boat let that be their higgs boson definition for this question.
Look at what the title of your thread explicitly asks us.
Now do a substitution on your response
Now, lets do it in reverse put supernatural back there again and see what people say.
It seems like some people can't or won't make a definition for supernatural. I hesitate to make a definition or even copy a definition of supernatural. Even if I did put a definition of supernatural, someone on here would argue that. I was trying to avoid all that, but it looks like no matter what I do it is an issue. Here is a definition of supernatural.
departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature
That definition works for me, short and sweet. Now watch as other people tear it apart.
Now, lets do it in reverse put supernatural back there again and see what people say.
It seems like some people can't or won't make a definition for supernatural. I hesitate to make a definition or even copy a definition of supernatural. Even if I did put a definition of supernatural, someone on here would argue that. I was trying to avoid all that, but it looks like no matter what I do it is an issue. Here is a definition of supernatural.
departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature
The "appear to" in your definition makes it easy for me to say I believe in the "supernatural", as defined by you.Now, lets do it in reverse put supernatural back there again and see what people say.
It seems like some people can't or won't make a definition for supernatural. I hesitate to make a definition or even copy a definition of supernatural. Even if I did put a definition of supernatural, someone on here would argue that. I was trying to avoid all that, but it looks like no matter what I do it is an issue. Here is a definition of supernatural.
departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature
La vérité;65735847 said:Well it comes down to the fact that pretty well no one on this planet wants anything to do with actual proof of there being a higher power out there somewhere. They ask for it, but when proof is presented to them they spit at it, or ignore it in an instant.
If you google "Bible Code Introduction 156 462" without the quotes, you can find the proof of Jesus Christ for instance.
If you find the Bible Code Introduction website, click on the flashing words "Watch / Listen", and let the webpage take you on a webpage tour of such proof. It's about 10 minutes long.
As usual, endless examples of the rejection of truths will appear in posts below AND NO ONE will even bother to take a look at the proof itself, guaranteed 99.9.... percent. Or actual proof of God's existance often is instantly placed under the title of "Spamming". It's a no God win situation. God is banned always unless it is reduced to a mere "BELIEF" in God.
departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature
Number codes? Really?
Keep in mind many of us were Christian. We did look for evidence to justify our beliefs, and we found none. In fact, some of us feel lied to.
OK, so all we have to do to evidence the supernatural is to have evidence that "appears" to tranced natural laws.
So, you've given us a definition that automatically excludes natural things that are simply very unusual if they "appear" to transcend natural laws (and thus are supernatural).
So, with that definition in mind the required evidence is one observed instance.
The problem though is that all unexplained natural phenomena that appear to transcend known laws are now supernatural.
Natural = Supernatural
A = ~A
So, I detect a problem with your definition.
which is more important to you:
1. ordering your life according to the truth
or
2. ordering your life according to your desires
1, because 2 is just lying to myself and would cause more issues in the long run than the brief benefits it would have.
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?