Bridging the gap

truthseekingsoul said:

Double-blind tests?

The bad jokes are on me tonight.

Click to expand...

Oh, Jimmy, that was painful.

And what's wrong with the nature of the subjective evidence for God.

Click to expand...

It fails all the basic tests for reliability. It's not universal, consistant, or testable. It's entirely individual, offers no corroborating evidence or support, and makes no predictions which can be tested for.

John 20:24 Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!"
But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it."

26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 27 Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."

28 Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

29 Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." 30 Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 31 But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. NIV

We have the recordings of eye witness accounts of the miracles of Jesus. But really, most who actually SAW them did not believe. It's not a issue of the mind, but of the heart. If you seek God with all your heart you will find him. If he is of little consequence to you, then you probably never will.

We have the recordings of eye witness accounts of the miracles of Jesus. But really, most who actually SAW them did not believe. It's not a issue of the mind, but of the heart. If you seek God with all your heart you will find him. If he is of little consequence to you, then you probably never will.

Click to expand...

No, you have a Biblical claim of eye-witnesses. Can you find a prophecy which is independantly verifiable?

NetDoc said:

We have the recordings of eye witness accounts of the miracles of Jesus.

Click to expand...

No. We have translations of copies of second hand stories, authored by anonymous apologists, of activities purported to have occurred decades earlier. We also have strong circumstantial evidence that stories have been added to earlier manuscripts. The chain of evidence is so thoroughly corrupt that only the faithful would label it evidence.

Amhadi said:

yes.. I don't disagree with the fact that other animals can see what humans can't. But I am still interested in the original question: How can you provide objective evidence to a blind man that colour exists?

Click to expand...

*sigh* Okay, I'll explain in detail how a sighted person could provide objective evidence to a blind person that color exists:

1) The sighted person provides several pieces of colored paper which the blind person comfirms are identical in size, shape, texture, and smell. The sighted person's claim is that she can distinguish between these pieces of paper based on her ability to see with her eyes their different colors.

2) The blind person stands at a distance and asks the sighted person to identify the color of the piece of paper he is holding. The blind person then labels each piece of paper "red", "yellow", etc., accordingly in brail.

3) After all the pieces of paper have been labeled in brail by the blind person, he holds up pieces of paper at random.

4) If the sighted person can consistently identify the "red" paper as "red", the "yellow" paper as "yellow", etc., the blind person must conclude that the sighted person has a sense besides touch, taste, sound, and smell which she uses to identify the different pieces of paper at a distance (pieces of paper which, to the blind person, are indistinguishable). The pieces of paper must have certain qualities to them--analogous to the different smells or sounds that one experiences with other senses--which correspond to the sighted person's special sense. The sighted person would identify these different qualities as "colors" and the blind person has objective evidence of their existence.

JerryL said:

It fails all the basic tests for reliability. It's not universal, consistant, or testable. It's entirely individual, offers no corroborating evidence or support, and makes no predictions which can be tested for.

Click to expand...

Well, wrong, wrong, wrong. It is universal, consistent, and testable. It's not entirely individual, offers evidence, and makes many predictions.

Spinks:

So Deut,

you have evidence it DIDN'T happen? One document that is concurrent with the the others that suggests that the scriptures are a fraud? Half a document? As hated as the Christians were at the time, I find it amazing that there were no 1st Century Deuts to chronicle the "lies and deceptions".

I suggest that I have more evidence that it DID happen then you have that it didn't.

NetDoc said:

Spinks:

:biglaugh: You should try a "double blind" test... Bwahahaha!:biglaugh:​

Click to expand...

I applaud you! Great minds thinking alike and all that jazz.

Mr_Spinkles said:

*sigh* Okay, I'll explain in detail how a sighted person could provide objective evidence to a blind person that color exists:

1) The sighted person provides several pieces of colored paper which the blind person comfirms are identical in size, shape, texture, and smell. The sighted person's claim is that she can distinguish between these pieces of paper based on her ability to see with her eyes their different colors.

2) The blind person stands at a distance and asks the sighted person to identify the color of the piece of paper he is holding. The blind person then labels each piece of paper "red", "yellow", etc., accordingly in brail.

3) After all the pieces of paper have been labeled in brail by the blind person, he holds up pieces of paper at random.

4) If the sighted person can consistently identify the "red" paper as "red", the "yellow" paper as "yellow", etc., the blind person must conclude that the sighted person has a sense besides touch, taste, sound, and smell which she uses to identify the different pieces of paper at a distance (pieces of paper which, to the blind person, are indistinguishable). The pieces of paper must have certain qualities to them--analogous to the different smells or sounds that one experiences with other senses--which correspond to the sighted person's special sense. The sighted person would identify these different qualities as "colors" and the blind person has objective evidence of their existence.

Click to expand...

Hmmm... Interesting.... How about someone who is deaf, dumb, and blind?

Now, a prophet of God tells us that here is a book of God (The Holy Quran). In it are revelations from God Almighty. Prophecies, stories of past, knowledge of the unseen, knowledge of the Physical world, commandments, etc.

Try to discover a flaw in it. If you find a flaw in it, then leave it. If you don't, then it is for your own good that you accept it.

Your anwer to my question was very rational. In fact, it would be very rational for the blind man to accept that colour exists. Is there any irrationality in knowing that a human being cannot compile a book without inconsistency and error? Is there any irrationality in believing in a flawless book from God? Is there any irrationality in believing that it is a book of God because Muhammad (pbuh) did not have any ulterior motives in presenting it?

The blind man believed because there was no reason for him to doubt himslef. After all, the sighted person would give him the correct answers every time. I believe in the book of God because I don't have any reason to doubt myself. I don't have any reason to belive that Muhammad (pbuh) wrote it for any personal motives. It is from God because of its magnificience, and greatness, and accuracy, and.... *sigh* .. so many other things.

NetDoc said:

So Deut,

you have evidence it DIDN'T happen? One document that is concurrent with the the others that suggests that the scriptures are a fraud? Half a document? As hated as the Christians were at the time, I find it amazing that there were no 1st Century Deuts to chronicle the "lies and deceptions".

I suggest that I have more evidence that it DID happen then you have that it didn't.

Click to expand...

Hey! The burden of proof is on you my man.

Ahmadi said:

Hmmm... Interesting.... How about someone who is deaf, dumb, and blind?

Click to expand...

Well Hellen Keller was able to write inspiring works...I don't doubt that a race of deaf, blind people could discover the existence of different wavelengths in electromagnetic waves which many animals percieve as "colors". However, I could not demonstrate the existence of color to a sufficiently dumb person any more than I could demonstrate it to bacteria.

Ahmadi said:

Now, a prophet of God tells us that here is a book of God (The Holy Quran). In it are revelations from God Almighty. Prophecies, stories of past, knowledge of the unseen, knowledge of the Physical world, commandments, etc.

Click to expand...

You have stated your conclusion as your premise: you should have said that someone who claims to be a prophet of God presents a book which he claims is from God. The book claims to consist of revelations from God Almighty. Prophesies, stories of the past, .....etc.

Ahmadi said:

Try to discover a flaw in it. If you find a flaw in it, then leave it. If you don't, then it is for your own good that you accept it.

Click to expand...

Although I'm rather confident that, barring a very loose (and inaccurate, i.m.o.) interpretation I could indeed find "flaws" in the Koran, your method is still flawed: since when must all works of folklore contain "flaws"? What kind of "flaw" would I expect to find in folklore/legend that I CANNOT find in a work of nonfiction?

To be more specific, what sort of flaws should I find in, say, the Iliad or in the Book of Mormon that I should not find in the Koran?

Ahmadi said:

Your anwer to my question was very rational. In fact, it would be very rational for the blind man to accept that colour exists. Is there any irrationality in knowing that a human being cannot compile a book without inconsistency and error? Is there any irrationality in believing in a flawless book from God? Is there any irrationality in believing that it is a book of God because Muhammad (pbuh) did not have any ulterior motives in presenting it?

Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that the authors of every mythological story ever written had "ulterior motives" when writing them? What were the "ulterior motives" of the authors of the Gilgamesh legends which came out of ancient Mesopotamia?

Well, wrong, wrong, wrong. It is universal, consistent, and testable. It's not entirely individual, offers evidence, and makes many predictions.

Click to expand...

Name a piece of subjective evidence which is universally experienced. Describe a test for it. Point to evidence of it's occurance. Tell me a prediction made by it.

TSS said:

Hey! The burden of proof is on you my man.

Click to expand...

Sounds like someone that is bereft of evidence. I have already produced ENOUGH evidence.

NetDoc said:

Sounds like someone that is bereft of evidence.

Click to expand...

I have absolutely no evidence to contradict Jesus' miracles. That is true. It is also true that the burden of proof rests on you and that shifting it is not acceptable.

NetDoc said:

I have already produced ENOUGH evidence.

Click to expand...

Can you point me to it?

NetDoc said:

Deut has only produced malicious conjecture that is based on his hatred for all things Christian.

Click to expand...

I've been posting here for over a year and never noticed this alleged bigotry. Hardly the point however.

truthseekingsoul said:

I have absolutely no evidence to contradict Jesus' miracles.

Click to expand...

I do. It is a well-known fact that people cannot walk on water. It is a well-known fact that bread and fish cannot suddenly, spontaneously become many loaves of bread and many fish. The evidence for these two facts is overwhelming. As David Hume would argue, it is reasonable for us to assume that these things are impossible until there is compelling evidence otherwise.

...or would you pet the vicious dog?

NetDoc--

Do you have any "evidence" that the miraculous events in the Odyssey are false?

In my opinion, it is reasonable to assume that miraculous events--like those in the Odyssey--are false. It would take evidence to convince me that many of the things in the Odyssey actually happened. Without that evidence I assume, by default, that those miracle stories (which defy common experience) are mythical.

I'd like to add that there are numerous examples of claims that defy common experience which do have evidence to support them. Einstein's special relativity, for example, totally defies our common experience, but I accept it because there is good evidence for it.

Mr_Spinkles said:

I don't doubt that a race of deaf, blind people could discover the existence of different wavelengths in electromagnetic waves which many animals percieve as "colors".

Click to expand...

We can only speculate...

Mr_Spinkles said:

However, I could not demonstrate the existence of color to a sufficiently dumb person any more than I could demonstrate it to bacteria.

Click to expand...

You cannot demonstrate it to a dumb person but it exists! His inability to see it or his doubt of the existence of colour doesn't make the existence of colour any less real. It's there no matter how much he denies it. Similarly, God exists no matter how much you doubt it. If you don't have a physical sense to perceive Him, it simply doesn't matter. It's an entirely spiritual matter.

Mr_Spinkles said:

You have stated your conclusion as your premise: you should have said that someone who claims to be a prophet of God presents a book which he claims is from God. The book claims to consist of revelations from God Almighty. Prophesies, stories of the past, .....etc.

Click to expand...

Well, describe for me a scenario in which subjective evidence can actually be accepted as true/ or a scenario where a claim can be considered true.

Mr_Spinkles said:

Although I'm rather confident that, barring a very loose (and inaccurate, i.m.o.) interpretation I could indeed find "flaws" in the Koran, your method is still flawed: since when must all works of folklore contain "flaws"? What kind of "flaw" would I expect to find in folklore/legend that I CANNOT find in a work of nonfiction?

Click to expand...

Anything against wisdom... anything against nature... anything against historical evidence... anything against rationality... any flaw that makes the book human and not from the Perfect God, Who has perfect knowledge and perfect wisdom....

Mr_Spinkles said:

To be more specific, what sort of flaws should I find in, say, the Iliad or in the Book of Mormon that I should not find in the Koran?

Click to expand...

I haven't studied these two books but I have given some examples above...

Mr_Spinkles said:

Are you suggesting that the authors of every mythological story ever written had "ulterior motives" when writing them? What were the "ulterior motives" of the authors of the Gilgamesh legends which came out of ancient Mesopotamia?

Click to expand...

I haven't read these but why does a writer write a work of nonfiction? Passion? Artistic talent? Money? Power? or manipulation of power over the people as a priest? Control of large masses?....etc.

JerryL said:

Name a piece of subjective evidence which is universally experienced. Describe a test for it. Point to evidence of it's occurance. Tell me a prediction made by it.

Click to expand...

Universal Experience (apart from a few) = Acceptance of Prayer

Test = faith, devotion, absolute submission to God and He will reveal Himself to you

Occurance = do you want a list? Prophets

prediction = do you want another list... click here