Challenge: I'm willing to convert if.......

[stvdv]

Sorry I don't understand?

Have you witnessed and miracles and can prove they actually happened?

Living in the present moment can grant you your spiritual proofs

Gathering proofs from events in the past, and using them to prove things about Spirituality won't work

I have searched, witnessed and experienced miracles, so I have plenty of proof

If you want proof, you need to search for it yourself, that's the only way it works in this world (university degrees, as well as Spirituality).

Professors can point you in the right direction, but you need to search and find yourself, the professor won't do your exam for you; the same is true, even more so, in Spirituality.

 

[Ignatius A]

Jesus taught his disciples to pray to their Father in heaven.

 

[Ignatius A]

Jesus taught his disciples to pray to their Father in heaven.

Citation

 

[Ignatius A]

you're funny.

So now up the challenge. That's one down

 

[Ignatius A]

I struggle to see how me creating a material not presently in existence, has to do with you becoming an atheist? Can you clarify, please?

What point are you trying to make?

Why do you struggle? It's rather simple. Scripture reads "God saidet there be light. And there was light." If I believe that God brought light and everything else into existence from material not presently in existence, which his what the Bible tells us, then if you could create something from material not presently in existence then I would have to say that creating something from material not presently in existence doesn't require God. See? Simple.

 

[leroy]

Yeah your definition forgot to include 'scientific laws'

Miracle definition - an extraordinary and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore attributed to a divine agency.

Well the big bang was an extraordinary event (it only happened once in the last 14B years) and cant be explained by the laws of nature…………………..

So the big bang fits pretty good in to your definition of “miracle”…………… and I am pretty sure you would grant that we are more than 51%+ certain the event known as the big bang took place.

Disagree, 1

Really, do you reject the first law of thermodynamics?.......... well good for you, but you definition of miracle is about “events that cant be explicable by the laws of nature”………. Wether if you personally agree with these laws or not is irrelevant.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

In my experience interacting with skeptics over the years, they typically don't begin to believe in anything supernatural until they've had an up-close and personal encounter with something that completely baffles their mind, and they are unable to explain or rationally debunk the experience, no matter how hard they try. On the other hand, skeptics who are firmly opposed to believing won't be persuaded by even the most compelling evidence of supernatural phenomena. Even if they experienced something supernatural, such as what others would call a miracle, they'd still refuse to believe. This is why I won't argue or debate with them over anything I consider to be supernatural. And while I don't know the OP, I doubt that any kind of compelling evidence that he has requested can persuade him to become a Christian or Muslim. Of course, I could be mistaken about him, but I think his conversion is improbable.

 

[Ignatius A]

In my experience interacting with skeptics over the years, they typically don't begin to believe in anything supernatural until they've had an up-close and personal encounter with something that completely baffles their mind, and they are unable to explain or rationally debunk the experience, no matter how hard they try. On the other hand, skeptics who are firmly opposed to believing won't be persuaded by even the most compelling evidence of supernatural phenomena. Even if they experienced something supernatural, such as what others would call a miracle, they'd still refuse to believe. This is why I won't argue or debate with them over anything I consider to be supernatural. And while I don't know the OP, I doubt that any type of compelling evidence that he has requested can persuade him to become a Christian or Muslim. Of course, I could be mistaken about him, but I think it is unlikely to happen.

This is spot on. I laugh when an atheist says, "God knows what it would take to make me believe", because everyone including the atheist knows they would explain away any evidence. They talk a good game but not much else.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

In my experience interacting with skeptics over the years, they typically don't begin to believe in anything supernatural until they've had an up-close and personal encounter with something that completely baffles their mind, and they are unable to explain or rationally debunk the experience, no matter how hard they try. On the other hand, skeptics who are firmly opposed to believing won't be persuaded by even the most compelling evidence of supernatural phenomena.

It would be great if you actually had some of this "most compelling evidence."

The one time I saw you go into some detail about your evidence-gathering approach, all sorts of red flags went up. All of it was questionable and aspects of it seemed like deliberate anomaly generation.

Even if they experienced something supernatural, such as what others would call a miracle, they'd still refuse to believe. This is why I won't argue or debate with them over anything I consider to be supernatural.

That's why you won't debate?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

This is spot on. I laugh when an atheist says, "God knows what it would take to make me believe", because everyone including the atheist knows they would explain away any evidence. They talk a good game but not much else.

I think you just suggested that atheists can thwart the will of God.

I guess I should take this as a compliment.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

This is spot on. I laugh when an atheist says, "God knows what it would take to make me believe", because everyone including the atheist knows they would explain away any evidence. They talk a good game but not much else.

Yes, I remember hearing similar statements when I was still a Christian.

I've always told skeptics that they can decide for themselves whether to believe me or not. If there are skeptics investigating a haunted location with me and they try to argue with me about any potential evidence, then I simply inform them that they witnessed the same evidence as everyone else who is participating in the investigation, and they can decide for themselves whether to accept the evidence and believe it is real or not. I let the chips fall where they may. I don't give them the chance to start arguing with me or draw me into a heated debate about whether the paranormal is real or not. I let them use my equipment and analyze the data for themselves. I invite them to analyze any documented data they want to scrutinize to their heart's content. If they ask me, "What is this?" such as in a digital picture or in an SLS or thermal image, then I'll say, "You tell me what you think it is." If they ask what I heard on an EVP, I'll say to them, "Tell me what you heard first, and then I'll tell you what I heard." It is important to me that I don't influence skeptics in any way. I make it a point not to influence them into believing in the paranormal. If they're going to believe, then I want their belief to be genuine and based on a conclusion that they came to on their own without any interference from me. In all of my years of experience investigating the paranormal, I've come to strongly believe that seeing is believing. I've seen it happen time and time again with skeptics who were once adamant that the paranormal wasn't real.

 

[Ignatius A]

I think you just suggested that atheists can thwart the will of God.

I guess I should take this as a compliment.

Sadly you think poorly. You are free to choose. He knows what you'll choose he doesn't choose for you.

You can take it as you like.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yes, I remember hearing similar statements when I was still a Christian.

I've always told skeptics that they can decide for themselves whether to believe me or not. If there are skeptics investigating a haunted location with me and they try to argue with me about any potential evidence, then I simply inform them that they witnessed the same evidence as everyone else who is participating in the investigation, and they can decide for themselves whether to accept the evidence and believe it is real or not. I let the chips fall where they may. I don't give them the chance to start arguing with me or draw me into a heated debate about whether the paranormal is real or not. I let them use my equipment and analyze the data for themselves. I invite them to analyze any documented data they want to scrutinize to their heart's content. If they ask me, "What is this?" such as in a digital picture or in an SLS or thermal image, then I'll say, "You tell me what you think it is." If they ask what I heard on an EVP, I'll say to them, "Tell me what you heard first, and then I'll tell you what I heard." It is important to me that I don't influence skeptics in any way. I make it a point not to influence them into believing in the paranormal. If they're going to believe, then I want their belief to be genuine and based on a conclusion that they came to on their own without any interference from me. In all of my years of experience investigating the paranormal, I've come to strongly believe that seeing is believing. I've seen it happen time and time again with skeptics who were once adamant that the paranormal wasn't real.

@Sgt. Pepper isn't talking to me, but for everyone else's benefit: please note that when she says "SLS camera," she's talking about a video device that was designed to interpret a player's moves for a gaming system. It isn't designed to detect whether a human-shaped figure is present; it's designed to draw a human-shaped figure on whatever in its view looks closest to human-shaped.

IOW, it's a device to create false positives.

Anyone who uses such a device is either not interested in the truth or doesn't understand the tools they're using.

The fact that I raised this point years ago (IIRC) but Sgt. Pepper still talks about using this device has led me to the conclusion that even if she was ignorant of how the device works then, that ignorance is now wilful.

The Xbox Kinect and Paranormal Investigation | Skeptical Inquirer

Sadly, the majority of gadgets that are being used by ghost hunting teams are about as useful as a car muffler in the shower. In other words, they are compl ...

skepticalinquirer.org

 

[sayak83]

Yes it is, the psychologist speaks of his hope that we have a larger self without providing any evidence for it and the other guy speaks of his own alleged past life experience demonstrating the two are not sceptical of the conclusions drawn in my view.

Correct, but for the conclusion to be true (ie reincarnation) the mechanism has to be true.

"a lot"? What percentage of these children as a fraction of all children that come from societies without a pre-existing belief in reincarnation are we discussing here.

I don't see how we can know that the information transfer source wasn't simply forgotten by the child which would also predict what we see.

Then there are the various non materialistic paradigms you are hand waving away such as ESP, demon projection etc which are just as accurate a fit for the evidence as reincarnation in my view.

Apparently, to you, merely talking about a childhood anomalous experience (little to do with any past life memory by the way) makes one a believer to your eyes.
The conclusion is that children report verifiable memories from dead peoples' lives without knowing about them from any other source. That conclusion is true (if the work is rigorous which I believe it is) regardless of the mechanism.

As per current surveys 6-10% of children worldwide report past life memories during this period of their lives. Cases have been collected from every continent, though initial research by Doctor Stevenson focused on Asia. Now a lot of work is devoted to places like USA, Nordic countries, Brazil, Israel etc. Results are similar and robust.
Stevenson created an exhaustive method to rule out such false positives
1) All cases where the life recalled was of relatives neighbours or within the circles of the family member were immediately ruled out.
2) All cases where the family have already identified a past life person through some way were ruled out.
3) Only cases were considered a "positive" where the identified past life person was identified by the researchers himself/herself through research of the reports made and when the identified dear person or the associated family of the deceased had any connection with the child's own family
4) Finally all celebrity cases or cases that appeared in the media in some way was ruled out.
There is a reason why, over the last 50 years, the cases collected have not been debunked by any researcher. Because they could not be.
If you do not believe read the case studies in the academic monograms they have written. It's extensive.

I did not know that you thought ESP or demon projection are considered materialistic. But I will make a general comment about PPL who believe that there is some material field behind such anomalous phenomena. We know the physical forces and fields too well for there to be any elbow room inside them to fit such things. I think you know this as well. At our energy scales the 4 fundamental forces account for everything.

Anyways. I am not asking you to believe this on my say so. Read their work, read what others have said about them. Make up your own mind. I am not here to preach reincarnation, the thread OP asked, so I provided something I have found convincing. And I am open to other researchers debunking this work as well.

Cheers

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No, I can't see why. On what rational basis does someone establish doubt of a reported miracle when he lacks first-hand knowledge?

I'm sure you can figure that out by yourself.
Here are two variations of claims.

Example 1
Last night I was watching an episode of Friends. I got a bit hungry so I ordered a pizza. Lo and behold, Jeniffer Aniston delivered the pizza's. She saw I was watching Friends and stayed to watch the rest with me and we shared the pizza.

Do you have a rational basis to doubt this claim? Perhaps something about the very low probability of Aniston working as a pizza delivery girl?


Example 2
Last night I was watching an episode of Friends. I thought to myself "boy that Jeniffer Aniston is hot...". And suddenly the picture froze and miss Aniston crawled out of the TV screen, had sex with me and then crawled back into the TV screen and then the episode simply continued.

Do you have a rational basis to doubt this claim? Perhaps something about TV's not working that way and it being physically impossible (which is to say: physics as we know it does not allow for such a thing to happen; it requires the violation / suspension of natural law for it to occur?)



Now consider that religious claims of "miracles" are more of the nature of example 2 then example 1.

Without first-hand knowledge, it is not equally as rational to establish trust of the reported miracle?

Well, you tell me....
Is the probability of the above examples being truthful 50/50?

Certainly there must be some evidence-based foundation for either doubt or confidence, right? If so, what is it?

How about: knowledge of commonly observable reality and how things work?

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Apparently, to you, merely talking about a childhood anomalous experience (little to do with any past life memory by the way) makes one a believer to your eyes.
The conclusion is that children report verifiable memories from dead peoples' lives without knowing about them from any other source. That conclusion is true (if the work is rigorous which I believe it is) regardless of the mechanism.

As per current surveys 6-10% of children worldwide report past life memories during this period of their lives. Cases have been collected from every continent, though initial research by Doctor Stevenson focused on Asia. Now a lot of work is devoted to places like USA, Nordic countries, Brazil, Israel etc. Results are similar and robust.
Stevenson created an exhaustive method to rule out such false positives
1) All cases where the life recalled was of relatives neighbours or within the circles of the family member were immediately ruled out.
2) All cases where the family have already identified a past life person through some way were ruled out.
3) Only cases were considered a "positive" where the identified past life person was identified by the researchers himself/herself through research of the reports made and when the identified dear person or the associated family of the deceased had any connection with the child's own family
4) Finally all celebrity cases or cases that appeared in the media in some way was ruled out.
There is a reason why, over the last 50 years, the cases collected have not been debunked by any researcher. Because they could not be.
If you do not believe read the case studies in the academic monograms they have written. It's extensive.

I did not know that you thought ESP or demon projection are considered materialistic. But I will make a general comment about PPL who believe that there is some material field behind such anomalous phenomena. We know the physical forces and fields too well for there to be any elbow room inside them to fit such things. I think you know this as well. At our energy scales the 4 fundamental forces account for everything.

Anyways. I am not asking you to believe this on my say so. Read their work, read what others have said about them. Make up your own mind. I am not here to preach reincarnation, the thread OP asked, so I provided something I have found convincing. And I am open to other researchers debunking this work as well.

Cheers

Thank you for sharing this information, sayak83. I appreciate it.

I'm beginning to believe in reincarnation because the stories that I've read about it are very compelling, in my opinion.

 

[Ignatius A]

I'm sure you can figure that out by yourself.
Here are two variations of claims.

Example 1
Last night I was watching an episode of Friends. I got a bit hungry so I ordered a pizza. Lo and behold, Jeniffer Aniston delivered the pizza's. She saw I was watching Friends and stayed to watch the rest with me and we shared the pizza.

Do you have a rational basis to doubt this claim? Perhaps something about the very low probability of Aniston working as a pizza delivery girl?


Example 2
Last night I was watching an episode of Friends. I thought to myself "boy that Jeniffer Aniston is hot...". And suddenly the picture froze and miss Aniston crawled out of the TV screen, had sex with me and then crawled back into the TV screen and then the episode simply continued.

Do you have a rational basis to doubt this claim? Perhaps something about TV's not working that way and it being physically impossible (which is to say: physics as we know it does not allow for such a thing to happen; it requires the violation / suspension of natural law for it to occur?)



Now consider that religious claims of "miracles" are more of the nature of example 2 then example 1.




Well, you tell me....
Is the probability of the above examples being truthful 50/50?




How about: knowledge of commonly observable reality and how things work?

How are miracles more like example 2 than 1?

 

[danieldemol]

Apparently, to you, merely talking about a childhood anomalous experience (little to do with any past life memory by the way) makes one a believer to your eyes.
The conclusion is that children report verifiable memories from dead peoples' lives without knowing about them from any other source. That conclusion is true (if the work is rigorous which I believe it is) regardless of the mechanism.

As per current surveys 6-10% of children worldwide report past life memories during this period of their lives. Cases have been collected from every continent, though initial research by Doctor Stevenson focused on Asia. Now a lot of work is devoted to places like USA, Nordic countries, Brazil, Israel etc. Results are similar and robust.
Stevenson created an exhaustive method to rule out such false positives
1) All cases where the life recalled was of relatives neighbours or within the circles of the family member were immediately ruled out.
2) All cases where the family have already identified a past life person through some way were ruled out.
3) Only cases were considered a "positive" where the identified past life person was identified by the researchers himself/herself through research of the reports made and when the identified dear person or the associated family of the deceased had any connection with the child's own family
4) Finally all celebrity cases or cases that appeared in the media in some way was ruled out.
There is a reason why, over the last 50 years, the cases collected have not been debunked by any researcher. Because they could not be.
If you do not believe read the case studies in the academic monograms they have written. It's extensive.

So how did they rule out for example a playgroup teacher telling the child about someone they met on their world travels and the child forgetting about being told?
These children weren't raised in a vacuum, so I believe we shouldn't rule out contamination of ideas from other sources.

I did not know that you thought ESP or demon projection are considered materialistic.

I dont, and guess what else I dont consider materialistic - reincarnation. But the psychologist claims that there is a connection between conciousness and the material such that it can leave a material impression such as a birthmark. *If* this hypothesis is true then the ESP person or the demon projected person only need have their conciousness affected to have material phenomena such as birthmarks created.

But I will make a general comment about PPL who believe that there is some material field behind such anomalous phenomena. We know the physical forces and fields too well for there to be any elbow room inside them to fit such things. I think you know this as well. At our energy scales the 4 fundamental forces account for everything.

Precisely why they account for birthmarks, because the 4 fundamental forces account for everything at our scales, so there is no need for reincarnation to explain birthmarks.

Anyways. I am not asking you to believe this on my say so. Read their work, read what others have said about them. Make up your own mind. I am not here to preach reincarnation, the thread OP asked, so I provided something I have found convincing. And I am open to other researchers debunking this work as well.

Cheers

I believe it is debunked by these things occurring between the ages of 2-3 unless you believe a person doesn't have a soul till 2 which typically has left the body by 3.

If the soul was there after 3 the link between prior conciousness and this one would remain to correct any errors, particularly if conciousness precedes the physical in my view.

 

[Maninthemiddle]

Buddha said don't believe in anything unless it makes sense to you, even Buddhas words.

 

[sayak83]

So how did they rule out for example a playgroup teacher telling the child about someone they met on their world travels and the child forgetting about being told?
These children weren't raised in a vacuum, so I believe we shouldn't rule out contamination of ideas from other sources.

I dont, and guess what else I dont consider materialistic - reincarnation. But the psychologist claims that there is a connection between conciousness and the material such that it can leave a material impression such as a birthmark. *If* this hypothesis is true then the ESP person or the demon projected person only need have their conciousness affected to have material phenomena such as birthmarks created.

Precisely why they account for birthmarks, because the 4 fundamental forces account for everything at our scales, so there is no need for reincarnation to explain birthmarks.

I believe it is debunked by these things occurring between the ages of 2-3 unless you believe a person doesn't have a soul till 2 which typically has left the body by 3.

If the soul was there after 3 the link between prior conciousness and this one would remain to correct any errors, particularly if conciousness precedes the physical in my view.

When I say they eliminated cases where the child could have got the info from neighbors, I included in the group all PPL he/she could have come in contact with, including teachers.
Look, read the case files of their work and the reviews thereof. I cannot detail here all the precautions taken to remove false positives.
Consciousness does have an impact on the body. Otherwise placebo effect would not have worked, to take just one example. How it works is not known as of now...by anyone. But new physical forces are not needed. For the present purposes, read up on dual aspect theory of mind/body.
No. It was clearly mentioned in the video discussions that 2-3 years is the developmental age when explicit referential "I" memories can start to form in a child. Hence it is natural that it as that time older "I" memories appear in the consciousness of the child. Nothing to do with souls.