I Need To Ask An Atheist A Question

[xSilverPhinx]

On 1/1/2016, 8:06:19, Josh said:

I've have more than one experience but the particular one I want to present first is dealing with a ouija board. This was over 12 years ago and I would never touch one now because I believe it to be demonic. At the time I didn't view it that way although I was skeptical. I got talked into participating. Anyway I think my experience (and countless others) leads to the conclusion spirts/souls exist and therefore an atheist purely materialistic view on reality is wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideomotor_phenomenon

This is the phenomenon that explains how the Ouija board works. You subconsciously move the pieces yourself. It would be impressive if they moved on their own, though, and probably be a stronger reason to believe in the paranormal/supernatural, provided no natural force is acting upon them.  

[Spinozist]

3 hours ago, xSilverPhinx said:

I think that if the supernatural exists, it is beyond the reach of humans. 

Why do you think that the supernatural exists? What does it mean for it to be beyond the reach of humans?

[Not A Real Name]

11 minutes ago, Spinozist said:

Why do you think that the supernatural exists? What does it mean for it to be beyond the reach of humans?

He's an athiest so he doesnt believe the supernatual exists.  He said "if", and he is right the supernatural would be beyond humans, however, this does conclude that the supernatural could not be revealed to human beings by God.   

[Spinozist]

1 minute ago, Not A Real Name said:

He's an athiest so he doesnt believe the supernatual exists.  He said "if", and he is right the supernatural would be beyond humans, however, this does conclude that the supernatural could not be revealed to human beings by God.   

Thanks for pointing that out. I missed the key 'if'. I'm still curious, how would we know whether they were beyond us vs didn't exist?

And to you, how would revelation solve the problem? God reveals through some naturalistic means, presumably (a book, the sound of a voice, a dream, etc.), how could those naturalistic means by themselves provide sufficient reason to believe that the supernatural exists? Or do you think some sort of interior revelation, a motion within the individual spirit by God, is also necessary?

[Not A Real Name]

3 minutes ago, Spinozist said:

Thanks for pointing that out. I missed the key 'if'. I'm still curious, how would we know whether they were beyond us vs didn't exist?

And to you, how would revelation solve the problem? God reveals through some naturalistic means, presumably (a book, the sound of a voice, a dream, etc.), how could those naturalistic means by themselves provide sufficient reason to believe that the supernatural exists? Or do you think some sort of interior revelation, a motion within the individual spirit by God, is also necessary?

I believe both means would be necessary, but I will comment on the necessity of naturalistic means.  For example we will take books/scriptures.  If a scripture(s), as well as other writtings throughout the world,  preannounced the coming of God, how he would be born, where he would be born, how he would live, the works he would do, and etc, then we could test the truth of these revelations and the claimants themselves once they arrived. In fact preannouncment is so necessary that without it there could be no proper way we could ever test an individuals claim to either be God or a messenger from God.  

[Spinozist]

27 minutes ago, Not A Real Name said:

For example we will take books/scriptures.  If a scripture(s), as well as other writtings throughout the world,  preannounced the coming of God, how he would be born, where he would be born, how he would live, the works he would do, and etc, then we could test the truth of these revelations and the claimants themselves once they arrived. In fact preannouncment is so necessary that without it there could be no proper way we could ever test an individuals claim to either be God or a messenger from God.  

I think that is a great point. Prediction would be a good way to indicate the truth of supernatural claims, although it would be open to alternative interpretations, these interpretations would be similarly outlandish (time-travel, advanced alien interference to complete predictions, etc.). So predictions is a good way to go.

My struggle is that the predictions, as far as I've seen them, are fairly vague. For the example of Jesus, comparing the prophesies to the life of Jesus didn't convince most of the Jews at the time (and don't convince very many of them today), but they did convince some of them, and those Jews have gone into quite a bit of analysis about how Jesus completed the prophesies. There have been other great Rabbis, more recently Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, who some Lubavitch Hasids believe was the Messiah, and they have written quite a bit arguing how his life fits the prophesies.

What would be nice is if the prophesies were very specific, such as, "The Messiah would be born during a time a people called the Romans ruled, when the ruler's names was Augustus, 25 years into his rule. His parents will be named Mary and Joseph, and he will have a birthmark the shape of Greece on his right forearm." Or something like this. It would also be helpful if the verification could somehow perpetuate to today, without having to rely on one set of fairly well established (but I believe embellished, at least as far as the miracles) historical documents, comparing to not as well established and somewhat vague prophesies.

Reality is somewhere in between. The prophesies are not maximally vague, and Jesus is a compelling candidate, more compelling probably than Rabbi Menachem. But it would have been nice, and certainly more convincing to me personally, if the prophesies had been more specific, and had some sort of direct verifiability to this day.

All this to say that it's a good reason, convincing for some people, but not as good as it could have been (and I wonder why this would be the case). And even if the predictions were very specific and very accurate, it might not be compelling evidence for the supernatural, since there are still other explanations. For example, some writers who were nominally affiliated with the Russian Orthodox Church in the 1800's thought that Jesus might have been a time-travelling Russian.

Edited January 3, 2016 by Spinozist

[Not A Real Name]

30 minutes ago, Spinozist said:

I think that is a great point. Prediction would be a good way to indicate the truth of supernatural claims, although it would be open to alternative interpretations, these interpretations would be similarly outlandish (time-travel, advanced alien interference to complete predictions, etc.). So predictions is a good way to go.

My struggle is that the predictions, as far as I've seen them, are fairly vague. For the example of Jesus, comparing the prophesies to the life of Jesus didn't convince most of the Jews at the time (and don't convince very many of them today), but they did convince some of them, and those Jews have gone into quite a bit of analysis about how Jesus completed the prophesies. There have been other great Rabbis, more recently Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, who some Lubavitch Hasids believe was the Messiah, and they have written quite a bit arguing how his life fits the prophesies.

What would be nice is if the prophesies were very specific, such as, "The Messiah would be born during a time a people called the Romans ruled, when the ruler's names was Augustus, 25 years into his rule. His parents will be named Mary and Joseph, and he will have a birthmark the shape of Greece on his right forearm." Or something like this. It would also be helpful if the verification could somehow perpetuate to today, without having to rely on one set of fairly well established (but I believe embellished, at least as far as the miracles) historical documents, comparing to not as well established and somewhat vague prophesies.

Reality is somewhere in between. The prophesies are not maximally vague, and Jesus is a compelling candidate, more compelling probably than Rabbi Menachem. But it would have been nice, and certainly more convincing to me personally, if the prophesies had been more specific, and had some sort of direct verifiability to this day.

All this to say that it's a good reason, convincing for some people, but not as good as it could have been (and I wonder why this would be the case). And even if the predictions were very specific and very accurate, it might not be compelling evidence for the supernatural, since there are still other explanations. For example, some writers who were nominally affiliated with the Russian Orthodox Church in the 1800's thought that Jesus might have been a time-travelling Russian.

You make great points, however, there are things other than the scriptures which point to Christ as the fullfilment of the OT prophecies.  As Arch Bishop Fulton J Sheen mentions in his book "Life of Christ", other factors to be considered are: the ceasing of all prophieses as well as sacrifices in Judaism after Christ, and that Christ's very life has split time in two. Our history as human beings revolve around His life.

[xSilverPhinx]

3 hours ago, Not A Real Name said:

He's an athiest so he doesnt believe the supernatual exists.  He said "if", and he is right the supernatural would be beyond humans, however, this does conclude that the supernatural could not be revealed to human beings by God.   

Actually I'm a "she"  

[Not A Real Name]

7 minutes ago, xSilverPhinx said:

Actually I'm a "she"  

My apologies.

[xSilverPhinx]

2 minutes ago, Not A Real Name said:

My apologies.

No worries.  

[Nihil Obstat]

25 minutes ago, xSilverPhinx said:

Actually I'm a "she"  

I did not realize either. Your writing style had struck me as male.

[xSilverPhinx]

8 hours ago, Nihil Obstat said:

I did not realize either. Your writing style had struck me as male.

I don't mean to derail this thread, but now I'm curious. What is it about my writing that struck you as male? 

[Guest]

17 hours ago, xSilverPhinx said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideomotor_phenomenon

This is the phenomenon that explains how the Ouija board works. You subconsciously move the pieces yourself. It would be impressive if they moved on their own, though, and probably be a stronger reason to believe in the paranormal/supernatural, provided no natural force is acting upon them.  

Interesting. When my experience happened there was 4 of us. My best friends older sister recruited myself and my best friend. His sisters friend also participated. I went into the experience making sure my hands barely touched the thing that points at the letters. I was 50/50 on whether I believed spirits were involved going into the session. Although I was 100 percent committed to making sure my hands didn't help point to the letters in anyway. I made as little contact as possible. I concentrated on making minimal finger contact throughout the whole session. 

Edited January 4, 2016 by Guest

[Nihil Obstat]

7 hours ago, xSilverPhinx said:

I don't mean to derail this thread, but now I'm curious. What is it about my writing that struck you as male? 

Not sure I could articulate any reasons for that. I just tend to read some people as more masculine and some as more feminine. I'm guessing the avatar is a big influence on that as well.

[veritasluxmea]

Yeah, I thought SP was a male too. I also thought that about icenine