What's so fictional about The Bible?

Started by Bentley17 pages

I never said you should believe them, I pointed out asking for irrational proof is irrational 👆

Regarding the pixies, you put the idiots into prison or a psychiatric hospital anyways. Even if pixies existed, they are the ones commiting the crime by starving their children.

The claim determines the amount of proof which substantiates it. I'm not going to level the same burden of proof on a person claiming to have a pet dog as I would on someone claiming to have a talking clairvoyant invisible pet dragon who informs their actions (but only seems to speak when no one else is around). Having a dog as a pet at the very least has a precedent in our shared reality. I surmise that you wouldn't either, but I could be mistaken.

So what's your position on people having supernatural abilities?

Like, for example, Benny Hinn?

For me the idea of people having to convince others about their abilities or their experiences is very alien. What's the point of telling others about it? And even further, convincing them you have abilities. That would make me suspicious of them at the very least and I'm likely not to take their claims at face value.

Me? I don't think I ever take people at face value when they have motivations to lie. I've met decent people that lie to my face about realistic stuff for no reason other than the fact they can. What do people win over having me share their opinions?

People with superpowers should at least have the power of common sense and accept people have every reason not to buy into their claims. Weird beliefs/experiences shouldn't excuse them from being pragmatic.

I've been told in confidence about stuff that is weird at the very least, but the teller was open about me not taking the story for granted so it led to a decent discussion at least.

Originally posted by MF DELPH
The claim determines the amount of proof which substantiates it. I'm not going to level the same burden of proof on a person claiming to have a pet dog as I would on someone claiming to have a talking clairvoyant invisible pet dragon who informs their actions (but only seems to speak when no one else is around). Having a dog as a pet at the very least has a precedent in our shared reality. I surmise that you wouldn't either, but I could be mistaken.

So what's your position on people having supernatural abilities?

Like, for example, Benny Hinn?

😬 Sounds like a cross between a rabbit and a chicken.

What does this "Benny Hinn" of yours purportedly do?

Re: What's so fictional about The Bible?

The content

Re: Re: What's so fictional about The Bible?

Originally posted by Bardock42
The content

😂

Originally posted by Jynocidus
I'm an idiot for making a thread based from a supposedly empiracle point of view instead of...theory...? There's no logic in saying there's a Creator? When everything around us is a creation?

Maybe a cheap shot, but a shot nonetheless.

No one called you an idiot. How is saying I'm not one imply that you are?

You're overly-sensitive. Calm down.

Also, you can't prove everything around us is a "creation". Not really.

It seems he's adding intent to action.

eg We know the Earth was formed by space dust and gases and gravity; he's automatically assuming purpose. God/some being made it happen.

That's cool and all, but no one has to accept the purpose he has assigned to it. It isn't as self-evident as he makes it sound.

Of course not.

Originally posted by Jynocidus
Is it literally, by calculation, logic, or rationale, impossible for A Creator to exist?

Are the laws ineffective, worldwide?

You're asking two different questions here. Why should any Holy Books have anything to do with creators.

Nothing is fictional, you just need to understand how to read it properly. 🙂

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Nothing is fictional, you just need to understand how to read it properly. 🙂

How many different denomination of Christianity are there in the world? It seems that believers can't even read it properly.

Originally posted by Bentley

I don't see why we would claim something is supernatural unless we cannot describe it by natural means. The problem is that even defining something as truly supernatural is extremely difficult under our current models, which makes it a very weak word to throw around if we want clarification about stuff.
what do you mean by "can't describe by natural means"? you mean we can't explain it yet? correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't dark energy basically an unobserved and unexplained phenomenon that is interacting with the other matter and energy in our universe. is that supernatural?

Originally posted by red g jacks
what do you mean by "can't describe by natural means"? you mean we can't explain it yet? correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't dark energy basically an unobserved and unexplained phenomenon that is interacting with the other matter and energy in our universe. is that supernatural?

Supernatural is something external to our scope. If we can't predict something based in data that we can interpret, that can be considered supernatural. Truly supernatural things would be unpredictable from our perspective because, by principle, the elements that cause them are outside our scope.

So yes, in this perspective some cosmic phenomena can be depicted as being supernatural. The Big Bang itself could be understood that way.

Originally posted by red g jacks
what do you mean by "can't describe by natural means"? you mean we can't explain it yet? correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't dark energy basically an unobserved and unexplained phenomenon that is interacting with the other matter and energy in our universe. is that supernatural?

No. For the same reason electrons are not supernatural. Just because we can't see it doesn't mean it is supernatural.

su·per·nat·u·ral

1
: of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe; especially : of or relating to God or a god, demigod, spirit, or devil
2
a : departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature
b : attributed to an invisible agent (as a ghost or spirit)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/supernatural

Originally posted by Bentley
Supernatural is something external to our scope. If we can't predict something based in data that we can interpret, that can be considered supernatural. Truly supernatural things would be unpredictable from our perspective because, by principle, the elements that cause them are outside our scope.

So yes, in this perspective some cosmic phenomena can be depicted as being supernatural. The Big Bang itself could be understood that way.

So with the above stated Bentley do you believe Gods and Angels to be natural or supernatural? These beings allegedly have, at least per the Bible and numerous other Theological/Mythological texts from other cultures (like the Olympic Pantheon of Greece), interacted with human beings, to the point of being able to procreate with humans on multiple occasions, and produce demigod offspring. Or do you classify that under myth?

God said to at least believe because of the miricals.

Originally posted by Wonder Man
God said to at least believe because of the miricals.

But the gospels were written between 60 to 150 years later. There is no evidence out side of the bible that confirms these miracles. Don't you think the Romans would have taken notice? I think it is highly possible that the miracles where added later to give the early church validity.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No. For the same reason electrons are not supernatural. Just because we can't see it doesn't mean it is supernatural.

su·per·nat·u·ral

1
: of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe; especially : of or relating to God or a god, demigod, spirit, or devil
2
a : departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature
b : attributed to an invisible agent (as a ghost or spirit)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/supernatural

so let me get this straight. dark energy is something we can't observe or describe but we can see its influence on the world around us,

ghosts (if they were real) might be described as something we can't observe or describe but we can their influence on the world around us.

why is one supernatural and the other not?