Jesus vs. the Tooth Fairy

Tired of wandering the lawless wilds of the AC&A forum? Have a friendly chat in our cozy, velvet-covered civility lounge. Alcohol not permitted, only the Kenny G button works on the jukebox. All undesirable types will be quietly escorted out the back door.

Re: Jesus vs. the Tooth Fairy

Postby somecallmeTim? » Tue Nov 03, 2015 8:17 pm

Razor wrote:
somecallmeTim? wrote:
Razor wrote:(FYI, I am in the "it makes no difference as the water into wine part has p<.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001")

Wow! With such a small level of probability, it really must have been a miracle.

No, just never actually happened....
If it HAD happened it would have a probability a wee bit higher, no?

Why would the probability have to be higher for it to have happened? As long as the probability is not zero, it is possible. Don't make me break out that Bible quote, "With God all things are possible." [Matt 19:6] Oops, there it is.
User avatar
somecallmeTim?
recruit
recruit
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2015 10:32 am
Location: Roanoke, Virginia
Affiliation: Christian (Evangelical)

Re: Jesus vs. the Tooth Fairy

Postby Simplyme » Wed Nov 04, 2015 9:31 am

Why would the probability have to be higher for it to have happened? As long as the probability is not zero, it is possible. Don't make me break out that Bible quote, "With God all things are possible." [Matt 19:6] Oops, there it is.


Except Iron Chariots,
Judges 1:19
The LORD was with the men of Judah. They took possession of the hill country, but they were unable to drive the people from the plains, because they had chariots fitted with iron.

OOps there it really is.
I find it rather amusing, when thought of as ignorant or stupid(though I can be on many subjects). Especially by those who believe in a deity up in heaven watching our every move, and rewarding or punishing us after we have expired.
Simplyme
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5953
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:11 am

Re: Jesus vs. the Tooth Fairy

Postby somecallmeTim? » Thu Nov 05, 2015 8:26 pm

Simplyme wrote:Except Iron Chariots,
Judges 1:19
The LORD was with the men of Judah. They took possession of the hill country, but they were unable to drive the people from the plains, because they had chariots fitted with iron.

OOps there it really is.

It doesn't say God couldn't drive the people from the plains. It says the men of Judah couldn't do it.
The phrase "the Lord was with.." comes at the end of a passage reciting all that Judah accomplished (with God's help). It seems as though Judah stopped short because they were afraid of the iron chariots. Shouldn't have been, though. More of a shortcoming on the part of the tribe of Judah, than something God himself couldn't do.
User avatar
somecallmeTim?
recruit
recruit
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2015 10:32 am
Location: Roanoke, Virginia
Affiliation: Christian (Evangelical)

Re: Jesus vs. the Tooth Fairy

Postby Simplyme » Thu Nov 05, 2015 8:32 pm

Does it not say, The Lord was with them? Implying that when it says "they", the Lord was included. And it actually at the beginning of this passage.
I find it rather amusing, when thought of as ignorant or stupid(though I can be on many subjects). Especially by those who believe in a deity up in heaven watching our every move, and rewarding or punishing us after we have expired.
Simplyme
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5953
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:11 am

Re: Jesus vs. the Tooth Fairy

Postby Razor » Fri Nov 06, 2015 2:47 am

somecallmeTim? wrote:Why would the probability have to be higher for it to have happened? As long as the probability is not zero, it is possible. Don't make me break out that Bible quote, "With God all things are possible." [Matt 19:6] Oops, there it is.


We are talking about the probability of a specific event occurring. If that event is shown to have occurred, p=1.

If you are asking if it is possible to turn water into wine, the same holds. the probability of it being possible is 100% after someone actually does it - we KNOW it is possible then.

Right now, we have found no way that it would have been possible to turn water to wine in the manner under consideration.

To take a different example, you could ask "what is the probability the we will be able to build a commercial fusion reactor". We haven't done so yet, but we have a fairly good idea how it might be done, we have a few precursors... I might go so far as to say its a near-certainty that we will be able to quite soon even.
Once we actually build one, it is 100%.
Razor
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 9:42 am

Re: Jesus vs. the Tooth Fairy

Postby somecallmeTim? » Sun Nov 08, 2015 5:39 pm

Razor wrote: We are talking about the probability of a specific event occurring. If that event is shown to have occurred, p=1.
If you are asking if it is possible to turn water into wine, the same holds. the probability of it being possible is 100% after someone actually does it - we KNOW it is possible then.

Right. If Jesus has already done it, then the probability is 100%. But, if Jesus did not do it, then the probability is still not zero (as you said previously).
Right now, we have found no way that it would have been possible to turn water to wine in the manner under consideration.

I agree our lack of understanding how it could be done, and our inability to recreate the event ourselves, makes it seem less likely to us. But, if God created the world (including grapes that ferment), is it outside the realm of probability that he could do it again?
User avatar
somecallmeTim?
recruit
recruit
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2015 10:32 am
Location: Roanoke, Virginia
Affiliation: Christian (Evangelical)

Re: Jesus vs. the Tooth Fairy

Postby humanguy » Sun Nov 08, 2015 8:44 pm

somecallmeTim? wrote:
Razor wrote: We are talking about the probability of a specific event occurring. If that event is shown to have occurred, p=1.
If you are asking if it is possible to turn water into wine, the same holds. the probability of it being possible is 100% after someone actually does it - we KNOW it is possible then.

Right. If Jesus has already done it, then the probability is 100%. But, if Jesus did not do it, then the probability is still not zero (as you said previously).
Right now, we have found no way that it would have been possible to turn water to wine in the manner under consideration.

I agree our lack of understanding how it could be done, and our inability to recreate the event ourselves, makes it seem less likely to us. But, if God created the world (including grapes that ferment), is it outside the realm of probability that he could do it again?


No, but if the possibility of turning water into wine is agreed upon then what else must be, and to what end result? But, let's go ahead and agree that God can do anything, and that through or with God anything is possible. Now where do we go?
Most of us, just about all of us, have the capacity to be rock and rolled by a feeling of pure ecstatic raw joy. You do, don't you? We should respect each other for that.
User avatar
humanguy
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 3876
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 3:50 pm
Location: Lumpen Post-Industrial District
Affiliation: Human

Re: Jesus vs. the Tooth Fairy

Postby Razor » Mon Nov 09, 2015 12:03 pm

somecallmeTim? wrote:
Razor wrote: We are talking about the probability of a specific event occurring. If that event is shown to have occurred, p=1.
If you are asking if it is possible to turn water into wine, the same holds. the probability of it being possible is 100% after someone actually does it - we KNOW it is possible then.

Right. If Jesus has already done it, then the probability is 100%. But, if Jesus did not do it, then the probability is still not zero (as you said previously).

No. I said I gave it p<.00000000001 (or similar). This means that I accept that there IS a possibility that it happened, by I also assess that it is a astonishingly small one.
It is small because of the points I raised earlier. If you are going for "goddidit" then the probability that anything is possible is 100%, as god can do anything. That'd make "reasonable doubt" in a trial rather hard to overcome wouldn't it?
Right now, we have found no way that it would have been possible to turn water to wine in the manner under consideration.

I agree our lack of understanding how it could be done, and our inability to recreate the event ourselves, makes it seem less likely to us. But, if God created the world (including grapes that ferment), is it outside the realm of probability that he could do it again?

Like I said above. IF you accept the premise that God exists, and by extension that he can do anything, then the probability that any event is possible is 100%.
The issue is, the premise is garbage and I don't accept it. Tell you what, if you give me a good reason to accept the premise I'll reconsider? Else, it remains garbage and thus your argument for higher probability is also garbage.
Razor
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 9:42 am

Re: Jesus vs. the Tooth Fairy

Postby somecallmeTim? » Tue Nov 10, 2015 7:14 pm

Razor wrote: Like I said above. IF you accept the premise that God exists, and by extension that he can do anything, then the probability that any event is possible is 100%.
The issue is, the premise is garbage and I don't accept it. Tell you what, if you give me a good reason to accept the premise I'll reconsider? Else, it remains garbage and thus your argument for higher probability is also garbage.

OK- So, your objection is not really the water-into-wine story itself, just the premise that God exists. Because, if God exists, turning water into wine is well within the realm of what is possible.

I can give you many good reasons to accept the premise that God exists. No one piece of evidence may be "sufficient"; but the accumulation of evidence might be.
- The cosmological argument for the existence of God
- The teleological argument for the existence of God
- The moral argument for the existence of God
- That God's existence is not inconsistent with anything we have discovered through science.
- That God's existence is not logically inconsistent
- That the original apostles of Jesus were willing to be martyred over their first-hand testimony that Jesus was raised from the dead. (who would do that for something you knew was a lie?)
- The god-shaped vacuum so many people throughout all of history have sought to fill
- The purpose, meaning and hope provided by Christianity
- The extreme accuracy (agreement) of the New Testament text, despite the many thousands of manuscripts over a long period of time
- That for all the religious jerks, charlatans, and idiots out there giving Christianity a bad name, there are others who try treat people the way they would want to be treated, and to love unconditionally
- The "still small voice" you may have experienced yourself at some point in your life
- I was just talking with him and he said to tell you "hi" and that he still loves you.

Convinced yet? Think about it.
User avatar
somecallmeTim?
recruit
recruit
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2015 10:32 am
Location: Roanoke, Virginia
Affiliation: Christian (Evangelical)

Re: Jesus vs. the Tooth Fairy

Postby sayak » Tue Nov 10, 2015 8:40 pm

somecallmeTim? wrote:
Razor wrote: Like I said above. IF you accept the premise that God exists, and by extension that he can do anything, then the probability that any event is possible is 100%.
The issue is, the premise is garbage and I don't accept it. Tell you what, if you give me a good reason to accept the premise I'll reconsider? Else, it remains garbage and thus your argument for higher probability is also garbage.

OK- So, your objection is not really the water-into-wine story itself, just the premise that God exists. Because, if God exists, turning water into wine is well within the realm of what is possible.

I can give you many good reasons to accept the premise that God exists. No one piece of evidence may be "sufficient"; but the accumulation of evidence might be.
- The cosmological argument for the existence of God
- The teleological argument for the existence of God
- The moral argument for the existence of God
- That God's existence is not inconsistent with anything we have discovered through science.
- That God's existence is not logically inconsistent
- That the original apostles of Jesus were willing to be martyred over their first-hand testimony that Jesus was raised from the dead. (who would do that for something you knew was a lie?)
- The god-shaped vacuum so many people throughout all of history have sought to fill
- The purpose, meaning and hope provided by Christianity
- The extreme accuracy (agreement) of the New Testament text, despite the many thousands of manuscripts over a long period of time
- That for all the religious jerks, charlatans, and idiots out there giving Christianity a bad name, there are others who try treat people the way they would want to be treated, and to love unconditionally
- The "still small voice" you may have experienced yourself at some point in your life
- I was just talking with him and he said to tell you "hi" and that he still loves you.

Convinced yet? Think about it.

Ah a list :D
I can counter each of these arguments or propositions which leads me to atheism.
Each of these points has been discussed several times here, but I am ready to redo some of them. I claim

The cosmological argument fails
The teleological argument fails
The moral argument fails
Consistency is a vacuous concept for a term as free floating as a God
Jesus himself is logically inconsistent..but you guys put that inconsistency as a mystery. Still inconsistent.
Lot of people die for false beliefs they fervently believe in
There is no such God shaped hole in many people (including me)
Christianity provides no better purpose or meaning than any secular system
New Testament books are religious propaganda documents containing some historical information, but untrustworthy on the whole.
Secular people do as well in terms of other regarding behavior
Yep, that voice is my own, and it is often Gandalf.
You are truly truly deluded my friend. Time to wake up. I have made a hot steaming coffee of rationality for you.

Still believe? Think about it. :D
sayak
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 1519
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 7:09 pm
Affiliation: Humanist

Re: Jesus vs. the Tooth Fairy

Postby CL Moderator » Wed Nov 11, 2015 2:23 am

* * * * * Warning from the CL Moderators * * * * *

Please review our new rules. Several posts here are in violation in terms of personal insults and fundy-ism, and further action will be taken if the tone of this discussion does not improve.

-- The CL Moderators
User avatar
CL Moderator
recruit
recruit
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2015 4:55 pm

Re: Jesus vs. the Tooth Fairy

Postby Simplyme » Wed Nov 11, 2015 8:32 am

All they want on here is love, laughing, sharing, hearts, flowers. JEEZ!

The name of this post does not pass there criteria for Civility......Jesus vs Tooth Fairy...COME ON!
I find it rather amusing, when thought of as ignorant or stupid(though I can be on many subjects). Especially by those who believe in a deity up in heaven watching our every move, and rewarding or punishing us after we have expired.
Simplyme
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5953
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:11 am

Re: Jesus vs. the Tooth Fairy

Postby Razor » Wed Nov 11, 2015 9:20 am

somecallmeTim? wrote:
Razor wrote: Like I said above. IF you accept the premise that God exists, and by extension that he can do anything, then the probability that any event is possible is 100%.
The issue is, the premise is garbage and I don't accept it. Tell you what, if you give me a good reason to accept the premise I'll reconsider? Else, it remains garbage and thus your argument for higher probability is also garbage.

OK- So, your objection is not really the water-into-wine story itself, just the premise that God exists. Because, if God exists, turning water into wine is well within the realm of what is possible.

I don't know if you are being intentionally knuckledheaded here, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
IF God exists, ANYTHING. EVERYTHING. is within the realm of the possible. The answer to the question "is it POSSIBLE that (insert stuff) happened" is YES
I can give you many good reasons to accept the premise that God exists. No one piece of evidence may be "sufficient"; but the accumulation of evidence might be.
- The cosmological argument for the existence of God
- The teleological argument for the existence of God
- The moral argument for the existence of God
- That God's existence is not inconsistent with anything we have discovered through science.
- That God's existence is not logically inconsistent
- That the original apostles of Jesus were willing to be martyred over their first-hand testimony that Jesus was raised from the dead. (who would do that for something you knew was a lie?)
- The god-shaped vacuum so many people throughout all of history have sought to fill
- The purpose, meaning and hope provided by Christianity
- The extreme accuracy (agreement) of the New Testament text, despite the many thousands of manuscripts over a long period of time
- That for all the religious jerks, charlatans, and idiots out there giving Christianity a bad name, there are others who try treat people the way they would want to be treated, and to love unconditionally
- The "still small voice" you may have experienced yourself at some point in your life
- I was just talking with him and he said to tell you "hi" and that he still loves you.

Convinced yet? Think about it.

I think this has been covered off already, but this list is a pile of unsubstantiated steaming (for the moderators I'll omit).

The extreme accuracy of the new testament :) that one tickles me :)
Razor
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 9:42 am

Previous

Return to The Civility Lounge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest