Double-blind Prayer Efficacy Test -- Really?

[TagliatelliMonster]

I've never denied that belief is just that, belief, not proof... that's where science is supposed to be different.

And it is.
Science requires evidence.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

And it is.
Science requires evidence.

And the understanding of the limits of evidence.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

But many people also lose god after personal trauma, so their lack of faith is also "truth", yes?

No, no...

Such reasoning only works when it supports his drivel. Duh.

 

[KWED]

DNA doesn't effect the soul.

How do you know?

 

[PruePhillip]

Question begging.
The magic stories about Jesus could have been made up to appear to fulfil prophecies.

Jacob, some 2,000 years before Jesus, spoke of the Messiah as coming from the tribe of Judah, and his coming would end the Jewish state. And in this Messiah would the Gentiles trust.
Daniel, some 600 years before Jesus said this Messiah would be destroyed by a nation that didn't have a name in his day, and this enemy would destroy the temple, Jerusalem and Israel. Daniel also gave a date for this. And he said this mystery nation (Rome) would eventually fall, but never fall. Rome fell, but then there was the Roman Catholic Church ruling the known world, then the Holy Roman Empire, and the Eastern Roman empire. And today Russia, like Italy and Germany before it, likes to think it is carrying on the Roman legacy.
Give me the odds of all this happening. I did the figures last year for the Jacob one and figured, at best, the odds were one in a billion it could happen by chance.

 

[KWED]

Things that are produced through the scientific method, don't require faith.

Actually they do.

So you think your phone only works because you believe it does?

 

[PruePhillip]

.

Genesis said that God commanded the seas to bring forth life. Until Darwin's time the know-it-alls, the intellectual cognescenti, said this is impossible. How can life come out of the sea. We know how:
Life had already begun on land (fresh water, wetting and drying cycles to concentrate organics) and once it was able to procreate in a marine environment it created most of the life we see today. That's the evolution bit.

 

[PruePhillip]

Or even basic moral decency like atheists exhibit. It makes me wonder how Christians have gotten so far off the teachings and influence of Jesus over the millennia. This religion, especially the more conservative it is, gets more and more abstract, and less a personal basis for right thinking and actions. We see the KKK claim to be a Christian organization, and this informs us that this religion doesn't help make bad people good.

Ah, the ol' Democrats and the KKK. They thought they were doing good. People were lynched in the name of doing good. But it aint the 'doing good' that matters if you hate someone, or worse, kill them. You can kill many people and think that you are 'doing good', but not before God - there's an absolute gold standard of behavior.

 

[PruePhillip]

Nah. I can say a lot more than that. I can say that your claim is not credible. That you are unable to provide a rational basis for your claim.. That you engage in special pleading fallacy. That you engage in false analogies (e.g. god vs white swan fallacy). That you are solipsistic (personal proof). That you are quite literally using the same arguments that people use for astrology, homeopathy, all the religious beliefs that contradict your own, and lucky socks.

Lucky socks?!!!! Never heard that one.
You are trying to reconcile religious beliefs with naturalistics beliefs - no telescope, microscope, equation, experiment or set of logic rules will suffice. Faith is faith.

 

[KWED]

Jacob, some 2,000 years before Jesus, spoke of the Messiah

Firstly, there are no records from that period. You are referring to stories about a past event.

as coming from the tribe of Judah, and his coming would end the Jewish state. And in this Messiah would the Gentiles trust.
Daniel, some 600 years before Jesus said this Messiah would be destroyed by a nation that didn't have a name in his day, and this enemy would destroy the temple, Jerusalem and Israel. Daniel also gave a date for this.

None of this disproves my argument that hater works could have been written to appear to fulfil earlier prophecies.

And he said this mystery nation (Rome) would eventually fall, but never fall. Rome fell, but then there was the Roman Catholic Church ruling the known world, then the Holy Roman Empire, and the Eastern Roman empire. And today Russia, like Italy and Germany before it, likes to think it is carrying on the Roman legacy.
Give me the odds of all this happening.

This requires some shoehorned interpretations of vague texts. Nothing you could call a "fulfilled prophecy" any more than the others claimed by other religions - that you no doubt reject.

I did the figures last year for the Jacob one and figured, at best, the odds were one in a billion it could happen by chance.

So you claim that an event with odds of a billion to one can't happen. You clearly don't understand the nature of probability then.
Some years ago, a man won the National Lottery. Twice. With the same numbers. The odds are around 4 trillion to one! So presumably you believe it never happened.

So even ignoring all the initial problems with your claim, you still can't argue that it must be miraculous.
Do you have anything better?

 

[KWED]

Nope, where did you get that?

You said that atheists who reject the existence of the supernatural were "made in god's image".
Therefore what they are must be a reflection if what god is.
QED

You seem to think that what we believe dictates what is.

Ironically, that is what you think.
You believe god exists, therefore god exists.

My position is that what can be demonstrated is what is. If it is merely a claim, we should be sceptical (the degree of scepticism depends on the nature of the claim).

 

[KWED]

If humans were created in God's image, then this would explain why they are capable of horrible cruelty towards one another and other living species on the planet. It would also explain why they are prone to selfishness, arrogance, narcissism, and indifference to other people's pain and suffering. On the other hand, there are obviously humans who are morally superior to the God of the Bible because they exhibit compassion and goodwill towards other people, and they don't willingly ignore the pain and suffering of others.

Perhaps we are created in the image of the god we would be if there were gods?

 

[KWED]

Yes, you are right. It is a possibility, the actuality probability is just unknown. So it is reasonable for it being a possibility, just as a Creator God is reasonable.
And if then someone claims one is more reasonable than other, that requires evidence and I have never come across that for any cases of more reasonable.

Really?
You think there is no more evidence for natural processes being the cause of observable phenomena than there is gods being the cause?

 

[KWED]

Yeah, and it is still a fact, that religious people can believe as they do.

Hold on. I thought you didn't believe in "facts".

 

[PruePhillip]

Firstly, there are no records from that period. You are referring to stories about a past event.

None of this disproves my argument that hater works could have been written to appear to fulfil earlier prophecies.

This requires some shoehorned interpretations of vague texts. Nothing you could call a "fulfilled prophecy" any more than the others claimed by other religions - that you no doubt reject.

So you claim that an event with odds of a billion to one can't happen. You clearly don't understand the nature of probability then.
Some years ago, a man won the National Lottery. Twice. With the same numbers. The odds are around 4 trillion to one! So presumably you believe it never happened.

So even ignoring all the initial problems with your claim, you still can't argue that it must be miraculous.
Do you have anything better?

Wots the chance of you disappearing off the earth and walking on the sun, then returning to the earth? It's been worked out as part of quantum theorry - it's one chance in ten to the power one hundred to the power one hundred again. But possible.
But I was mistaken, that figure was a trillion, not a billion. Kept a copy

Jacob in Egypt foresaw a Hebrew nation, under theocratic law and governed by a monarchy under the line of Judah, “until” the Messiah comes. The Gentiles would obey Him.

Let’s apply “Probability Judgment”

Chance of one particular Semite tribe becoming a nation? Difficult, let’s say 1/1000.
Chance of a monarchy? God was against monarchy but monarchies were common – 50%.
Chance of a Judean king? Easy, 1/12.
Chance of a theocratic law? 50%
Chance of the Messiah who’s coming would end this nation? Impossible to figure. 1/million? More. Let’s be generous – 1/1000.
And the “obedience of the nations” to a Jewish Messiah? Count the gods of the world’s tribes. Be generous and say 1/10,000.

Generous probability = 0.000000000000415%
What’s that? Not even one in a trillion.
You mentioned “shockers” ?

Pious fiction? the accuracy demands explanation.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Really?
You think there is no more evidence for natural processes being the cause of observable phenomena than there is gods being the cause?

Well, yes, if you accept that axiomatic assumptions for methodological naturalism and science, then you can claim evidence. But there is no evidence/proof/truth for the axiomatic assumptions. But that says nothing about the metaphysical status of objective reality.

So here it is:
Fact as per above assumptions: There are no evidence for the supernatural.
Conclusion: Therefore are beliefs in the supernatural wrong.

The problem is that there is no evidence that it is wrong. That is not evidence, that is a cognitive evaluation of wrong versus different assumptions.
It is a fact, that people can believe in the supernatural, so how can it be wrong as a fact? I simply believe different for the metaphysics than both naturalists and supernaturalists.

 

[KWED]

Genesis said that God commanded the seas to bring forth life. Until Darwin's time the know-it-alls, the intellectual cognescenti, said this is impossible. How can life come out of the sea. We know how:
Life had already begun on land (fresh water, wetting and drying cycles to concentrate organics) and once it was able to procreate in a marine environment it created most of the life we see today. That's the evolution bit.

Not sure if you are being dishonest or just a bit dim here.
Two days before god created life in the seas, he had already created plants, so life did not "come out of the sea" as it already existed on dry land. You even admit this yourself.
The "intellectual cognescenti" [sic] never questioned that there was life in the sea.

Another example of cognitive dissonance-driven confusion.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Hold on. I thought you didn't believe in "facts".

Well, to me I properly don't believe in the same type of facts as you do, but I still believe in facts. I just use a different reasoning than you and a different reasoning for evidence.

 

[KWED]

Ah, the ol' Democrats and the KKK. They thought they were doing good. People were lynched in the name of doing good. But it aint the 'doing good' that matters if you hate someone, or worse, kill them. You can kill many people and think that you are 'doing good', but not before God - there's an absolute gold standard of behavior.

You should read your Bible. God does, commands and condones lots of killing, intolerance and oppression.
His actions show he is not one of the good guys so you shouldn't believe him if he tells you he is.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You should read your Bible. God does, commands and condones lots of killing, intolerance and oppression.
His actions show he is not one of the good guys so you shouldn't believe him if he tells you he is.

Well, for a culture Christian like me, that is easy. I don't pay attention to the OT and I on purpose only use the parts in the NT, that makes sense to me. So I cheat in a sense and I admit it.
I am in effect a left leaning progressive culture Christian in effect. And even as an atheist, as I can make positive sense of God in a personal coping sense. I just don't need it, but I remain a friendly atheist.