Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Theism vs. Atheism ... will it ever be settled?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedTheism vs. Atheism ... will it ever be settled?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 1112131415 174>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 09 2010 at 01:34
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak Mr ProgFreak wrote:

And I don't accept your claim that there is a process that could identify miracles. You explained to me how it works, and I tried to explain to you that all they can possibly identify is "we don't know". What you need to demonstrate to me is *how* they get from "we don't know" to "it was a miracle". No doctor can do that. If you say that the pope can do it - tell me how. If you say "you need faith", then that's the same as saying "I can't demonstrate it to you". Which is all I'm saying.

And please, remember that it's not me who's trying to disprove miracles. In this case it's the Vatican trying to make it look like there's some scientific aspect to the process of identifying miracles. There is not. 

The difference between you and me is that for you, science is everything, for us, science is a tool.


Yopu would first need to define what "science" is - I doubt that our definitions are compatible.

Originally posted by Iván Iván wrote:


As a lawyer I defend people that I don't know with 100% of certitude if they are innocent or not, we use scientific methods to reach an approach, but at the end, not even with all the scientific evidence we know if X guy killed Y guy (in most of the cases) or if "A" raped "B".

Science tells us that a bullet killed "Y" and that "X" is has powder in his hands, or that "B" had violent sex, but nothing can tell us if "X" was acting in legitimate defense or if "A" and "B" had violent CONSENSUAL sex, but still the courts convict or declare people innocent every day, and the system can't stop because we can't prove beyond any doubt.


How can a lawyer, of all people, make such a horrible mistake?

Courts declare people "not guilty". The difference between "not guilty" and "innocent" is essentially the same as the one between "we don't know what caused the cure" and "god did it". You need positive evidence to convict someone of a crime, you need positive evidence to identify miracles.

Originally posted by Iván Iván wrote:


In the same way, the church asks doctors, check witnesses, use scientific tests to know if something is possible or not, but at the end, the tests can only tell you that the person who went to Lourdes, ask for God's help was cured without explanation and that the cure is permanent, no doctor can tell if it's a miracle or if a Martian abducted the person and cured him, and in this cases  the Church with this evidence has to decide.


They have no data to evaluate which could ever lead to the conclusion "it was a miracle" ... in essence, they're rolling dice. Sure, some claims they may dismiss because they think they're deliberate fakes, but in the end, from those where we really don't know what caused the cure and we really know they were devout Catholics, some are arbitrarily (read: based on faith) chosen. If you disagree, NAME THE CRITERIA USED, if you want this to remain a rational discussion.

Originally posted by Iván Iván wrote:


Will there ever be 100% certitude? No, but scientific tests and testimonies tell us that there are reasons to believe that a miracle is not impossible, and only then the Chuch with their experience of centuries and theological research has to decide.

But at least they are searching for a possible explanation, you are only saying "I can't explain it but I won't accept your investigation, even if I don't have a better explanation".

And yes, there's a scientific process that doesn't allow us to say science says A is a miracle, but allows us to say that 95% of the cases are not miracles and there's an alternative explanation. The decision if something is a miracle is not exclusively scientific, but we use science as a tool.

Iván

I believe that miracles are possible - I just refrain from believing that one actually happened until someone presents some positive evidence to that effect. Why won't God heal amputees? Seriously, why do those reported miracles usually involve situations where some disease mysteriously disappears, and never a limb growing back. If we're talking about an all powerful God, why not give a child a severed limb back instead of healing a 70+ years old priest from cancer.

I am using science as a tool ... always. And if you do some research, maybe you'll some day find out what science actually does - and then you'll be able to apply it yourself in some situations.
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 23:02
Originally posted by Padraic Padraic wrote:

Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak Mr ProgFreak wrote:

Originally posted by Angelo Angelo wrote:

It's a way of passing time, Padraic, can't wee what else it brings.

It's fun.LOL

If you say so.  Ermm

I think so, too. 
Tongue
Back to Top
Padraic View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 20:52
Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak Mr ProgFreak wrote:

Originally posted by Angelo Angelo wrote:

It's a way of passing time, Padraic, can't wee what else it brings.

It's fun.LOL

If you say so.  Ermm
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 20:45
Originally posted by Textbook Textbook wrote:

 
Also, not for the first time I am once again puzzled by how someone like Ivan, who attests that he has faith, is bursting with desperation to bring science and reason into the picture. FAITH DOESN'T REQUIRE SCIENCE AND REASON.

Iván is is not bursting with desperation to bring anything, 

The process exists, Iván hasn't invented anything, the Church is the one who asks science to collaborate in searching for the truth.

I can't bring anything that doesn't exist, I'm just presenting the facts of the sanctification process, a process that has evolved since the fourth Century if I'm not wrong..

Iván


Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - December 08 2010 at 21:10
            
Back to Top
Textbook View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 20:14
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:


scientific tests and testimonies tell us that there are reasons to believe that a miracle is not impossible,
 
 
This is one of the silliest things I have ever read.
 
 
Also, not for the first time I am once again puzzled by how someone like Ivan, who attests that he has faith, is bursting with desperation to bring science and reason into the picture. FAITH DOESN'T REQUIRE SCIENCE AND REASON.
 
He'll no doubt say something about me being a troll or ignore me, but if I were a troll I believe I'd be over in the Christianity thread, which I do not post in and never will. Though I do read it sometimes when in need of a laugh. Or a fright.
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 20:12

Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 18:18
Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak Mr ProgFreak wrote:

And I don't accept your claim that there is a process that could identify miracles. You explained to me how it works, and I tried to explain to you that all they can possibly identify is "we don't know". What you need to demonstrate to me is *how* they get from "we don't know" to "it was a miracle". No doctor can do that. If you say that the pope can do it - tell me how. If you say "you need faith", then that's the same as saying "I can't demonstrate it to you". Which is all I'm saying.

And please, remember that it's not me who's trying to disprove miracles. In this case it's the Vatican trying to make it look like there's some scientific aspect to the process of identifying miracles. There is not. 

The difference between you and me is that for you, science is everything, for us, science is a tool.

As a lawyer I defend people that I don't know with 100% of certitude if they are innocent or not, we use scientific methods to reach an approach, but at the end, not even with all the scientific evidence we know if X guy killed Y guy (in most of the cases) or if "A" raped "B".

Science tells us that a bullet killed "Y" and that "X" is has powder in his hands, or that "B" had violent sex, but nothing can tell us if "X" was acting in legitimate defense or if "A" and "B" had violent CONSENSUAL sex, but still the courts convict or declare people innocent every day, and the system can't stop because we can't prove beyond any doubt.

In the same way, the church asks doctors, check witnesses, use scientific tests to know if something is possible or not, but at the end, the tests can only tell you that the person who went to Lourdes, ask for God's help was cured without explanation and that the cure is permanent, no doctor can tell if it's a miracle or if a Martian abducted the person and cured him, and in this cases  the Church with this evidence has to decide.

Will there ever be 100% certitude? No, but scientific tests and testimonies tell us that there are reasons to believe that a miracle is not impossible, and only then the Chuch with their experience of centuries and theological research has to decide.

But at least they are searching for a possible explanation, you are only saying "I can't explain it but I won't accept your investigation, even if I don't have a better explanation".

And yes, there's a scientific process that doesn't allow us to say science says A is a miracle, but allows us to say that 95% of the cases are not miracles and there's an alternative explanation. The decision if something is a miracle is not exclusively scientific, but we use science as a tool.

Iván


Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - December 08 2010 at 18:20
            
Back to Top
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 16:43
Originally posted by Angelo Angelo wrote:

It's a way of passing time, Padraic, can't wee what else it brings.

It's fun.LOL
Back to Top
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 16:42
And I don't accept your claim that there is a process that could identify miracles. You explained to me how it works, and I tried to explain to you that all they can possibly identify is "we don't know". What you need to demonstrate to me is *how* they get from "we don't know" to "it was a miracle". No doctor can do that. If you say that the pope can do it - tell me how. If you say "you need faith", then that's the same as saying "I can't demonstrate it to you". Which is all I'm saying.

And please, remember that it's not me who's trying to disprove miracles. In this case it's the Vatican trying to make it look like there's some scientific aspect to the process of identifying miracles. There is not. 
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 16:37
Mike, I'm just talking about somebody being the authority in miracles, neither you or me can give an exact opinion because we never been part of any process.

I'm not even sure all are miracles, I admit the possibility that some are and that a careful process has been followed..

Iván
            
Back to Top
Angelo View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: May 07 2006
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 13244 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 16:23
It's a way of passing time, Padraic, can't wee what else it brings.
ISKC Rock Radio
I stopped blogging and reviewing - so won't be handling requests. Promo's for ariplay can be sent to [email protected]
Back to Top
Padraic View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 16:01
Are either of you actually gaining anything personally (intellectually or otherwise) from the continuation of this discussion?

I'm honestly curious.
Back to Top
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 16:00
^^ Exactly.

No wait a minute - you're close-minded!Wink


Edited by Mr ProgFreak - December 08 2010 at 16:00
Back to Top
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 15:59
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Is worthless to explain you over and over Mike, you will never see because you don't want to see.

5 diagnosis of the cure of an illness that can't be explained by medicine...Is that so hard to understand?

If just one of the 5 doctors offers an alternative possibility, it's over, no miracle.

Calling me a jerk, won't help your case, you're loosing your temper again

Iván

I'm having a ball here ... you're showing the world how close minded and impervious to reason one can get. No need to go over these fallacies again - let's just put this to rest. You can continue to think of me as a close minded person - I don't mind - I'm beginning to think that you really can't see the flaw in your argument.
Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 15:50
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Is worthless to explain you over and over Mike, you will never see because you don't want to see.

5 diagnosis of the cure of an illness that can't be explained by medicine...Is that so hard to understand?

If just one of the 5 doctors offers an alternative possibility, it's over, no miracle.

Calling me a jerk, won't help your case, you're loosing your temper again

Iván

A thousand Doctors could say they couldn't explain someones recovery from illness and it still wouldn't be a miracle.
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 15:47
Is worthless to explain you over and over Mike, you will never see because you don't want to see.

5 diagnosis of the cure of an illness that can't be explained by medicine...Is that so hard to understand?

If just one of the 5 doctors offers an alternative possibility, it's over, no miracle.

Calling me a jerk, won't help your case, you're loosing your temper again

Iván
            
Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 15:40
I'm heading for the bunker.
Back to Top
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 15:30
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak Mr ProgFreak wrote:

 

You can quote scientists - there's nothing wrong with that. When you quote medical doctors commenting on what's a miracle and what isn't, then it gets ridiculous. Sure, I know, they're only determining that no medical cause is found. But that's a non-issue - nobody contests that in the first place. 


False

You need 5 different diagnosis, 100% coincident

The Holy Office can (an always does) ask for any scientific expert opinion, EVEN FROM ATHEISTS,  there's no limit for this.

At the end after 5 diagnosis (mandatory), many more optional, many witness, many expert declarations, a process that can take decades (in the best of cases), THE POPE BY OFFICIAL DOCUMENT declares if we are before a miracle.

Iván

You are such a jerk. WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE DIAGNOSIS "WE DON'T KNOW". 

We have a problem with getting from "we don't know" to "it's a miracle". It is bunk. You object - ok, it's carefully controlled bunk. It still doesn't matter how many doctors conclude "we don't know", it doesn't matter how many decades they (at the Vatican) ponder the question of whether it was a miracle, and all they know is that they don't know how the patient got cured. And no, it doesn't matter either whether the f**king pedophile-protecting pope farts an official document out of his blessed poop-hole. NONE OF THIS MATTERS TO ANYONE BUT DEVOUT CATHOLICS. 

BTW: I'm not angry at all, I'm amused.LOL 


Edited by Mr ProgFreak - December 08 2010 at 15:31
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 12:57
Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak Mr ProgFreak wrote:

I know what it is ...

BUNK

Bunk for you.

But is one of the most careful processes in the world.

Iván
            
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 08 2010 at 12:56
Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak Mr ProgFreak wrote:

 

You can quote scientists - there's nothing wrong with that. When you quote medical doctors commenting on what's a miracle and what isn't, then it gets ridiculous. Sure, I know, they're only determining that no medical cause is found. But that's a non-issue - nobody contests that in the first place. 


False

You need 5 different diagnosis, 100% coincident

The Holy Office can (an always does) ask for any scientific expert opinion, EVEN FROM ATHEISTS,  there's no limit for this.

At the end after 5 diagnosis (mandatory), many more optional, many witness, many expert declarations, a process that can take decades (in the best of cases), THE POPE BY OFFICIAL DOCUMENT declares if we are before a miracle.

Iván
            
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 1112131415 174>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.408 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.