Another James Randi rant

[ChurchBoy]

Originally posted by Elena:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Helen:
Real science does not mean you have to ignore the evidence that doesn't fit. It means you are free to really consider everything.

You seem to be using 'skepticism' to ignore or mock anything that doesn't fit in with your worldview. Unless you have the mind of God, that is probably not a wise thing to do.

EF Anything I've rejected is because of careful consideration of the evidence. My nature is skeptical and that includes science, pseudoscientific claims such as dowsing and religious claims made in the name of science. </font>[/QUOTE]Elena,

Do you accept the physical ressurection of Jesus Christ? If yes, what evidence that you examined convinced you that this historical event did happen?

 

[Johnv]

Although James Randi is an atheist, we all owe him a lot for defrauding a lot of Charlatains. He has nothing against people of religious faith per se.

He defrauded false prophet Peter Popff, who claimed to be a faith healer, but in reality wore a hidden earpiece. His wife would, via a wireless microphone, tell him stats about audience members, which we would "miraculously" blurt out.

He has also defrauded many people claiming to have psychokinetic powers. Most recently, he's taken on folks like Sylvia Brown and John Edwards for thair claims of psychic abilities.

 

[UTEOTW]

Originally posted by ChurchBoy:
Do you accept the physical ressurection of Jesus Christ? If yes, what evidence that you examined convinced you that this historical event did happen?

You did not address this to me, but I would like to take a brief stab at it.

Taking your example of the ressurection. That is something expected on faith. I take that as fact based on the faith I have in Jesus and the personal relationship with him a Christian has. This needs no further explanation, you know what I mean. But there is no evidence to be given of that. That we accept the ressurection is almost a given based on who we claim to be and where we are talking about things. I neither expect nor need evidence nor do I know of any possible evidence that could be presented other than what people claim to have seen.

Now in the case of the things we are debating here. A 6000 year old earth would be expected to have one set of evidences and a 4.5 billion year old earth a different set. Original "kinds" would be expected to leave one set of evidences in the world and evolution another set. A recent global flood would leave evidence of itself. And that is what we set out to debate here, what evidence can be presented and which history does the preponderance of the evidence support.

I hope that helps a bit.

 

[Elena]

Do you accept the physical ressurection of Jesus Christ? If yes, what evidence that you examined convinced you that this historical event did happen?

EF: I accept it as a matter of faith. Because of that, the evidence is irrelevant.

 

[ChurchBoy]

Elena, UTEOTW

When you say that you believe the resurrection of Jesus Christ on "faith", does that mean the you never looked at any historical evidence or read books like The Case for Christ?

 

[Steven O. Sawyer]

Originally posted by Elena:
EF: I accept it &lt;the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ&gt; as a matter of faith. Because of that, the evidence is irrelevant.

The evidence is irrelevant? Elana, do you believe that Christianity is indeed a "blind faith" rather than a reasonable faith? As a Christian, I think the evidence is very relevant. However, the evidence is more historical in nature than scientific. You cannot prove Christianity is true, but there is certainly a wealth of logical evidence in its favor. That is what Christian Apologetics is all about.

But if Christianity were merely a faith, why would you believe this one? Why not Buddhism? Why not the non-judgmental spiritism? If I were to choose a religion because of what I wanted to be true, I would not be a Christian. While Christianity does teach that God offers grace towards all of us sinners, it also teaches that there is a day of judgment and hell that awaits those who do not repent and turn to Christ. If I believed what I wanted, I would believe in the non-judgmental god of the spiritists or something like that. But I can’t believe that because the Bible says it is false and that Jesus is the ONLY way to the true God (and, indeed, Jesus is the second person of the Godhead incarnated). If the Bible is not the final authority of arbitration on spiritual matters, then what is? Or is your view the liberal view that the Bible is “inspiring” but it is not inspired. Maybe the Bible contains truth but it is not THE standard of truth God has left for mankind to aid man with the help of His spirit to know the truth? Maybe Jesus was merely a misguided Jewish rabbi who didn’t really die on the cross for the sins of mankind and was resurrected the third day but instead was thrown into a pauper’s grave and was eaten by stray dogs like some of the “Christians” in the Jesus Seminar would have us believe?

The Bible also says that divination and witchcraft were acts of rebellion against God and carried severe penalties... why? Because people who do such things that are not slick magicians or hucksters but actually do have supernatural gifts did NOT get those gifts from God. They are demonically possessed (not a very PC thing to say in the modern world, but that is the truth).

Any person who is a Christian must believe that the Bible is true, especially the New Testament. That is where we learn about Christ. I believe in demons not only because the Bible says they are real, but because Jesus said they were real and even cast out demons. Jesus even conversed with Satan. Now either Jesus knew what He was doing and talking about or He was a fraud and can’t save anyone.

Now, back to dowsing. Try to imagine yourself in my position. But you are put in test to try something you think is pretty hokey. You are given this plain old forked branch that was just cut off a tree and told to walk over a certain area. You laugh to yourself and tell yourself this is pretty stupid because everybody of any intelligence knows that dowsing is faked and there is nothing in nature on a calm day that can make a branch bend down. It must be a trick, and you are going to prove that it doesn’t work for you and your relatives are just playing a joke on you.

Can you imagine, even for a moment, what that must be like to see and feel something you know can’t be real happening right in front of you? In your own hands? If you had a stick in your hands bends over with a very tangible force when approaching a particular area, what would you conclude?

I can conclude that the force was either natural or supernatural. There is NO natural reason for an end of a light stick to pull down MUCH greater than the force of gravity then something supernatural or paranormal is a reasonable conclusion that anyone has proposed. The only relatively “natural” explanation that I know of is that we are all endowed subconsciously with ESP and psychokinetic powers and that somehow those powers were released that day. I don’t buy that for a second, but that is the closest explanation I have ever heard to being a “natural” phenomena and that was a paranormal rationalization. So if there is no natural explanation… even a wildly theoretical one… then there is something unnatural happening… or should I say supernatural. If a source is supernatural, it can come from God or the demons. If the action is expressly forbidden in the Bible, which divination is (and dowsing is considered a type of divination), then its source must be demonic because God is not going to condemn divination with one hand and turn around with the other and grant you that power.

This is a simplification, I know. But it at least outlines some of the basic thoughts and guidelines for Christians. I believe that all forms of divination will continue to elude scientific scrutiny because the intelligences behind the acts love to keep us confused.

 

[Helen]

Thank you, Steve. I would definitely recommend the book "The Occult Invasion" by Dave Hunt for anyone who is interested in what is happening to Christian churches and our culture right now. It is not something to be brushed off. It is something to be very concerned about and something we need to warn our children and others about.

Demons are not imaginary. No, they are not dancing in front of our faces, and most of our problems stem from our own sinful hearts before we are saved, but nevertheless, they sure seem to know how to take advantage of those who are willing to be deceived.

 

[Elena]

Originally posted by ChurchBoy:
Elena, UTEOTW

When you say that you believe the resurrection of Jesus Christ on "faith", does that mean the you never looked at any historical evidence or read books like The Case for Christ?

EF it means those books are irrelevant to my faith.

 

[Elena]

Originally posted by Helen:
[QB] Thank you, Steve. I would definitely recommend the book "The Occult Invasion" by Dave Hunt for anyone who is interested in what is happening to Christian churches and our culture right now. It is not something to be brushed off.

EF I agree, but not for the same reasons.

 

[NeilUnreal]

If I were to choose a religion because of what I wanted to be true, I would not be a Christian.

This is the closest thing I've ever read to a Christian koan.

-Neil

 

[Alcott]

Elena:
"Eyewitness testimony does not trump a controlled scientific test in this case. Eyewitnesses, as you should well know, can be highly unreliable. "

"I was given a gift of intelligence and that God does not want me to check my brains at the door and accept claims of demonic dowsers, fairies, UFO's, a global flood or any one of many false idols of God presented in the name of some religion."

'Do you accept the physical ressurection of Jesus Christ? If yes, what evidence that you examined convinced you that this historical event did happen?'
"I accept it as a matter of faith. Because of that, the evidence is irrelevant."

The question, I'm sure, is rather obvious... You have nothing in the way of evidence to show you Jesus Christ was resurrected from death. It is based entirely on eyewitness accounts,, which you said are "highly unreliable." You don't use your "gift of intelligence" on this topic, so you must "check your brain at the door," if we can trust your analysis of accepting any proclaimed truth in the abscence of evidence. Why would you believe anything, whatsoever, "as a matter of faith?"-- or is there anything else you do believe such that "evidence is irrelevant?"

 

[Elena]

The question, I'm sure, is rather obvious... You have nothing in the way of evidence to show you Jesus Christ was resurrected from death. It is based entirely on eyewitness accounts,, which you said are "highly unreliable."

EF That's why it's a matter of faith.

 

[Elena]

The evidence is irrelevant? Elana, do you believe that Christianity is indeed a "blind faith" rather than a reasonable faith? QUOTE]

EF Yup, it's blind faith. Sorry that this troubles you so.

 

[Alcott]

Originally posted by Elena:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
The question, I'm sure, is rather obvious... You have nothing in the way of evidence to show you Jesus Christ was resurrected from death. It is based entirely on eyewitness accounts,, which you said are "highly unreliable."

EF That's why it's a matter of faith. </font>[/QUOTE]Then get down to it and answer the question. Why do you believe anything of which there is no evidence? Was the gospel knocked into your head at an early age and you have not as yet been able to shake it loose? or what?

 

[Mike McK]

Originally posted by Elena:
EF Yup, it's blind faith. Sorry that this troubles you so.

I find it troubling that you would base your faith in Christ on blind faith.

Blind faith isn't faith at all. Rather, it's just wishful thinking.

 

[Mike McK]

Originally posted by Elena:
EF Oh my! Actually, this explains a lot regarding your creationist beliefs. Reality is not constituted by our beliefs. You don't make something true because you believe it to be true.

But you go on to do just this when you say that Christianity must be taken on "blind faith".

 

[mdkluge]

I was a bit reluctant to join the theological discussion here, since it seemed to be premised upon several posters publicly doubting the faith of another. However, since she persists in this discussion perhaps Elena is not as offended by questioning as I might be.

Elena wrote:

EF Yup, it's blind faith. Sorry that this troubles you so.

I would prefer "unseeing" to "blind" here. To be blind is to be unable to see. Yet those of us of faith can and do see alternatives to our faith. We do not directly see the object of our faith. Perhaps that is a special sort of blindness, but that term to me fails to capture the essence of the metaphor being invoked.

 

[Peter101]

&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;I dowsed in my pre-Christian days... back when I was an atheist myself. There is nothing quite like watching a Y-shaped stick beging to pull down the closer you get to a water source and then bend over so forcefully that the bark literally started to come off because you were gripping the branch so tightly and were TRYING to twist the branch back to the upright position because you thought dowsing was bunk and your atheistic worldview was being challenged. In other words, it wasn't some subconcious nervous twitch lowering the brach towards the ground... it was more like holding a limber fishing pole with a 5 pound bass hooked on the other end... the branch was BENT OVER from an unseen force&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;

I don't think this is nearly as mysterious as you think. Rather, I think it can be explained by the fact that some potential energy can be stored in the forked stick that then becomes kinetic energy at an unexpected time. That is, the forked stick was storing some energy in much the same way as a spring stores energy. I have tried dowsing my self a few times and although the forked stick sometimes bent downwards, I didn't find anything mysterious about it. Dowsing is an old bit of folklore that dies hard.

 

[Peter101]

&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;You laugh to yourself and tell yourself this is pretty stupid because everybody of any intelligence knows that dowsing is faked and there is nothing in nature on a calm day that can make a branch bend down. It must be a trick, and you are going to prove that it doesn’t work for you and your relatives are just playing a joke on you. &lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;

And in the traditional manner, you held the stick with one forked branch in each hand, didn't you?
Are you sure you really understand the natural forces that can come into play in the situation?

 

[Paul of Eugene]

Brother Sawyer, thank you for your post. I think your personal testimony is evidence that there is something more than the mere physical out there. After that, the experience by itself is singularly obscure in terms of giving us something to figure out what really happened. Dowsing, if the stories about it are to be trusted, seems to be a good thing rather than a bad thing and certainly the dowsers testimonies don't seem to be of a demonic leaning type of testimony. So the only thing I grasp from your experience is the thing I said at first - there is more than the mere physical out there.

In own spiritual quest God has been real to me and I've seen His hand and His guidance but nothing of that sort. It seems that I experience God's guidance in a way that makes the paranormal completely irrelevant. It would appear that your own testimony is of a similar nature. May God continue to guide you towards the true riches of His spiritual presence.