This has nothing to do with the supernatural.

When you see a couple of guys on TV claiming to be detecting ghosts and such, you should be very very skeptical of that claim. Just as you should be very skeptical when you get an email from a Nigerian who wants to make you money. It's just amazing to me that your first thought is, "oh these guys might have something here."

You asked me to point out the error in your reasoning. That error is that you are willing to believe a demon possessed a boy based on shaky second hand evidence. I understand what anecdotal evidence is, what I don't understand is how you are willing to believe something based only on anecdotal evidence.

My analogy is fine. You cannot understand or explain the boy's ability to speak English. Ancient people could not explain sickness. You're both using demon possession as your explanation.

1. I think it indicates a supernatural event. I'm just not sure if its from God or a less benevolent power. I find the number of viewers to be one of the most compelling details.

2. Outside of 2+2 most people including atheists probably aren't aware of this miracle. Most atheists would probably reject it and come up with their own cosmological explanation.

3. Impossible for me to come up with a number since I've only heard one person ever mention it and they were a Catholic. Though I saw a tv documentary on it once a year or two back. Do you think it was faked with tv equipment?

lol, you dont know what 'supernatural' means

lets say the story is true. what is the point? is god speaking through this child? if so, why?

secondly, why does god only do these kinds of things (allegedly speak english in a boy who doesnt speak english, or appear in a burrito in Tijuana) rather than do anything important or recognizable? why is it ALWAYS second hand anecdotal crap? and why is it never on camera?

Let's play the "chase the assertion" game for a while. Why do you believe this?

There's a difference between "skepticism" and accusing someone of being a liar (or hoaxer).

I'm allowing for the *POSSIBILITY* that there might be something to what they're doing, but I also put an upper limit to the extent to which I would believe their claims. I think this is "skepticism."

What you are doing is making accusations. You are asserting that it is a hoax and are using a wikipedia reference as your sole evidence.

Do you see the difference?

I am willing to believe it at the level of an anecdote. The level of confidence I have in the story is based on the level of perceived trustworthiness of the source. I am describing it as an anecdote, and not attempting to claim that it is any more than that. I think I have handled the evidence in an appropriate manner at every step.

The only thing that I believe based only on anecdotal evidence is the anecdote.

I don't believe God spoke through the boy. The following will only make sense if you are willing to suspend your disbelief about the supernatural temporarily.

The boy spoke out against what the lead minister was teaching. The Christian belief is that there is a spiritual war going on between good and evil, and it is the nature of the war that evil wants to prevent good from winning. Evil wins when the truth about God is not advanced. Therefore, the "purpose" of speaking through the boy is to prevent the advancement of the knowledge of God in the world.

You may now return to your disbelief.

What is "important" depends on what you view the "purpose" of an action is. In the above story, this was a "battle" of the spiritual war that is going on.

FWIW - I think seeing faces in your toast and that sort of thing is not miraculous. I think it is an error on "your side" to try to keep equating all spiritual things as all being equally valid.

Be honest with yourself. If I claimed to have been there and filmed it, and then showed you the film, you still wouldn't believe it. You would have other reasons, such as "that was an actor" or something like that.

of course i would, how could i not? but the question remains, why is it never on camera? ever.

as for the spiritual war, you should get into LOTR or Harry Potter. you have an imagination that needs some attention man.

I invite you to go play around on youtube for a while. Search "demon possession" or something like that. Either you will find one (or more) that you believe is a legitimate video and we can discuss the ramifications, or you will deny that any of them are real and that everyone is making a fake video.

Again - I asked you this earlier - if this miracle is true, does it not lend a massive amount of credence specifically to the Catholic belief system?

You are smart enough to know that this is a false dichotomy of massive proportions.

You're right, I did leave in a couple pronouns that were not specific enough:

Better?

how bout you pick a real one out for me? i dunno what to look for when it comes to demonic possession.

I won't because I want you to demonstrate that you are actually pursuing the question.

You want me to support my assertion that popularity is not evidence of the supernatural? You've got it backwards, you need to support your assertion that popularity is evidence of the supernatural.

What does the possibility have to do with anything? You're not claiming you believe in the supernatural because you've seen some stuff that could "possibly" have supernatural causes. This thread is about evidence for the supernatural. If your evidence is just that some things could be caused by the supernatural then just say so. If not, please provide some other evidence.

So if you only believe the anecdote, does that mean you do not believe that a demon possessed the child? If that's the case, how is this evidence of a supernatural event?

rofl.

im supposed to pursue the question by looking at videos on youtube>? i rarely say this, but i genuinely believe you need professional mental help.

Haven’t read the thread but I wanted to give you my opinion on the subject as I think this is a great example for faith.

I will try to answer this on behalf of those who have discovered a force more powerful then themselves as a result of self induced hardships.

A woman I know is being released from prison next month and she also claims to have found Jesus during her time behind bars. At the beginning of her sentence she was on suicide watch and was empty inside with no hope for her life. Now after almost two years I am informed of her religious discovery and that a positive change has taken place.

I myself also found Jesus after undergoing difficult times and it may seem that these circumstances happen quite frequently to those in trouble, but why? I think the answer is that believing in a supernatural force relieves a troubled person of their difficulties, in the form of, hope. It's faith. Faith that a power greater then yourself will guide you to the light of a new day. And when the burden of hardship is lifted it is only then that progress can be made.

But how much does one really know about themselves? I mean, how do you really know what you are capable of? You are correct about the guesswork and lack of evidence for a supernatural being, however, reasoning is obtainable. It is possible to come to a reasonable conclusion that a force greater then yourself exists and is therefore worth pursuing further knowledge of.

Jesus is, by theory, strength. Strength given to any man who has the faith to believe that He is real. I was attracted to the idea that I could accomplish anything. In my time of despair and lack of hope it was exactly what I needed to pull myself up. And I’m sure to a similar extent the situation was the same for the woman I know. So is it real, this hope? The results are real and I think the results are the reasonable conclusions that prompt further investigation.

I think personal results lead to this belief. Maybe not for all but speaking for myself I can say that seeking God produced enough of a hope to continue my search. I think you misunderstand that Christians see supernatural events that others do not. I think it’s more that we see the supernatural effect of life whereas others view it as commonplace. Something inside of me, my instinct, tells me that life as I know it is shadowed. And that there is something behind the scenes that I catch glimpses of.

Today I picked up the Bible and held it in my hand and just sat looking at it for a few moments. In my heart I felt the mystery and saw the irony of life written out in a book. It was all right there in the palm of my hands and yet it’s still a mystery. How did this story come to be and if this book was written as a fraud would we know it? I think we would. The story is too crazy to not be real. The Bible is the most read book ever and it’s about a guy who died, resurrected, and then disappeared. And we still can’t get a verdict of fiction or non-fiction so we throw it on the shelf under RELIGION.

im sure many people were comforted by their personal gods, or their personal supernatural beliefs all throughout history. you dont think people going to the Oracle at Delphi were at low points in their life, and subsequently found great comfort in its pronouncement? (and so on with every person and every book that says it has answers for you.) the hope you receive is an emotion, exclusive from the truth or falsity of the thing that gives you an emotion.

just like the thought of santa can delight a child despite his nonexistence, you can find joy and hope and comfort in your gods. the funny thing about the things you wrote above (aside from the last sentence) is that atheists will say the exact same thing.

I think you're quite right about this, but of course none of it is evidence that God exists or that any supernatural phenomena are actually real.

Tom Cruise could sell you on something even better.

The majority of the world has already formed a verdict and considers the bible to be fictional. It is only the Christians/Jews who have decided to believe the bible's claims because they choose to do this based on faith rather than objective evidence.

I’ll be fair with anyone who is willing to do the same in return. If we can use this: as a basis for debate then I propose:

If you are willing to admit that there’s a chance you are wrong and the supernatural realm does exist, then I am willing to admit there’s a chance that I am wrong and the supernatural realm doesn’t exist.

Fair enough?

I'm going to use "God" as my figure of speech for the "supernatural realm".

So if God does in fact exist then there’s not much discussion here I don’t think. Except there still may be the question of multiple Gods but I would consider that irrelevant because God existing would supercede any misunderstanding we have on this.

So now if I’m wrong and God doesn’t exist then please explain to me what I am missing out on. You claim that: If I along with all of these people are misled into believing that there is a source of strength, and actually found strength because of the belief, what did it hurt?

I told you that I'll be fair and admit that I may be wrong about God, but I fail to see why this is a losing battle for me. I pulled myself from addiction and a women I know is sitting in prison with peace in her heart because she has a faith that allows her to feel this peace. She claims to have gotten it from Jesus. Whether Jesus is alive doesn't matter, but the strength He is giving seems to be having a real life effect producing positive results. I don't think you can deny that.

True. But, how does one go about getting hope from Jesus if one doesn't believe in Jesus? I agree that hope is exclusive from the truth or falsity but my point is that real hope is being provided by the thought that such a supernatural being exists. What changes a person in prison like that? If not God, then what? Does the atheist find hope and meaning that allows inner peace through the duration of a prison sentence? Sure it's possible, but is it likely?

If God does exist then that means I along with everyone else share the same potential for use of our emotions regardless of whether or not we choose to believe. Just because I believe doesn’t mean that I can experience hope and an atheist cannot. But what it does mean is that my foundation is built around the presence of a being that provides far greater strength then what is known to man. And the atheist must rely on himself to seek his way through life. Every pitfall I run into I have God (immeasurable strength) to rely on and the atheist has himself, mere man.

When you were a kid were you happier when you believed in Santa or when you were told he wasn't real?

So assuming I'm wrong, would my life have been better had I never discovered this other realm of life? Say, if I had never been misled with false hope? This answer is clear as day my brother. This delusion has saved my life and given me a future.

Now on the flipside, what about you? Do you ever wonder what you're missing should you be wrong? Ever wonder what you coulda been? When it's all said and done are you going to be able to look yourself in the mirror and say you did all you could?

I assume this is a joke and you recognize the false dichotomy, and I'll leave it at that.

This is actually a bit of a stretch.

Obviously the following example is absurd, but it does make the point.


Imagine someone walks up to you, and says, "Peanut butter doesn't exist!"

You say, "Of course it does, I can show you."

He says, "No, you can't. I can probably show you it doesn't."

You say, "Well, we should debate."

He says, "Okay, good. For the purposes of debate, I'll admit there's the possibility that peanut butter exists, if you admit there's the possibility that it doesn't."

*****

What do you say here? You might say "Okay" but be honest - you'd be lying. You know peanut butter exists. Are you being closed minded because you believe it does?

Not saying I agree with religious fundamentalists. Just making the point that to them, the supernatural is as real as peanut butter. Beginning with "I'll debate, if you lie to me first" isn't going to get things off to a good start.

Also, both sides having the same (lack) of conviction is hardly a prerequisite for healthy debate.

all im talking about is its veracity. not its usefulness. besides, See: History of Religion for an answer to this very stupid question.

obviously

are you saying personal growth is impossible without a god? what changes them in prison? i dunno, how about a realization that their lives are a wreck and they need a change. besides, not everyone changes in prison.

probably not. you are correct, but for the 100,001st time on this forum...

usefulness != truth