Ok, perhaps a recap is in order.
I said
quote:
But the same Public Relations can be applied to an atheist view of prayer.
If a believer gets what is asked for, it is merely chance, pure coincidence.
If a believer does not get what is asked for, then prayer is a futile activity.
Therefore, prayer always fails. With the right spin, the atheist can never be wrong.
This reply was in response to your corollary stating that according to believers, prayers can never fail.
Now I can’t prove that prayers
never fail nor can any atheist prove prayers
always fail. But just because there is no proof regarding prayers doesn’t mean that is an indictment on the existence of God.
I said:
quote:
Now, what is not often considered by atheists is this question. How often does a coincidence need to occur before it can begin to look no longer as a coincidence? Does the sum total of multiple coincidences occurring on a regular basis and often in quick succession constitute something other than one large coincidence? One might say no, it is just one large coincidence, until it happens to them..."
Here, I was trying to offer a scenario where all is not what it seems and that some events in life appear to be more than random chance. I do this in order to open the possibility that these events do not always have a plausible, identifiable, physical cause.
Of course, this does not further the belief in the supernatural and I would strongly hesitate to make such a leap.
Indeed, most people, (I know I am taking liberty with the use of the word most, no replies necessary), would simply say that not enough time and effort has been exerted to uncover a logical physical explanation.
For atheist, the quest for a physical explanation has no end. If one is not found, then the argument is simply that some day it will be. Believers get to a point where potential physical explanations have been stretched beyond limits and a supernatural cause begs to be recognized.
I was trying to show this using the hypothesis as foundation and also to show how it is possible that perfectly sane rational people come to a belief in God and that, in doing so, they have not suddenly become delusional.
Then crashfrog responds:
quote:
What is not often considered by believers is the fact that we have mathematical tools that can be applied to tell us what is coincidence and what is not, and that your freehand seat-of-your-pants estimation of significance is liable to be almost always completely wrong.
Here Crashfrog implies that mathematics can be used to determine whether an event or series of events (coincidences) have significance. To put it another way, that it is possible to prove mathematically that certain events are beyond random chance. I had not really considered the mathematical approach, so it intrigued me.
Then your response
quote:
Can I have an example of a set of occurrences, happening on a regular basis, in quick succession that are obviously supernatural in origin? Perhaps I missed this happening on the evening news...
Here begins the hypothetical discussion in order to show that my seat-of-your-pants estimation mentioned by crash is not necessarily wrong and, at the very least, has a rational basis.
NosyNed has been gracious enough to examine the mathematics of the hypothesis to determine whether such a series of events would be considered beyond mere chance. Based on his assessment, albeit filled with broad assumptions
Message 176, it is unlikely that these events are the result of random chance.
If the events can be shown to be beyond random chance then there must be a cause. And if the cause has been explored extensively and no viable physical explanation presents itself then causes outside of nature would, to some people, be feasible. Here is where believers and atheist part ways.
I am attempting to demonstrate that from the point of view of the individual
experiencing the phenomena, causes outside of nature would be possible. Of course it is easy for one to say; No, I would never consider that cause. It can’t happen, wouldn’t happen, and is simple nonsense. Your phenomena is uncanny, but purely random."
But we have already discussed how a hypothetical event might not be considered random chance. It wasn’t random even when the event selected, (hearing a song before turning on the radio), is not in itself a religious experience.
I have discussed religious conversions with many people and have read a fair amount about how people who were not initially religious come around to believing in God. There are, of course, blind ignorant people who look at a faith healer on stage, see a cure, and believe. It’s unfortunate that they are being duped, (and likely robbed of their wallets).
But this is only a small segment of believers. There are those who claim a feeling of energy through their bodies when they accept Jesus. Others claim that it is more of an inner feeling of being cleansed. Some, such as C.S. Lewis, claim to have come to faith through a rational thought process. Still others perceive a series of unlikely coincidences that defy explanation.
I don’t believe this should be unusual because I believe in a God who values a personal relationship with the believer. Since all of us are different, then we all have different thresholds for belief. For some, like C.S. Lewis, an ‘extraordinary’ event is not necessary.
For others, those who cannot make a leap of faith based solely on rational arguments, then I believe God finds the most appropriate method of communicating His presence. The communication is with the individual in question and not to the world via some supernatural extravaganza
I selected the hypothesis involving coincidences because that was how I came to believe. But the coincidences were not so mundane as hearing a song before it is played on the radio even though we have shown that it is unlikely to be random.
The events were personal, directed at me, and having significance for me alone. Events that by their very nature removed in my mind all probability that I was dealing with randomness. I was dealing with a personal communication from God that I found impossible to deny.
Does that make me delusional? Perhaps, all I can say is that since then, my life has changed for the better and I believe God has everything to do with that.
My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind. ---Albert Einstein