Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evidence for the Supernatural
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 76 of 107 (650305)
01-29-2012 10:48 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by crashfrog
01-29-2012 10:38 AM


Re: Debating Skeptics
Crashfrog, l plan to cite other evidence, but let's discuss this most significant one for now. There's plenty of time for more. I'm limited in how much time I can expend on this, having a lot of other activity, including a business etc.
How about you go at the Jew/Israel and debunk it before getting all hept up for more?

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
Someone wisely said something ;ike, "Before fooling with a fool, make sure the fool is a fool."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by crashfrog, posted 01-29-2012 10:38 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by crashfrog, posted 01-30-2012 9:49 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(2)
Message 77 of 107 (650306)
01-29-2012 10:52 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Buzsaw
01-29-2012 10:31 PM


Re: Debating Skeptics (Sometime A Venture In Futility
Buz, this is about as convincing as the Nostradamus predictions--they can be interpreted, after the fact, to apply to almost anything.
From Wiki:
Most academic sources maintain that the associations made between world events and Nostradamus's quatrains are largely the result of misinterpretations or mistranslations (sometimes deliberate) or else are so tenuous as to render them useless as evidence of any genuine predictive power. Moreover, none of the sources listed offers any evidence that anyone has ever interpreted any of Nostradamus's quatrains specifically enough to allow a clear identification of any event in advance.
Or, in other words:
It does not pay a prophet to be too specific.
L. Sprague de Camp

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Buzsaw, posted 01-29-2012 10:31 PM Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 78 of 107 (650307)
01-29-2012 11:04 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by Trixie
01-29-2012 9:46 AM


Re: Debating Skeptics
Trixie writes:
Buz, the thread title is "Evidence for the supernatural". When you resurrected this long-dead thread it was reasonable to assume you were either going to request evidence or supply evidence. So far all we've got is a vague claim about a fulfilled prophesy, a prophesy you don't even provide a proper source for.
Trixie, anyone literate can read the evidence which I've cited. If you think it's vague, how about telling the folks how so you consider it vague?
Again, as I've posted, deal with this and then we move on.
Finally, the sour grapes over a Great Debate topic doesn't cut it. For someone who hits the "Jeers" button regardless of post quality, but based on which side of the debate someone is on, your whinge is ironic. All those times you jeered people for purely partisan reasons,........
You're falsely maligning me, Check them out more carefully. You see that they are hit and miss, depending on the content of the message.
As for my suggestion to Warthog, all I did was suggest that if he/she cared to one could check out the Thread titles. Some of them would likely cite others. Other than that, be patient. The one at have should have you plate full for now.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
Someone wisely said something ;ike, "Before fooling with a fool, make sure the fool is a fool."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Trixie, posted 01-29-2012 9:46 AM Trixie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Trixie, posted 01-30-2012 4:00 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 79 of 107 (650309)
01-29-2012 11:23 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by PaulK
01-29-2012 9:44 AM


Re: Meldinoor, Reconsidering?
PaulK writes:
Meldinoor was a Christian who became an agnostic during his time at EvC Message 1 I think that the "cheer" is just a conversion of a rating given under the previous system, not a sign that Meldinoor has been around lately.
The significant thing is that he essentially declared my OP irrefutable, knowing that he would not prevail in the debate.
I take it as a hopeful indication that Meldinoor has had 2nd thoughts and reconsidered the awful decision to cast off Christianity and go agnostic publicly. I hope to, by and by, meet him inside Heaven's pearly gates.
ABE: Cavediver, take note.
Edited by Buzsaw, : Change name
Edited by Buzsaw, : As noted

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
Someone wisely said something ;ike, "Before fooling with a fool, make sure the fool is a fool."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by PaulK, posted 01-29-2012 9:44 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by PaulK, posted 01-30-2012 1:45 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 82 by Trixie, posted 01-30-2012 4:21 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 80 of 107 (650311)
01-30-2012 1:45 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by Buzsaw
01-29-2012 11:23 PM


Re: Meldinoor, Reconsidering?
quote:
The significant thing is that he essentially declared my OP irrefutable, knowing that he would not prevail in the debate.
He certainly didn't say anything of the sort in the debate thread.
He only post there said:
Sorry about the delay folks. I'm currently in bed with strep throat and a fever, and will postpone my reply until I'm feeling a little better. It's not easy to produce well thought-out posts when you're choking on your own tonsils.
Message 5
Nothing there about your post being irrefutable.
And of course, it isn't true that your post is irrefutable. You don't even do much to lay out a case. I'm certain that I could soundly defeat you, yet again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Buzsaw, posted 01-29-2012 11:23 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Trixie
Member (Idle past 3706 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 81 of 107 (650313)
01-30-2012 4:00 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by Buzsaw
01-29-2012 11:04 PM


Re: Debating Skeptics
The only "evidence" you've cited in this thread is a link to your own opening post in the Great Debate! As you yourself noted, your post in the Great Debate wasn't debated, therefore it's content is a bunch of untested assertions. Yes, in that post you quote various passages from the Bible, but are they relevant? So bring them here and lets get to it.
It's not the job of other posters to make your case for you in this thread. You brought this thread back, no-one else. If you're not going to provide your evidence in this thread, why did you bother?
You feel your jeers were justified so we'll leave it at that - it's obviously in the eye of the beholder.
I don't understand your last sentence. Care to elaborate or fill in the missing words?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Buzsaw, posted 01-29-2012 11:04 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Trixie
Member (Idle past 3706 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 82 of 107 (650314)
01-30-2012 4:21 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by Buzsaw
01-29-2012 11:23 PM


Re: Meldinoor, Reconsidering?
The significant thing is that he essentially declared my OP irrefutable, knowing that he would not prevail in the debate.
This should not pass without comment. As Paul pointed out, he declared nothing of the sort and you know it! Now, if it was an honest mistake on your part, that's one thing, but you have amply demonstrated that this was never, on God's green earth, an honest mistake. It is a deliberate falsehood in an attempt to rewrite part of your history here. The phrase "lying for Jeebus" springs to mind.
What part of "Thou shalt not bear false witness" do you not understand?
Edited by Trixie, : Formatting error corrected

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Buzsaw, posted 01-29-2012 11:23 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Pressie, posted 01-30-2012 4:44 AM Trixie has replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 83 of 107 (650316)
01-30-2012 4:44 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by Trixie
01-30-2012 4:21 AM


Re: Meldinoor, Reconsidering?
Although I did not participate, I read the thread Buz referred to. There's not anything even vaguely resembling the outcome Buz is trying to indicate. I think that he is telling porkies (although I also realise that porkies are all he has)!
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Trixie, posted 01-30-2012 4:21 AM Trixie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Trixie, posted 01-30-2012 5:27 AM Pressie has not replied

  
Trixie
Member (Idle past 3706 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 84 of 107 (650319)
01-30-2012 5:27 AM
Reply to: Message 83 by Pressie
01-30-2012 4:44 AM


Re: Meldinoor, Reconsidering?
It was a Great Debate and as such no-one other than the two of them was allowed to post which is why Buz's assertions remained unrefuted. The only reason they were unrefuted was because they were "undiscussed"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Pressie, posted 01-30-2012 4:44 AM Pressie has not replied

  
Warthog
Member (Idle past 3968 days)
Posts: 84
From: Earth
Joined: 01-18-2012


Message 85 of 107 (650332)
01-30-2012 8:27 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by Buzsaw
01-29-2012 10:31 PM


Re: Debating Skeptics (Sometime A Venture In Futility
I don't understand...
Ezekiel 37:25 and Genesis 13:14 seem to say that the Jews will get Israel forever, while Amos 9:14 contradicts this by stating that they will be 'plucked up out of their land'. Which of these are the true prophecies?
quote:
Then you look up recent history and find that the long time relatively desolate land has been irrigated, blooming and that Israel is the only nation in that region of the world that actually exports produce. You find that there's been numerous wars as all of the large Islamic nations have tried to knock out Israel, etc, etc.
recent history shows me a politically engineered state created to mitigate religious conflicts between the Jews and the Arabs, beginning with the Peel Commission of 1937 - the first suggestion from the then dominant British for a two state solution. After WWII and the creation of Israel as a separate state, the US got involved an the area and turned Israel into a defacto military base.
Since then, the tiny nation of Israel defends itself against all odds by the enthusiastic flexing of a military that costs the US almost 2 Billion dollars a year to fund, dwarfing its opposition.
The reason I bring all of this up is that, go figure - I don't find any of this unusual and here's why...
With a strong cultural and religious tradition closely tied to their ethnicity and status as the 'Chosen People', the Jews would naturally preserve their identity in this manner. Mostly, this is normal and universal cultural/social behaviour - The Romani people have managed this for up to 3000 years without even the bonding element of a historical homeland or exclusive religion.
If you add to this some good old fashioned religious persecution from the offspring of Judaism - Christianity and Islam - you have the formula to create an armour-plated culture resistant to outside forces. Xenophobia even.
Remember that it was (partly) Jewish Terrorism which led to the creation of the modern State of Israel. As one of the core wishes of the Jewish culture was to return to the holy land, it is hardly surprising that there was a consistent effort to make this happen after the turmoil and displacement of war. Consider also the consider the horrific details of the time regarding the Jews, which could only strengthen this desire.
While there are a few correct predictions, my research into the history of the bible suggests that at least some of them were written after the fact, which lessens their prophetic nature somewhat. As Coyote pointed out, none are specific enough to be truly credible as individual cases. Message 77
I'm pretty sure that you'll disagree with me but I don't see any of this as evidence for the powers of prophecy.
I certainly don't see it as evidence for the supernatural. That would require backup from archaeology as a minimum. I have not found any - mostly the opposite or nothing at all.
Still hoping you have more information that you have not shared yet.
Edited by Warthog, : Broken link fix

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Buzsaw, posted 01-29-2012 10:31 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


(3)
Message 86 of 107 (650336)
01-30-2012 9:49 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by Buzsaw
01-29-2012 10:48 PM


Re: Debating Skeptics
How about you go at the Jew/Israel and debunk it before getting all hept up for more?
Well, ok, here's what you're overlooking that makes me find the re-establishment of Israel not all that "miraculous." It's safe to say that your position relies chiefly on two facts:
1) That Israel was "coincidentally" re-established right where it used to exist, and
2) That the Jews "miraculously" were able to survive as a people over 19 centuries of displacement and oppression.
1). Is there any evidence that everybody forgot where Israel used to be? It seems to me that the Bible is fairly clear about where Israel had been, and that Israel was the ancestral nation of Jews, so it's hardly surprising that if someone - anyone - were to go about creating ex nihilo a country for Jews, they'd put it where Israel used to be and call it "Israel." Again it's not the fulfillment of prophecy when you set out to deliberately fulfill it.
2) Are today's Jews the same people as the people of ancient Israel? I don't see that they are, for the most part:
(Born-abroad Israeli Jews by nation of birth.)
As you can see, the majority of Israel's returning Jews are overwhelmingly of Central Asian birth, not of Middle East descent. You can see a better breakdown here. Judaism is a creed in addition to an ethnicity - people can decide to be Jews - and after 19 centuries of displacement, about the only thing they have in common with the Jews of ancient Israel is the religion. The survival of the Jewish people is as much a story of evangelism as it is of cohesion. Don't get me wrong, it's admirable. I just don't see it as "miraculous." That's hardly the world's oldest continual culture - Hindus have had a continuous culture and record of history for over 4000 years. But somehow I doubt that prompts you towards the veneration of Vishnu.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Buzsaw, posted 01-29-2012 10:48 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by Buzsaw, posted 01-30-2012 12:40 PM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 88 by Buzsaw, posted 01-30-2012 1:46 PM crashfrog has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 87 of 107 (650347)
01-30-2012 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by crashfrog
01-30-2012 9:49 AM


Re: Debating Skeptics
posted by accident
Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by crashfrog, posted 01-30-2012 9:49 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 88 of 107 (650351)
01-30-2012 1:46 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by crashfrog
01-30-2012 9:49 AM


Re: Israel's Occupation
Well, ok, here's what you're overlooking that makes me find the re-establishment of Israel not all that "miraculous." It's safe to say that your position relies chiefly on two facts:
1) That Israel was "coincidentally" re-established right where it used to exist, and
2) That the Jews "miraculously" were able to survive as a people over 19 centuries of displacement and oppression.
No. That is not my position. My position is that in the latter days the nation of Israel will be established upon the same land which the nation existed in ancient times when the prophecies were spoken. This does not mean that every square mile of the promised land will suddenly be occupied. It means that it will be within the promised borders. That's why Israel gave the Sinai Peninsula back to Egypt after they took it in the 1967 Six Day War. That's why Israel has never tried to expand their borders beyond what was predicted and what was rightfully allotted to them by Jehovah.
Other messianic prophecies relative to declare that when messiah comes and sets up his unending kingdom in the land that it will all eventually be restored to the nation.
Crash and others, that's why one must corroborate all of the prophecies relative to this so as to get the aggregate of their fulfillment. I've been into these, studiously, for over 60 years as a youth. I know the prophecies and have done my home work on them. It's not well assimilated by cherry picking novices.
I get hammered in science if I go beyond my capability. That does not mean you or I cannot delved into them, raise questions and debate some of it as we do.
This was not to be a coincidence as you allege. It was to be by the providence of Jehovah who inspired the prophets to predict the events.
The ancient people were not to "miraculously" survive all those centuries. Their descendants, regardless of where they would be born, i.e. Jews, would come out of the nations and migrate back to the land from which their ancient forbears lived.
The prophecy declares that there will be nations which will oppose the Jew's occupation and contend for their land in the latter days when of their re-emergence as a nation.
A reading of Ezekiel, chapters 35 - 38 give a detailed sequence and account of this phenomena. My position is the scriptural one, that there would be nations opposing the resurgence of Israel and contend for the land, as is all over our news media today.
For example, in Ezekiel 35, the prophet predicted that the occupants of the land of Edom would claim two nations, i.e. both Israel and Edom as their own lands. The Palestinians who are clamoring for the demise of Israel and who now occupy part of ancient Israel's land now occupy ancient Edom
There are other prophecies that predict that all of the old promised land will be restore to Israel and a descendant of David will rule over them. I don't have that source on the top of my head and don't have time just now to look it up.
crashfrog writes:
2) Are today's Jews the same people as the people of ancient Israel? I don't see that they are, for the most part:
(Born-abroad Israeli Jews by nation of birth.)
As you can see, the majority of Israel's returning Jews are overwhelmingly of Central Asian birth, not of Middle East descent. You can see a better breakdown here. Judaism is a creed in addition to an ethnicity - people can decide to be Jews - and after 19 centuries of displacement, about the only thing they have in common with the Jews of ancient Israel is the religion.
Crashy, surely you've got enough smarts to know that where ever Jews reside, they are identifiable as descendants of ancient Jews. For example, in NYC, Jews are Jews are Jews, regardless of whether they are atheistic, Christian Jews or orthodox Jews.
Some decades ago a large C47 was gutted and airlifted a thousand Blackish Ethiopian Jews to Israel. Over the centuries, evidently there was some micro-evolving pertaining to them and enough Negro blood in their genes to change the color of their skin. Nevertheless, genetically, they were identifiable as Jews. This alone is phenomenal.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
Someone wisely said something ;ike, "Before fooling with a fool, make sure the fool is a fool."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by crashfrog, posted 01-30-2012 9:49 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by jar, posted 01-30-2012 1:54 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 90 by crashfrog, posted 01-30-2012 1:59 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 91 by PaulK, posted 01-30-2012 2:06 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 92 by DrJones*, posted 01-30-2012 2:11 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 89 of 107 (650353)
01-30-2012 1:54 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by Buzsaw
01-30-2012 1:46 PM


Re: Israel's Occupation
Jerusalem was not in Israel.
And if it is still to happen then it is most definitely unfulfilled prophecy.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Buzsaw, posted 01-30-2012 1:46 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 90 of 107 (650354)
01-30-2012 1:59 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by Buzsaw
01-30-2012 1:46 PM


Re: Israel's Occupation
My position is that in the latter days the nation of Israel will be established upon the same land which the nation existed in ancient times when the prophecies were spoken.
Well, ok, but where else would you establish it?
Should I be impressed that the tea "miraculously" never fails to take on the shape of the inside of the teacup?
Their descendants, regardless of where they would be born, i.e. Jews, would come out of the nations and migrate back to the land from which their ancient forbears lived.
That's what I'm getting at, though. Their "forebears" didn't live there because, for about half of all Israeli Jews, their forebears weren't the Jews of ancient Israel. The population of Israel aren't, for the most part, descendants of anybody who ever lived in Israel before 1947.
Crashy, surely you've got enough smarts to know that where ever Jews reside, they are identifiable as descendants of ancient Jews.
No more than my wife is the descendant of my grandfather. You can argue the Bible, Buz, but you can't argue with genetics. That someone is Jewish does not mean that they have any particular ancestry of the ancient Jews of Old Israel.
For example, in NYC, Jews are Jews are Jews, regardless of whether they are atheistic, Christian Jews or orthodox Jews.
You only think that because you don't know anything about Jews. There are Ashkenazi Jews, Mizrahi Jews, Sephardi Jews, and even Jews of Chinese extraction called the "Kaifeng Jews." They're united by a common religion, but there's a dozen independent peoples within that religion. To say that "Jews are Jews" and therefore all Jews are the descendants of Ancient Israel is as dumb as saying that you and Jar are both Christians, therefore you're related. You may be Brothers in Christ but Jesus didn't mean that to imply genetic sequence identity.
Over the centuries, evidently there was some micro-evolving pertaining to them and enough Negro blood in their genes to change the color of their skin.
Jesus, Buz, we don't say "Negro" anymore. Catch up with the times, you old racist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Buzsaw, posted 01-30-2012 1:46 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024