TheologicalDisc presented a miracle on camera on another thread:

... I am not God so I don't know why He doesn't provide miracles on cameras, my guess is because God isn't concerened about whether or not people like you are impressed, not to mention that even if you were to see a miracle on camera you still wouldn't be impressed. Watch.

Miracle of the sun at Medjugorje

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlPHHl0AjZk

Just to be clear, he is not saying it actually is a miracle, just that it is an example of a miracle caught on camera.

So what do people think? Is this a miracle? If you think it is, how would you know it was sent by God, and not Satan?

Originally posted by The Pixie

TheologicalDisc presented a miracle on camera on another thread:

Just to be clear, he is not saying it actually is a miracle, just that it is an example of a miracle caught on camera.

So what do people think? Is this a miracle? If you think it is, how would you know it was sent by God, and not Satan?

I am so sick and tired of people thinking they have a point because they're too ignorant to understand they don't. It's the equivalent of tackling someone in a boxing match and putting them in an arm bar and screaming victory and wondering why the judges and the rest of the crowd don't agree.

Originally posted by The Pixie

TheologicalDisc presented a miracle on camera on another thread:

Just to be clear, he is not saying it actually is a miracle, just that it is an example of a miracle caught on camera.

So what do people think? Is this a miracle? If you think it is, how would you know it was sent by God, and not Satan?

Pixie, doesn't he have a point, though? He posted a video (which I did not see) that apparently shows a realistic-looking suspension of natural law. His point was that you wouldn't accept it as evidence, so why demand it of God? You'd be right to not accept it as evidence given the potential for technological trickery today, but that's why atheists shouldn't be demanding such things from deities (if that is what you were doing. Maybe it wasn't).

The thing was though, he presented it as a "gotcha! we do have video evidence of miracles"

Pai,

It isn't even technological trickery, watch the video.

Originally posted by Pai Geacademe

Pixie, doesn't he have a point, though? He posted a video (which I did not see) that apparently shows a realistic-looking suspension of natural law. His point was that you wouldn't accept it as evidence, so why demand it of God? You'd be right to not accept it as evidence given the potential for technological trickery today, but that's why atheists shouldn't be demanding such things from deities (if that is what you were doing. Maybe it wasn't).

wow, I am surprised that you of all people got the point I was trying to make.

Originally posted by Jaecp

The thing was though, he presented it as a "gotcha! we do have video evidence of miracles"

No I didn't you ignorant half wit. This is just you hitting a straw man. Surprisingly, Pai understands the point I was making just fine.

Atheists are completely closed minded because they won't believe everything they see in a video clip is an accurate representation of what happened and accept the first interpretation suggested.

EDIT - After peeking at the other thread, it seems it's more like you're saying Atheists won't ever consider video persuasive evidence of a miracle if they doubt any video someone claims is evidence of a miracle.

Originally posted by TheologicalDisc

wow, I am surprised that you of all people got the point I was trying to make.

Don't get too cocky. Pixie still has a more sound epistemology than you. Atheists have always trumped Christians in understanding the record in the crust, skies, and DNA. That takes a certain amount of sophistication you don't have.

Originally posted by Seasanctuary

Atheists are completely closed minded because they won't believe everything they see in a video clip is an accurate representation of what happened and accept the first interpretation suggested.

How about my original point? which would be atheists shouldn't be asking nor expecting for miracles on camera because they will both not be impressed and look for and favor an alternate explanation thus making it pointless for miracles to be put on camera, thus answering ones question as to why God might be 'camera shy.'

Originally posted by Pai Geacademe

Don't get too cocky. Pixie still has a more sound epistemology than you. Atheists have always trumped Christians in understanding the record in the crust, skies, and DNA. That takes a certain amount of sophistication you don't have.

No one is getting cocky. Furthermore not only do you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about in regards to epistemology and because of that have absolutely nothing to make an accurate comparison on.

Originally posted by TheologicalDisc

No one is getting cocky. Furthermore not only do you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about in regards to epistemology and because of that have absolutely nothing to make an accurate comparison on.

This coming from a guy who started the thread on evolution titled "Admittedly Ignorant, But Still Unconvinced." If you're ignorant, of course you'll be unconvinced. =) That's why you have to educate yourself. In your case, it probably wouldn't help because the Jerry Falwells and Ray Comforts sabotaged your cognitive processes while you were soft and impressionable.

Originally posted by Pai Geacademe

This coming from a guy who started the thread on evolution titled "Admittedly Ignorant, But Still Unconvinced." If you're ignorant, of course you'll be unconvinced. =) That's why you have to educate yourself. In your case, it probably wouldn't help because the Jerry Falwells and Ray Comforts sabotaged your cognitive processes while you were soft and impressionable.

You're under the very incorrect impression that I am unconvinced because I am ignorant or my ignorance has anything to do with my skepticism. You're also under the very incorrect assumption that the jerry falwells and ray comforts have anything to do with either my cognitive process, my skepticism of evolution, or anything that has to do with me for that matter. Like always, when defending your gospel of darwin, you look like a complete idiot with your stuipd assumptions. Like I said, you have no idea what you're talking about.

Originally posted by TheologicalDisc

You're under the very incorrect impression that I am unconvinced because I am ignorant or my ignorance has anything to do with my skepticism.

Again, your title said: "Admittedly Ignorant" -- meaning you know nothing or next to nothing about evolution -- "But Still Unconvinced." LOL. That means you know crap-all about epistemology. If you're ignorant, then you educate yourself. Then, if you still don't understand it, you come back with "Well Studied,
But Still Unconvinced." It's okay to be incredulous, TD. Lots of scientists are because it's an incredible story. Purposefully ignorant is a whole other matter. That's unbecoming of a Christian, I hear. ;)

You're also under the very incorrect assumption that the jerry falwells and ray comforts have anything to do with either my cognitive process, my skepticism of evolution, or anything that has to do with me for that matter. Like always, when defending your gospel of darwin, you look like a complete idiot with your stuipd assumptions. Like I said, you have no idea what you're talking about.

Gospel of Darwin is the terminology of fundamentalists who fear their primate lineage (eg the Robertsons and MacArthurs). Strobel et al brainwashed you with derivative kindergartenish crap. It's not really your fault. But you ARE missing out on true appreciation of the general revelation. It's fascinating.

Put down your comic books. Grow a pair and examine it.

Originally posted by Pai Geacademe

Again, your title said: "Admittedly Ignorant" -- meaning you know nothing or next to nothing about evolution -- "But Still Unconvinced." LOL. That means you know crap-all about epistemology. If you're ignorant, then you educate yourself. Then, if you still don't understand it, you come back with "Well Studied,
But Still Unconvinced." It's okay to be incredulous, TD. Lots of scientists are because it's an incredible story. Purposefully ignorant is a whole other matter. That's unbecoming of a Christian, I hear. ;)



Gospel of Darwin is the terminology of fundamentalists who fear their primate lineage (eg the Robertsons and MacArthurs). Strobel et al brainwashed you with derivative kindergartenish crap. It's not really your fault. But you ARE missing out on true appreciation of the general revelation. It's fascinating.

Put down your comic books. Grow a pair and examine it.

Good post, Pai, I agree with much of what you are saying. :)

Originally posted by Seasanctuary

EDIT - After peeking at the other thread, it seems it's more like you're saying Atheists won't ever consider video persuasive evidence of a miracle if they doubt any video someone claims is evidence of a miracle.

This is what I understand TD is arguing. The point is that if he finds a clearly fake video, and atheists reject it, then how does that support his claim?

If there are, say, three Christians, including TD, who are willing to say "Yes, this looks like it probably is a real miracle", and yet atheists reject it, then he has a point.

If both Christians and atheists reject this as a fake, then he as proved nothing.

As yet no Christian has watched the video and then stated it is plausible, so how can you draw any such conclusion about atheists?

Originally posted by The Pixie

This is what I understand TD is arguing.

Like always, your understanding is hilariously incorrect. Try dealing with my original position found in post #9. Not only that but you've effectively ignored my previous posts which show your assertion to be incorrect:

The point is that if he finds a clearly fake video, and atheists reject it, then how does that support his claim?

You're assuming I knowingly posted a fake video. This is incorrect. All I simply did was link a miracle caught on camera, I neither care nor do I know if the miracle is fake or not, but the real point is that the Christians experiencing the miracle on the video and on the website think it is genuine, thus you have no point at all. All you're doing is repeating yourself and ignoring what I say.