[CliveG]

I do recall one anecdote of prayer working. A visiting preacher told the congregation (I  used to sing in church choirs!) how he had prayed that his sick daughter could die in peace. His prayer was answered and just for one night no bombs fell on north London - the Luftwaffe destroyed Coventry Cathedral instead.

Hmmm. Interesting. Seems there was a price to pay - or at least make the man think carefully about what he prays for.

They say be careful what you wish for - you may just get it.

[CliveG]

The difference between your evidence and my evidence is that yours is mechanical and limited and mine is personal and experienced by individuals.

Do you understand what
Anecdote  <>  evidence
means?

Your state as a confirmed absolute that I have no evidence simply because you reject my evidence.

You have not put forward any evidence for me to reject.
You have told me stories.

Do you understand the difference?

You insist that the physical universe IS absolutely physical and that there is not possibility of it being a virtual reality.

If you think that's true then show me where I said it.
(spoiler alert; I didn't)

Is psychology a science or not? And does it not rely heavily on the personal stories of what people are experiencing? Do you know of a meter that can measure thoughts and feelings to the extent they can pick up where an intuition is coming from.

You are so locked onto anecdote, anecdote, anecdote that it shows how afraid you are that you might just be wrong. All the years of denial wasted. However, don't sweat it too much. I was an atheist at 13 and only became an unbiased agnostic at 45. Then only swayed to serious consideration that there was a God when I was 60.

The interesting part is that I always believed in ghosts, mental telepathy and predicting the future. That belief never wavered because I had so much personal evidence from the time I was a small child.

[Bored chemist]

Is psychology a science or not?

Well, you refuse to accept that the cause of your problem is psychological.
So, you tell me.
Is it science- in which case you are wrong, or is it not, in which case you are wrong.

Do you know of a meter that can measure thoughts and feelings t

Several
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrocardiography
https://www.healthline.com/health/cortisol-urine

s to the extent they can pick up where an intuition is coming from.

You made that condition up, and it makes no sense.
Psychology does not "pick up where an intuition is coming from."
So you are setting up a straw man
You really like logical fallacy don't you?

You are so locked onto anecdote, anecdote, anecdote

I'm not the one whose whole "point" depends on pretending that an anecdote is proof.

Then only swayed to serious consideration that there was a God when I was 60.

I was thinking about how people seem to read the Bible a whole lot more as they get older; then it dawned on me - they're cramming for their final exam.

George Carlin

[CliveG]

This "rule" is not mine. It has been known for centuries.

Somebody made up that rule to take advantage from the gullibles.

Spirit and religion are probably among the most abused areas of humankind. And that rule is tailor made as a Get out of Jail Card. Uri Geller - total fake. Made so much money that he could keep his detractors quiet with law suits. Easy to spot because blatant breaking of the laws of physics is not allowed. Preacher who sits in God's lap and has fireside chats. Total fake who has fooled many and become rich. I had to point out to a Christian that the Bible says that communication with God is very difficult and indirect.

No. The rule is made up by those who have gifts. They all know they cannot be tested because they all try testing themselves. I did. I have spoken to a number of people I believe to have a gift. They all had stories of testing themselves. The charlatans abuse the rules. Do you think they have a great afterlife? No. They do not believe in spirit or they would not abuse it.

Once more. The huge number of fakes discourages people who are natural skeptics but it does not disprove the truth of the rule.

[Bored chemist]

The interesting part is that I always believed in ghosts, mental telepathy and predicting the future. That belief never wavered because I had so much personal evidence from the time I was a small child.

I think the relevant passage is 1 Corinthians 13:11

When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

[Bored chemist]

Easy to spot because blatant breaking of the laws of physics is not allowed.

I always believed in ghosts, mental telepathy and predicting the future.

When you have finished arguing with yourself, bring your conclusions back here.

I had to point out to a Christian that the Bible says that communication with God is very difficult and indirect.

And there was me thinking it said
"But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you."

Do you want "chapter and verse" on that?

They all know they cannot be tested because they all try testing themselves. I did.

So, did you pass or fail?

[Bored chemist]

Once more. The huge number of fakes discourages people who are natural skeptics but it does not disprove the truth of the rule.

The whole point of "the rule" is that it makes it impossible to prove it either way.
A damned good  rhetorical device, but bugger all actual use.

[CliveG]

The interesting part is that I always believed in ghosts, mental telepathy and predicting the future. That belief never wavered because I had so much personal evidence from the time I was a small child.

I think the relevant passage is 1 Corinthians 13:11

When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

And what is childish about about observing the universe and strange events that happen? My belief in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny disappeared as childish but fun beliefs. The ghost stories and spirit only got more convincing as I got older and was better able to evaluate them. And had more of them.

You dismiss the events as told to you because you start by assuming they have no factual basis. THEN you round up the usual suspects - namely arguments typically used without thought to dismiss the observations as faulty.

These observations deal with the hard problem of consciousness and just how faulty a human brain can be. I am constantly amazed that more cars do not hit trees that jump in front of them. Trillions of hours of human brains working at a very consistent level without fault. And yet you have no problem pointing to "glitches" I have which only apparently occur with regard to the supernatural.

[CliveG]

(snip)

They all know they cannot be tested because they all try testing themselves. I did.

So, did you pass or fail?

I failed because of the rule. I am surprized you even ask.

BTW. Wow. Did you study the Bible or do you get all your quotes from other sites? Was it beaten into you? If so, I am not surprized you are so strong an atheist. You are at the limits of the scale of non-believer to believer.

[CliveG]

Once more. The huge number of fakes discourages people who are natural skeptics but it does not disprove the truth of the rule.

The whole point of "the rule" is that it makes it impossible to prove it either way.
A damned good  rhetorical device, but bugger all actual use.

The rule is very very useful. It allows those who know the rules to immediately dismiss claims by the charlatans. Another example is the book by the 12 year boy who died and claimed he went to heaven. I knew immediately it was a fake. The boy subsequently confessed to a total lie.

If you set up a game that was virtual reality and supposed to be highly realistic, would you want the avatars to know they are not real and that reality could be arbitrarily changed? No, of course not.

If you sent kids out on an adventure and told them they were on their own, would you then let them see the monitoring devices that are being used to keep tabs on them? No, of course not.

This is why you are so illogical with your arguments. And why the rules make sense and are logical. Another aspect of scientific study.

You refuse to concede even one minor point for fear your whole hypothesis that there absolutely are no Gods or supernatural beings might crumble. Your hypothesis only is logical if you start with the presumption that there is no God and that we are not in a virtual reality.

You use all the standard contradictions in the traditional religions without conceding that they need an update and a rationalization just as various branches of science needed. You are the one arguing with yourself.

[CliveG]

I do recall one anecdote of prayer working. A visiting preacher told the congregation (I  used to sing in church choirs!) how he had prayed that his sick daughter could die in peace. His prayer was answered and just for one night no bombs fell on north London - the Luftwaffe destroyed Coventry Cathedral instead.

I had another thought. We keep thinking God is in total control and omni-all. As part of the game he has an adversary - namely Satan or the Devil. So while God gets to grant a few prayers, so does the Devil. In this case, there may have been a balancing of wishes where God granted the pray but Satan got to bomb a Cathedral.

I visited a psychic and asked her if she knows whether she gets informed by the good spirits or the bad spirits. She said she had never thought about it. She just gave answers that came to her. An evil person may get information from an evil spirit.

When Trump prays for a success in a military attack, and the target is praying for American disaster, who gets their prayers answered? The Devil wants as much conflict and destruction as possible (Shiva the God of Destruction) and God tries to mitigate it and have people strive to better themselves. It is under strife and conflict that one see the good in people come to the fore. So to the evil in others.

Remember it is all an illusion to entertain the Ultimate Intelligence. My most vivid memory of the experience of having the universe just end and then restart was that the Ultimate Intelligence was lonely and bored when compared to the life of a human. I have been blessed with an extraordinarily interesting life. Some see it as a curse. Not me. I also remember it had no human attributes such as form or emotion or sex and had no morals or ethics. It was neither good nor bad. No space or time. And much more real that our current reality.

But one plays the Game - and God is a part. Choose your side. It is difficult to remain neutral and on the sidelines.

[Bored chemist]

The rule is very very useful. It allows those who know the rules to immediately dismiss claims by the charlatans.

It also allows me to dismiss claims by you- since you are making those claims to bolster your own personal standing.

I failed because of the rule.

So, you tried to predict things, and you failed.
Why are you bragging about your success?

I am surprized you even ask.

I guess you now see why I asked.
You set yourself up to fail.

You dismiss the events as told to you because you start by assuming they have no factual basis.

No, (for the millionth time f telling you), I dismiss them because there is no supporting evidence.

These observations deal with the hard problem of consciousness and just how faulty a human brain can be.

It's good to see we agree on something.

I am constantly amazed that more cars do not hit trees that jump in front of them.

And yet you have no problem pointing to "glitches" I have which only apparently occur with regard to the supernatural.

No
As usual, you are resorting to a straw man attack.
What I have said is things like you are looking at the placebo effect, but not recognising it or you are a victim of confirmation bias.
Those phenomena are well charted in all sorts of situations.
Yet you make up dross about me thinking they only apply to the supernatural.

That's your mistake, not mine.

I knew immediately it was a fake.

So do I- and I don't feel the need to pretend I can read tarot cards...

Did you study the Bible

I never studied it but it is daft to think that anyone who grows up in the UK doesn't have an idea what it says about stuff. And, from there's it's a quick Google job to find the actual quote.

You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me,

You refuse to concede even one minor point for fear your whole hypothesis

Do you remember that I pointed out that you were lying about that?

You insist that the physical universe IS absolutely physical and that there is not possibility of it being a virtual reality.

If you think that's true then show me where I said it.
(spoiler alert; I didn't)

[hamdani yusuf]

Spirit and religion are probably among the most abused areas of humankind. And that rule is tailor made as a Get out of Jail Card. Uri Geller - total fake. Made so much money that he could keep his detractors quiet with law suits. Easy to spot because blatant breaking of the laws of physics is not allowed. Preacher who sits in God's lap and has fireside chats. Total fake who has fooled many and become rich. I had to point out to a Christian that the Bible says that communication with God is very difficult and indirect.

No. The rule is made up by those who have gifts. They all know they cannot be tested because they all try testing themselves. I did. I have spoken to a number of people I believe to have a gift. They all had stories of testing themselves. The charlatans abuse the rules. Do you think they have a great afterlife? No. They do not believe in spirit or they would not abuse it.

Once more. The huge number of fakes discourages people who are natural skeptics but it does not disprove the truth of the rule.

How do you distinguish between the fake from the real ones?

[hamdani yusuf]

I had another thought. We keep thinking God is in total control and omni-all. As part of the game he has an adversary - namely Satan or the Devil. So while God gets to grant a few prayers, so does the Devil. In this case, there may have been a balancing of wishes where God granted the pray but Satan got to bomb a Cathedral.

I visited a psychic and asked her if she knows whether she gets informed by the good spirits or the bad spirits. She said she had never thought about it. She just gave answers that came to her. An evil person may get information from an evil spirit.

When Trump prays for a success in a military attack, and the target is praying for American disaster, who gets their prayers answered? The Devil wants as much conflict and destruction as possible (Shiva the God of Destruction) and God tries to mitigate it and have people strive to better themselves. It is under strife and conflict that one see the good in people come to the fore. So to the evil in others.

Does your God have a name? How do you know it?
Who gives the name of satan or devil? Did he choose his own names? Is he the same being as Shiva?

[alancalverd]

I do recall one anecdote of prayer working. A visiting preacher told the congregation (I  used to sing in church choirs!) how he had prayed that his sick daughter could die in peace. His prayer was answered and just for one night no bombs fell on north London - the Luftwaffe destroyed Coventry Cathedral instead.

Hmmm. Interesting. Seems there was a price to pay - or at least make the man think carefully about what he prays for.

They say be careful what you wish for - you may just get it.

I rather think that the good citizens of Coventry were simultaneously praying not to be bombed. But it seems your god works in mysterious ways, and not for the benefit of humanity. A proper god would not have created congenital syphilis, for example.

[alancalverd]

Easy to spot because blatant breaking of the laws of physics is not allowed.

So your god did not create the universe out of nothing. Or inseminate Mary, or resurrect his onlybegotten son. Nor, in his earthly form, turn water into wine. Or part the water for Moses.. Bummer.

[CliveG]

Easy to spot because blatant breaking of the laws of physics is not allowed.

So your god did not create the universe out of nothing. Or inseminate Mary, or resurrect his onlybegotten son. Nor, in his earthly form, turn water into wine. Or part the water for Moses.. Bummer.

Quite right. MY God did MAY not have done such things. MY God was created with the Universe in a virtual reality. Since the universe is virtual, and truly comprises nothing, then the Ultimate Intelligence could have started the Game and allowed God almost unlimited (virtual) power.

If so then God of the Bible created the Big Bang out of nothing. Note that this was only the start of virtual time and space as well but was not the all important Prime Cause of True Reality.

There was no real need to inseminate Mary, or any other "Mother" of a God. The only need for this mythology and story is to emphasize that the God-man is different (having God for a father). The Bishops of Nicaea needed Jesus to be a God but Jesus never claimed to be a god. And sons of God we all are. Don't sweat the tiny details.

The resurrection probably occurred. Not physically but spiritually. It was needed to add emphasis to the story of Jesus. They could not tell the difference between a mental intervention by God and a real physical being.

Water into wine. One could suppose that such a miracle was allowed. Although if a rich admirer anonymously donated a lot of wine and food, it could have been left for people to gossip about a miracle. Even if a fully true miracle - where is the proof that laws of physics were broken. People accepted miracles in those days. The bar is very high in modern times.

Parting the water. Perhaps Moses had spiritual insight into a really low tide and a narrow hard pathway that the chariots sank when trying it. That alone would be miraculous. Not as exciting as the movie version, but the myth was born and endured.

I had a little miracle just 20 minutes ago. The weather was closing in and we have had heavy and continuous rains in late afternoon. I had committed to replacing my wife's exhaust support before going out in the car tonight. Car port and garage full of stuff so I was in the open. Struggled a little but despite my wife's fussing I said the rain will only start when I am done. A couple of drops otherwise. Despite a delay due to a tough nut and frequent trips to get another tool I got the job done and just as I walked in the house the rains came down. A minute later I would have been soaked.

My wife said to me "You cannot always rely on your luck". Not luck I said. It is reliable and predictable. Many many times. See, when it happens to me frequently and predictably the rule is not broken - you guys just scoff and call me a woo. Even I have to admit that the law of large numbers could allow me to be an exception, even in relying on and predicting these small "favors".

Just wish God would grant me a BIG favor and heal my medical problems. I suppose I should be grateful for not being dead. They say that when an old person wakes up without pain they can be sure they are dead.

[CliveG]

(snip)
Does your God have a name? How do you know it?
Who gives the name of satan or devil? Did he choose his own names? Is he the same being as Shiva?

No name I know of for any of the gods/devils or angels/demons. Just know that is it highly likely they exist and can be dealt with. It may be that a Hindu has a separate reality to a Christian but I doubt it. Some small aspects could differ but when compared there will be not differences.

If one prays for war and destruction then Satan by any name is similar to Shiva. No need for names except to direct a prayer or to discuss a common element. I prefer addressing God directly as "God". Not my lord or any other title. Hardly ever address Jesus directly but have on the odd occasion.

Some people who see spirit see different ones. Gabriel might be one. I do not see spirits (only one when I was a teenager but I accept I might have seen shadows in the middle of the night).

When I was a teenager a man got run over and killed at about midnight. His spirit came down the passage with heavy thumping feet and then heavy breathing into my bedroom. Excited at first, I chickened out and closed my eyes and stopped breathing while under the sheets. I had heard of a bloody apparition visiting my mother's sick friend.

[CliveG]

I do recall one anecdote of prayer working. A visiting preacher told the congregation (I  used to sing in church choirs!) how he had prayed that his sick daughter could die in peace. His prayer was answered and just for one night no bombs fell on north London - the Luftwaffe destroyed Coventry Cathedral instead.

Hmmm. Interesting. Seems there was a price to pay - or at least make the man think carefully about what he prays for.

They say be careful what you wish for - you may just get it.

I rather think that the good citizens of Coventry were simultaneously praying not to be bombed. But it seems your god works in mysterious ways, and not for the benefit of humanity. A proper god would not have created congenital syphilis, for example.

A "proper" God with no evil or sickness would defeat the object of the virtual reality Game. STDs keep people a little less promiscuous.

It is a straw man argument to say God is perfect and then say he created imperfection. I do not say that. MY God is limited and is a player in the Game. This is why I say religion should update their narrative (not for the masses but for the skeptics). The Bible contains wisdom that the masses can accept, as do the texts of other religions. The apparent contradictions should be rationalized and explained - again for the skeptics

[Bored chemist]

STDs keep people a little less promiscuous.

So, you don't know what congenital means...

. It is reliable and predictable.

If that was true, you could prove it.