Fine-Tuning Argument vs Argument From Miracles

[Learner]

When we discuss about God on the forum, it's often asked :" What do you mean by God?" Clarification. We can't ask those folks back then, what they meant by miracle, obviously, but we can have a pretty good guess, getting the context by the texts.

 

[bilby]

When we discuss about God on the forum, it's often asked :" What do you mean by God?" Clarification. We can't ask those folks back then, what they meant by miracle, obviously, but we can have a pretty good guess, getting the context by the texts.

Yes. And from the fact that they knew very little about how reality works. They weren't stupid; But they were very deeply ignorant, outside a very small set of practical knowledge. They knew how to raise cattle, but little of biology. They knew how to set broken bones, but little of medicine. Every five year old today knows about germs; But nobody did before the 1870s.

In the absence of today's deep knowledge of how things work, and how the physics, chemistry, and biology underlying all phenomena interrelate, with the whole structure of reality depending on common foundations at every level, people in the pre-scientific era had ad-hoc and frequently mistaken ideas about what made various observed phenomena occur.

Miracles, divine intervention, spirits, astrology, devination, curses, and prayer, belong to that ancient and fundamentally flawed set of guesses about how things might be; Guesses that owed more to desire, fear, and hope than to any actual knowledge or understanding.

That people continue to attempt to understand reality via these long debunked and utterly useless ideas is a cause for deep sadness and shame. We are not unintelligent, yet we choose to remain ignorant - a choice that until very recently our ancestors were unable to make. Those who subscribe to the idea that miracles are, or ever were, possible, should be ashamed of themselves. Those who actively try to persuade others to accept these stupid and outdated ideas should be shamed by us all, for they deserve the strongest of ridicule.

For an adult to believe in miracles is as absurd as for him to believe in faries, the Easter bunny, or Santa Claus.

 

[Learner]

Yes. And from the fact that they knew very little about how reality works. They weren't stupid; But they were very deeply ignorant, outside a very small set of practical knowledge. They knew how to raise cattle, but little of biology. They knew how to set broken bones, but little of medicine. Every five year old today knows about germs; But nobody did before the 1870s.

In the absence of today's deep knowledge of how things work, and how the physics, chemistry, and biology underlying all phenomena interrelate, with the whole structure of reality depending on common foundations at every level, people in the pre-scientific era had ad-hoc and frequently mistaken ideas about what made various observed phenomena occur.

They knew a lot about "good health". Cleansiness is next to Godliness was well understood, especially when practised as worshippers. They also had the diets ... eating foods by the seasons, (which some believe today we should return back to ). There was non of the harmful modern day by-products we have today from chemicals, plastics, gases and metalic substances/materials, not forgetting junk food which would need, running "parallel alongside" these things : "equal"counter measures to maintain health i.e. medicines and education (and clean air).

Miracles, divine intervention, spirits, astrology, devination, curses, and prayer, belong to that ancient and fundamentally flawed set of guesses about how things might be; Guesses that owed more to desire, fear, and hope than to any actual knowledge or understanding.

That people continue to attempt to understand reality via these long debunked and utterly useless ideas is a cause for deep sadness and shame. We are not unintelligent, yet we choose to remain ignorant - a choice that until very recently our ancestors were unable to make. Those who subscribe to the idea that miracles are, or ever were, possible, should be ashamed of themselves. Those who actively try to persuade others to accept these stupid and outdated ideas should be shamed by us all, for they deserve the strongest of ridicule.

It hasn't been debunked, the notion is false, unless you mean those claims made by people today (case by case basis) who can be examined to some degree. It has never been "established" in any way , a proof that those ancients were.. amongst a list of claims: "making up" these stories, writing about their halucinations, who were actually "lying" to bring about an agenda etc..

For an adult to believe in miracles is as absurd as for him to believe in faries, the Easter bunny, or Santa Claus.

Ok, you say miracle, but Jesus Himself , you must agree has something over the Fairies , Easter bunny and Santa Claus.

 

[Harry Bosch]

They knew a lot about "good health". Cleansiness is next to Godliness was well understood, especially when practised as worshippers. They also had the diets ... eating foods by the seasons, (which some believe today we should return back to ). There was non of the harmful modern day by-products we have today from chemicals, plastics, gases and metalic substances/materials, not forgetting junk food which would need, running "parallel alongside" these things : "equal"counter measures to maintain health i.e. medicines and education (and clean air).




It hasn't been debunked, the notion is false, unless you mean those claims made by people today (case by case basis) who can be examined to some degree. It has never been "established" in any way , a proof that those ancients were.. amongst a list of claims: "making up" these stories, writing about their halucinations, who were actually "lying" to bring about an agenda etc..

For an adult to believe in miracles is as absurd as for him to believe in faries, the Easter bunny, or Santa Claus.

Ok, you say miracle, but Jesus Himself , you must agree has something over the Fairies , Easter bunny and Santa Claus.

I'm curious, what does Jesus have over the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus?

 

[Keith&Co.]

They knew a lot about "good health". Cleansiness is next to Godliness was well understood,

....kind of a fantasy, there, Learner. Dr. Lister's attempts to get doctors to use clean knives, clean sheets, and clean hospital rooms was a 19th Century development, mocked and scorned by people of his day. Surgeons wore gore-spattered aprons to show how experienced they were...
People into the last century insisted that a good layer of dirt kept the bugs and diseases away.
Exactly when did good Christains learn not to dump their thunder buckets into public streets?

. They also had the diets ... eating foods by the seasons,

Known as Eating Food When It Is Actually Available, what with the poor state of refrigeration and the slowness of shipping? Yeah, that wasn't exactly a matter of knowledge, but basic facts of life.

 

[Learner]

....kind of a fantasy, there, Learner. Dr. Lister's attempts to get doctors to use clean knives, clean sheets, and clean hospital rooms was a 19th Century development, mocked and scorned by people of his day. Surgeons wore gore-spattered aprons to show how experienced they were...
People into the last century insisted that a good layer of dirt kept the bugs and diseases away.

Exactly when did good Christains learn not to dump their thunder buckets into public streets?

Things went backwards and worse as the timeline moves from the biblical era towards the "middle-ages" and a little time there after. All sorts of odd ideas were born from there, all types of supersttions and unhygienic medical practices, many to be quite painful - like drilling holes in heads for various ailments etc. Hygiene only re-appearing in focus later as you say, the 19th century.

Known as Eating Food When It Is Actually Available, what with the poor state of refrigeration and the slowness of shipping? Yeah, that wasn't exactly a matter of knowledge, but basic facts of life.

Yes of course, what was available, but preserving certain foods like sun-drying and fermentation besides wine is an ancient cultural method. Refrigeration and modern medicines we have today wouldn't in the same way be necessary , when it comes to "all year round" availability or the new medicines for diseases of today.

 

[Learner]

I'm curious, what does Jesus have over the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus?

Atheist biblical scholars., the ones who believe He existed, there are "zero" scholars for Easter Bunny and Santa claus.

 

[bilby]

They knew a lot about "good health". Cleansiness is next to Godliness was well understood, especially when practised as worshippers.

And yet they didn't know that they should wash their hands between shiting and eating; Or before minor surgery.

They also had the diets ... eating foods by the seasons, (which some believe today we should return back to ).

Sure, but those some are wrong - a balanced diet with adequate micronutrients works year round.

There was non of the harmful modern day by-products we have today from chemicals, plastics, gases and metalic substances/materials,

Everything is chemicals. Nobody is being harmed by plastics, unless they choke on them. Gases are no more common now than then - and air was always and remains a prerequisite for good health. And metals are neither new nor more harmful today than in the Bronze or Iron Ages - there's a hint in the names.

not forgetting junk food which would need, running "parallel alongside" these things : "equal"counter measures to maintain health i.e. medicines and education (and clean air).

And yet people who have access to junk food live longer, healthier lives than their ancestors from the time before Big Macs.

It hasn't been debunked, the notion is false, unless you mean those claims made by people today (case by case basis) who can be examined to some degree. It has never been "established" in any way , a proof that those ancients were.. amongst a list of claims: "making up" these stories, writing about their halucinations, who were actually "lying" to bring about an agenda etc..

Again, as I said already:

For an adult to believe in miracles is as absurd as for him to believe in faries, the Easter bunny, or Santa Claus.

Ok, you say miracle, but Jesus Himself , you must agree has something over the Fairies , Easter bunny and Santa Claus.

Nope. There is no reason at all for me to agree, and so I must NOT.

Magic is make believe, EVEN IF you call it 'miracle' and/or ascribe it to your favourite character from the tales we call 'The New Testament'

Your strong and abiding faith doesn't constitute evidence of anything - and it remains true that miracles are as plausible as a flat Earth, or leprechauns, or beer that doesn't make you fart.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

I'm curious, what does Jesus have over the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus?

Atheist biblical scholars., the ones who believe He existed, there are "zero" scholars for Easter Bunny and Santa claus.

No atheist biblical scholars believe a magical or "divine" Jesus existed, so you're quite wrong. There are zero scholars for Magical/Divine Jesus.

 

[Atheos]

I'm curious, what does Jesus have over the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus?

Atheist biblical scholars., the ones who believe He existed, there are "zero" scholars for Easter Bunny and Santa claus.

No atheist biblical scholars believe a magical or "divine" Jesus existed, so you're quite wrong. There are zero scholars for Magical/Divine Jesus.

Agreed. There are lots of bunnies. None of them hide pastel-dyed chicken eggs on the 1st Sunday following the 1st full moon following the spring equinox. There was an historical St. Nicholas. There wasn't one who lives in a hidden workshop at the North Pole populated with elves who fabricate toys for him to deliver via his sleigh pulled by flying reindeer all over the world in a single night. And there may have been an historical person named Jesus who formed the original kernel of the cult that eventually grew and splintered into Christianity. But there wasn't one who walked on water and levitated magically into the sky never to be seen again. Jesus is just like Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. The only difference is popularity which is fueled by the amount of money to be made by peddling this religious bunk.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I'm curious, what does Jesus have over the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus?

Atheist biblical scholars., the ones who believe He existed, there are "zero" scholars for Easter Bunny and Santa claus.

If magic isn't real, why are there so many magicians? Why do people go watch magicians do their thing if magic isn't real?

 

[atrib]

Ok, you say miracle, but Jesus Himself , you must agree has something over the Fairies , Easter bunny and Santa Claus.

Why should the Jesus miracle stories be treated differently? Because you believe them?

 

[Keith&Co.]

Things went backwards and worse as the timeline moves from the biblical era towards the "middle-ages" and a little time there after.

pu re fantasy.
Or you could offer some support for this assertion? I'll take anything. Longevity? Infant mortality rates charted against biblical fidelity?


If nothing else, Learner, in today's society, the WORST health conditions are among those who consider themselves biblically pbservant.

All sorts of odd ideas were born from there, all types of supersttions and unhygienic medical practices, many to be quite painful - like drilling holes in heads for various ailments etc. Hygiene only re-appearing in focus later as you say, the 19th century.

No. If something works, you get results, aznd you keep it.
Doctors and academics may grope to understand WHY it works, but if their experiments were competing against good practices, the practices would have been sustained. That's how life works.

One of the objections to Lister's and Pasteur's work, an obstacle to better health practices was that God never mentioned germs in the Bible. Never mentioned changing the sheets between patients. Don't boil a kid in the mom's milk, he had time to mention that, and don't have sex during a woman's period, but not a word about the minimum temoerature to boil surgical knives at, or the lowest temp to cook meat....

 

[bilby]

Things went backwards and worse as the timeline moves from the biblical era towards the "middle-ages" and a little time there after.

pu re fantasy.
Or you could offer some support for this assertion? I'll take anything. Longevity? Infant mortality rates charted against biblical fidelity?


If nothing else, Learner, in today's society, the WORST health conditions are among those who consider themselves biblically pbservant.

All sorts of odd ideas were born from there, all types of supersttions and unhygienic medical practices, many to be quite painful - like drilling holes in heads for various ailments etc. Hygiene only re-appearing in focus later as you say, the 19th century.

No. If something works, you get results, aznd you keep it.
Doctors and academics may grope to understand WHY it works, but if their experiments were competing against good practices, the practices would have been sustained. That's how life works.

One of the objections to Lister's and Pasteur's work, an obstacle to better health practices was that God never mentioned germs in the Bible. Never mentioned changing the sheets between patients. Don't boil a kid in the mom's milk, he had time to mention that, and don't have sex during a woman's period, but not a word about the minimum temoerature to boil surgical knives at, or the lowest temp to cook meat....

Trepanning has been noted by archaeologists since several thousand years BCE. Trepanned skulls with evidence of postoperative bone regrowth have been found, indicating that people were not only performing the operation, but surviving it, as long ago as the neolithic. So it most assuredly wasn't a medieval invention.

The current thinking is that the early medieval period (what used to be called the 'Dark Ages') wasn't particularly backward - despite the loss of some skills as the Roman Empire became Christianised. Christianity did lead to loss of knowledge, but not to the extent previously believed - for example, complex water management and stonemasonry disappeared, but steel and iron working actually became more advanced. Saxon and Viking blades are made of much better quality steel than Roman ones were.

Hygene didn't disappear at any point, so it couldn't reappear in the C19th. What happened in the 1870s was that trial and error hygene, as practiced for the preceding few millennia, was given a sound theoretical basis, allowing people for the first time in history to improve their hygenic practices via something other than trial and error. This MASSIVELY reduced mortality rates, in a way which was completely unprecedented.

In short, everything that Learner is saying here is either flat-out wrong, or represents a view of history that has been demonstrated archaeologically to be mistaken, and which is several decades out of date.

 

[Learner]

I'm curious, what does Jesus have over the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus?

Atheist biblical scholars., the ones who believe He existed, there are "zero" scholars for Easter Bunny and Santa claus.

No atheist biblical scholars believe a magical or "divine" Jesus existed, so you're quite wrong. There are zero scholars for Magical/Divine Jesus.

Not magic but divine yes, and you are still in error, as there was a reason why I first mentioned "only" Atheist scholars.

 

[atrib]

No atheist biblical scholars believe a magical or "divine" Jesus existed, so you're quite wrong. There are zero scholars for Magical/Divine Jesus.

Not magic but divine yes, so you were still in error, there was a reason why I first mentioned "only" Atheist scholars.

Can you explain why it would be reasonable for us to believe that Jesus performed miracles? What is the evidence, and what makes you conclude that a supernatural creator bending the laws of nature is the best explanation for the miracle stories in the gospels?

I should add that I don't actually expect you to do that, since you have been repeatedly called out for making up shit in the past, and have always dodged my questions. But the question has to be asked, so there it is. Show us that you are better at this than Mr. Max the cockatoo.

 

[Learner]

No atheist biblical scholars believe a magical or "divine" Jesus existed, so you're quite wrong. There are zero scholars for Magical/Divine Jesus.

Agreed. There are lots of bunnies. None of them hide pastel-dyed chicken eggs on the 1st Sunday following the 1st full moon following the spring equinox. There was an historical St. Nicholas. There wasn't one who lives in a hidden workshop at the North Pole populated with elves who fabricate toys for him to deliver via his sleigh pulled by flying reindeer all over the world in a single night.

And there may have been an historical person named Jesus who formed the original kernel of the cult that eventually grew and splintered into Christianity. But there wasn't one who walked on water and levitated magically into the sky never to be seen again. Jesus is just like Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. The only difference is popularity which is fueled by the amount of money to be made by peddling this religious bunk.

With a little bit of historical digging, so to speak, it was noticed that Santa Claus appeared much later than St. Nick. A merging of two images. Its good we seem to all know and agree with this,... as well as the bunnies coming about. (Those tales differing from the miracles storiy appearing right from the mentioning of Jesus .. and not added on later to the character.)

You say magically rising in the sky,... I'd like to say instead : God sent an anti-gravity field (keeping with the times).

 

[Learner]

I should add that I don't actually expect you to do that, since you have been repeatedly called out for making up shit in the past, and have always dodged my questions. But the question has to be asked, so there it is. Show us that you are better at this than Mr. Max the cockatoo.

Mine in bold is false ..now I'n not in the biz to call people out as fibbers, telling porkies, but I will take this as your mistake, you've said that to me once or twice before, you could point it out ...if it exists! I think you also tried that with Lion quite a few times.

I don't recall dodging either.

I'll do the rest of the post as underlined, in a bit, when I'm in the mood.

 

[bilby]

No atheist biblical scholars believe a magical or "divine" Jesus existed, so you're quite wrong. There are zero scholars for Magical/Divine Jesus.

Agreed. There are lots of bunnies. None of them hide pastel-dyed chicken eggs on the 1st Sunday following the 1st full moon following the spring equinox. There was an historical St. Nicholas. There wasn't one who lives in a hidden workshop at the North Pole populated with elves who fabricate toys for him to deliver via his sleigh pulled by flying reindeer all over the world in a single night.

And there may have been an historical person named Jesus who formed the original kernel of the cult that eventually grew and splintered into Christianity. But there wasn't one who walked on water and levitated magically into the sky never to be seen again. Jesus is just like Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. The only difference is popularity which is fueled by the amount of money to be made by peddling this religious bunk.

With a little bit of historical digging, so to speak, it was noticed that Santa Claus appeared much later than St. Nick. A merging of two images. Its good we seem to all know and agree with this,... as well as the bunnies coming about. (Those tales differing from the miracles storiy appearing right from the mentioning of Jesus .. and not added on later to the character.)

You say magically rising in the sky,... I'd like to say instead : God sent an anti-gravity field (keeping with the times).

Why should anyone care what you would like to say? What matters is what actually happened - and you have no way of knowing the answer to that. You say God did something, but you have no evidence that any gods have ever done anything, other than hearsay.

Worse, your sources tell us that god intervened a lot, in a wide variety of circumstances. And then suddenly stopped intervening, just as we developed the skills to critically examine claims of miracles. That strikes me as HUGELY suspicious.

I mean, god doing miracles seems unlikely; But god doing miracles only when nobody is watching closely stinks of pious fraud. People committing fraud doesn't seem unlikely AT ALL - we see it all the time, and it's utterly banal.

So we have two competing explanations - a god, for which we have no evidence, performed miracles which contravene the laws of physics, but stopped doing that just as men started to understand how to determine the truth value of claims; OR a bunch of people with the opportunity for wealth, fame, and power made up a load of horseshit in order to fleece the rubes, and were so successful that their lies are still believed to this day.

One of those explanations requires the suspension of physical law; The other requires a small number of dishonest people.

We have a vast, indeed inexhaustible, reserve of dishonest people in the world, and they have always been with us. We have NEVER ONCE seen the laws of physics being broken.

It's not rocket surgery.

 

[Learner]

pu re fantasy.
Or you could offer some support for this assertion? I'll take anything. Longevity? Infant mortality rates charted against biblical fidelity?

The bible is "awash" with emphasis to keep things CLEAN, the mind and body etc... Tons of verses to do with washing garments for ceremonial and everyday living purposes. Being among the dead at burials (being unclean) to be clean from or never eating things of the deep sea that feed off dead things, digging poop holes and covering them rather than throwing out human-waste in the streets, centuries later in Europe, .... which is ironic, since there was (and still exists) in England an earlier Roman toilets area with sewage and water drainage sytems .. just laying there for centuries while everyone else is throwing out waste in the streets ,which does suggest a little going backwards in this regard to hygiene.

I'm not even comparing or equating the biblical era to current times but I am however differentiating the image of the middle-ages, that atheists "love" to use, when portraying the times of the bible, who were more advanced in hygiene than those of the middle-ages. Many of the arguments used by atheists use the middle-ages portrayal template . which may seem useful for the argument but is really misleading and erroneous.

No. If something works, you get results, aznd you keep it.
Doctors and academics may grope to understand WHY it works, but if their experiments were competing against good practices, the practices would have been sustained. That's how life works.

Well yes of course, no disputing that, thats not what I arguing against.

One of the objections to Lister's and Pasteur's work, an obstacle to better health practices was that God never mentioned germs in the Bible. Never mentioned changing the sheets between patients. Don't boil a kid in the mom's milk, he had time to mention that, and don't have sex during a woman's period, but not a word about the minimum temoerature to boil surgical knives at, or the lowest temp to cook meat....

Biblical times were cleaner than the times centuries later, is all I was highlighting. A different portrayal than the usual dark-ages era. Like: Where does it say in the bible that a unicorn has a spike in a horses head ? You'll find that image appears centuries later like all the magic tales.