Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If they can't tell the difference between a patient and a corpse, they need a reality check.
I've suggested to the raise the dead believers that we take a walk to the cemetery with their best faith healer and do some tests. So far the consensus seems to be there is a time limit on when the dead can still be raised. I point out that wasn't the case in the biblical story of the valley of dry bones, but I've yet to see any modern journalism denoting any similar dry bones being raised from the dead. Because if we are ALL honest with ourselves, we ALL know it isn't going to happen, short of, perhaps, medical science cloning DNA from the long since deceased, and that would make man more capable than god.
To me, the difference between the Easter bunny, Santa, etc. and god (to a Christian) is obvious. They typically believe on the basis of alleged personal experiences in which god has "made himself known" to them. So it isn't some arbitrary assumption for most Christians, but a response to something they've experienced. That would make it more rational than, say, believing in the Easter bunny.
To me, the difference between the Easter bunny, Santa, etc. and god (to a Christian) is obvious. They typically believe on the basis of alleged personal experiences in which god has "made himself known" to them. So it isn't some arbitrary assumption for most Christians, but a response to something they've experienced. That would make it more rational than, say, believing in the Easter bunny.
What about people who claimed that the Easter Bunny had "made himself known" to them?
If I met this hypothetical person, I could only say I don't believe they're right.
And that should be enough. I don't see the need to make an assertion of my own.
...but do you think that their belief in the Easter bunny would be 'rational' because of their personal experience, in the the same way that you think god-belief is more rational if the believer can claim a personal experience?
...but do you think that their belief in the Easter bunny would be 'rational' because of their personal experience, in the the same way that you think god-belief is more rational if the believer can claim a personal experience?
No, because I think that if an actual giant bunny who delivered colored eggs to people existed, we'd have tangible evidence (a picture or video somewhere!) for it. And this is when absence of evidence would count as evidence of absence, if we should expect to have more evidence than we do have. And yes, they could claim "The Easter bunny has the ability to turn invisible", etc. but that would be ad hoc and so wouldn't help in finding this belief any more rational.
No, because I think that if an actual giant bunny who delivered colored eggs to people existed, we'd have tangible evidence (a picture or video somewhere!) for it.
We feel the same about gods.
Quote:
And this is when absence of evidence would count as evidence of absence, if we should expect to have more evidence than we do have.
We feel her same about gods
Quote:
And yes, they could claim "The Easter bunny has the ability to turn invisible", etc. but that would be ad hoc and so wouldn't help in finding this belief any more rational.
Just like god belief then.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.