Follow up Alright, All You Dashing, Swaggering Bush Pilots

God wants us to trust him.
Remember that trust isn't a right, it has to be earned.

Answered very well by another contributor. I'll simply add that God
owes you nothing-zero-zip-zilch-nada, as he already 0wnZ you lock,
stock, and barrel.


You're mixing apples and oranges. We're not talking about a
technology demonstration, we're talking about a singular historical
event.

The historical is irrelevant, it's the singular that's the conundrum.
If it only apparently happened once 2000 years ago, we can safely call it
observer/experimental error and ignore it.

You're still terribly confused, attempting to apply the tools of
science to a question of history. Worse, you don't even recognize the
fallacy of doing so.

Just because an event only happened once does not mean that it never
happened! The K-T impact only happened once. The flooding of the
Mediterranean basin only happened once. Krakatoa only blew up once.
Same for Mt. St. Helens.

I already know that you're going to say, "but those are within the
realm of reason, and a resurrection is not." That is true only within
a worldview that DENIES THE POSSIBILITY of a singular resurrection a
priori. You're beginning with a premise, and using that premise to
reject any evidence that would lead to a conclusion that conflicts
with it.

IT'S BAD LOGIC!

The resurrection of Jesus is singular for a reason. It's only
*needed* once. You may smirk and say, "how convenient," but that
doesn't change the facts. In the Christian worldview, only one
resurrection is required. One does not expect to see further
examples. The model does not predict them.

The question is, did the one really happen or not? You're simply
refusing to investigate. You're ducking the question.
Bwaaaawk-buk-buk-buk-buk-buk!


But continued observation and experimentation has led to greater
understanding of how things work.
No observation or experimentation has resulted in resurrection. Until it
does, there's no need to change our understanding.

Q.E.D. The point is, your modernist worldview is insufficient to the
task. It disregards a large chunk of reality simply because it cannot
be measured by "scientific" means. A friend recently sent me a very
apropos quote from Albert Einstein on the subject: "Not everything
that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted
counts."


Today, laboratory observations of quantum synchronicity phenomena
appear to violate the laws of physics. Does that mean that the
observations are erroneous, or that the "laws of physics" need to be
revised?

No, because they're predicted and expected by quantum mechanics.

Not the first time! The laws of QM were written to *explain*
observations that contradicted the accepted laws of physics. The
Newtonian worldview was insufficient to the task - "real" reality
could not be adequately or defined by F=MA anymore. So the definition
of "real" was expanded to include color, strange, and charm. The
point is that "real reality" is much larger than the shadow that you
accept.

Theories which don't predict and can't be tested or verified are useless and
worthless.

Such as the idea of one phylum morphing into a different phylum over
millions of years? Can't test it or verify it. Not repeatable.
Doesn't predict anything, at least not anything of use to us, or
anything we can measure. So it must be worthless, right? :-P


Now you can say that the Resurrection predicts an after-life... but unless
someone comes back and confirms then it's untestable.
If someone DOES come back, it satisfies my required for repeatability.
But then it would also supply proof, which defies faith, so it can't be
ALLOWED to happen. A nice little bit of circular logic.

Nice little straw man. Not what I claimed at all. The resurrection
is not a theory. It's an historical event. You're using the wrong
hammer.


Prayer works. So do sugar pills, with the same efficacy. Consult your
physician for possible side effects of either.


Wrong hammer again. I expect an MD to know about pills, but not
necessarily about prayer. Consult your clergy for evidence about the
efficacy of prayer.


Of course I know "Flatland".
And if the sphere should pass through flatland but once, what need is there
to explain it?


Maybe because it's coming back? :-D


And just because they're in a 2D world, doesn't prohibit them from
formulating a 3D model.
That, however, doesn't make the 3D world real (see superstring theory... not
to be confused with Silly String).
Further, while there's a elegant 3D explanation in this case, it's not
REQUIRED.
You could just as easily explain it as a growing and shrinking circle, and
it's just as valid.


No, because the third dimension and the sphere are in fact REAL, which
we can see from our three-dimensional vantage point. The "it's just a
growing and shrinking circle" explanation is WRONG. It does, however,
work better than any non-supernatural explanation of the evidences of
the Resurrection of Jesus that you've offered to date. At least the
skeptical flatlanders had an explanation that FIT THE EVIDENCE.


You misread me. No modernistic high-horse here!
I'm not judging the people of 2000 years ago and saying they're gullible....
I'm saying people TODAY are gullible, and the people of 2000 years ago were
likely no better.

Accepted. So then I assume that you'd be willing to take up the
challenge and look at the evidence at face value? I dare ya!

Murder and pillage are also universally punished.
Not when it's government policy, or if there's no government. Just
ask anyone from Cambodia, Bosnia, or Rwanda.
Exceptions which prove the rule.


If exceptions prove the rule, then any rule can - perhaps should -
have exceptions. For example, the rule that says dead people don't
come back to life?


There's a fairly large school of thought within
even conservative Christianity that suggests that Hell is eternal
destruction, not eternal torment. Dead and gone, not dead and
burning. Either way, it's a ****-poor alternative to eternal life in
paradise. Imagine - no need for annuals or pre-flights! :-D

Or maybe an endless string of BFRs! :P


Shoot, that'd just be Purgatory. If you're *really* unrepentant, you
bust a TFR and get a ramp check on every flight. ;-^


But is paradise an actual, available alternative or are you just fooling
yourself?
"If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is" clearly applies.

I thought *you* were supposed to be the optimist here. :-) We're
back to Pascal's wager. If you're right, I gain nothing and you lose
nothing. If I'm right, I gain everything and you lose everything.

To your question, though, yes - paradise is actual and available. The
PTS is a bitch, though. "Excruciating" would not be too strong a word
for it. No one has ever been able to meet the specs, or ever will,
except for this one guy with the scarred hands and feet. (He got
those scars passing the checkride.)

Here's the deal, though - the DE gives you a total waiver from the PTS
if you let that guy endorse your logbook - which he does in his own
blood. All you have to do is ask.


Corrie