Levitation, Telepathy

[DigitalShadow]

I realize that my response is pretty well nuts to worldly people (whomever they may be) -- Some things are worth more than money.

Vit Van once said that to obtain and KEEP the power over the elements, one must refuse such pointless demonstrations as Randi is demanding. (I like Vit Van)

HiJolly

It is my experience that everyone who claims to have supernatural power, can't seem to reproduce it in conditions that would prove they are not a fake. Coincidence? Maybe, but I find it far more likely that such powers simply do not exist and there are a some very talented con artists in the world.

BTW, I have a unicorn in my garage, but if anyone else tries to look at it, it will disappear forever :)

[Vort]

It is my experience that everyone who claims to have supernatural power, can't seem to reproduce it in conditions that would prove they are not a fake. Coincidence? Maybe, but I find it far more likely that such powers simply do not exist and there are a some very talented con artists in the world.

In general, I agree with this. However, things of God are sacred, and God will not be mocked. Thus, any legitimate Godly power that might be considered "supernatural" will of course only be present through faith. So, for example, having someone receive prophetic revelation under scientifically rigorous conditions would be a mockery. However, I would think that such things would be amenable to statistical methodology.

BTW, I have a unicorn in my garage, but if anyone else tries to look at it, it will disappear forever :)

I can turn invisible, but only when no one is looking at me.

[DigitalShadow]

In general, I agree with this. However, things of God are sacred, and God will not be mocked. Thus, any legitimate Godly power that might be considered "supernatural" will of course only be present through faith. So, for example, having someone receive prophetic revelation under scientifically rigorous conditions would be a mockery. However, I would think that such things would be amenable to statistical methodology.

I apply this philosophy to religion and faith as well, as I see no reason not to (hint: that is why I am agnostic). I do respect other people's beliefs though and am open to being proven wrong, which is why I am here :)

[hordak]

It is my experience that everyone who claims to have supernatural power, can't seem to reproduce it in conditions that would prove they are not a fake. Coincidence? Maybe, but I find it far more likely that such powers simply do not exist and there are a some very talented con artists in the world.

BTW, I have a unicorn in my garage, but if anyone else tries to look at it, it will disappear forever :)

Perhaps you could just make a youtube video then

[DigitalShadow]

Perhaps you could just make a youtube video then

Unicorns hate cameras, and they can sense when they are being filmed. I would not want to unleash the wrath of the unicorn on this world.

[Vort]

I apply this philosophy to religion and faith as well, as I see no reason not to (hint: that is why I am agnostic).

Agreed. Religion and faith are not immune to philosophical reasoning. But as with all things, you need to know how to apply the tool to the problem.

When used as a methodology to all aspects of life, the scientific method is deeply defective. In fact, it is useful only for the most trivial and unimportant of life's facets, like chemical reactions or physical laws. It is of no use in defining or explaining a parent's love for a child, or whether loyalty is right, or how we should treat our fellow man.

Once you have accepted that the scientific method is not sufficient for important questions of existence and action, you can start exploring whether other methods give good results. In researching this, you begin to realize that the scientific method is more an illusion than a reality. For example:

• Have you actually used number theory to validate the premises of mathematics?
• Have you, yourself, proven that the square root factoring method is valid for all real numbers?
• Can you demonstrate the truthfulness of the fundamental theorem of calculus?
• Can you rigorously show the validity of each DQ method in your differential equations "bag of tricks"?
• Have you actually worked through the calculations required to define universal gravitation, and can you explain why it leads inexorably to the predictions of general relativity?
• Can you derive Maxwell's Equations?
• Can you produce and explain the mathematical evidence for the existence of black holes?
• Can you show the foundational physics and mathematics that demonstrate the existence of electron and nuclear energy levels?
• Can you expound on the fundamental principles of laser physics and use that knowledge to construct a working laser?
• Can you substantiate the elements of crystallography and use its results to demonstrate the helical nature of DNA?
• Can you provide convincing experimental evidence of the nature of the lipid bilayer?

My guess is that, like 99+% of the human population, you cannot do even one of these listed items. (If you can do one, I'd bet it's the laser one.) I seriously doubt that anyone can do them all. And yet these are all things that we believe, and most of them are things that we claim to "know" are true because of -- drum roll, please -- Science. In fact, we merely believe them to be true on the word of others.

How is this much, or any, different from religion? Many have claimed to have spoken with God. They have laid out a path by which you, too, can speak with God and hear his voice. If you tried to reproduce an experiment to prove the idea of heat capacity, for example, and the experiment failed, would you then loudly proclaim that you had disproven the laws of thermodynamics? Or would you assume that you had done something wrong and then work very hard to isolate your error and do the experiment right? What level of confidence would you require before you finally concluded that you had indeed demonstrated that the laws of thermodynamics were incorrect? Yet look how many people, even those who call themselves "scientists", are only too willing to dismiss the claims of revealed religion after they fail in their first crude experimental attempt.

God will indeed manifest himself to all who sincerely seek him. But seeking sincerely, or as James puts it, asking in faith, involves a whole lot more than just throwing the question out into the ether and waiting for an angel to stand before you. It involves investing yourself and showing your willingness to humble yourself and do God's will. It involves making very real, though private and internal, sacrifices. It involves doing what you need to do to bring yourself into the presence of God. At that point, you receive what you most seek after, just as surely as your carefully prepared, carefully run physics experiments will show you what you seek.

Edited August 11, 2008 by Vort
Complete sentences are a good thing

[DigitalShadow]

Agreed. Religion and faith are not immune to philosophical reasoning. But as with all things, you need to know how to apply the tool to the problem.

When used as a methodology to all aspects of life, the scientific method is deeply defective. In fact, it is useful only for the most trivial and unimportant of life's facets, like chemical reactions or physical laws. It is of no use in defining or explaining a parent's love for a child, or whether loyalty is right, or how we should treat our fellow man.

Once you have accepted that the scientific method is not sufficient for important questions of existence and action, you can start exploring whether other methods give good results. In researching this, you begin to realize that the scientific method is more an illusion than a reality. For example:

• Have you actually used number theory to validate the premises of mathematics?
• Have you, yourself, proven that the square root factoring method is valid for all real numbers?
• Can you demonstrate the truthfulness of the fundamental theorem of calculus?
• Can you rigorously show the validity of each DQ method in your differential equations "bag of tricks"?
• Have you actually worked through the calculations required to define universal gravitation, and can you explain why it leads inexorably to the predictions of general relativity?
• Can you derive Maxwell's Equations?
• Can you produce and explain the mathematical evidence for the existence of black holes?
• Can you show the foundational physics and mathematics that demonstrate the existence of electron and nuclear energy levels?
• Can you expound on the fundamental principles of laser physics and use that knowledge to construct a working laser?
• Can you substantiate the elements of crystallography and use its results to demonstrate the helical nature of DNA?
• Can you provide convincing experimental evidence of the nature of the lipid bilayer?

My guess is that, like 99+% of the human population, you cannot do even one of these listed items. (If you can do one, I'd bet it's the laser one.) I seriously doubt that anyone can do them all. And yet these are all things that we believe, and most of them are things that we claim to "know" are true because of -- drum roll, please -- Science. In fact, we merely believe them to be true on the word of others.

How is this much, or any, different from religion? Many have claimed to have spoken with God. They have laid out a path by which you, too, can speak with God and hear his voice. If you tried to reproduce an experiment to prove the idea of heat capacity, for example, and the experiment failed, would you then loudly proclaim that you had disproven the laws of thermodynamics? Or would you assume that you had done something wrong and then work very hard to isolate your error and do the experiment right? What level of confidence would you require before you finally concluded that you had indeed demonstrated that the laws of thermodynamics were incorrect? Yet look how many people, even those who call themselves "scientists", are only too willing to dismiss the claims of revealed religion after they fail in their first crude experimental attempt.

God will indeed manifest himself to all who sincerely seek him. But seeking sincerely, or as James puts it, asking in faith, involves a whole lot more than just throwing the question out into the ether and waiting for an angel to stand before you. It involves investing yourself and showing your willingness to humble yourself and do God's will. It involves making very real, though private and internal, sacrifices. It involves doing what you need to do to bring yourself into the presence of God. At that point, you receive what you most seek after, just as surely as your carefully prepared, carefully run physics experiments will show you what you seek.

I agree with you to an extent, but I think your logic is off. Your list of items I admit that I could not do most of them myself, but then again, I don't use most of them or care one way or the other about them. If someone were to tell me tomorrow that a theory I don't even understand had been shown to be wrong, I would not care and I would put as much stock in the new theory as I had in the old one: not much. If I happened to work in that field and use the theory on a regular basis for my work, you can be sure that I would examine the evidence and be able to derive a proof for it myself though.

I'd also like to point out that skepticism is a different concept than the scientific method (yes there is a lot of overlap, but you can be a skeptical without the scientific method and you can follow the scientific method without being skeptical). Extaordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I firmly believe that because skepticism is in my nature (ask my parents if you don't believe me) and the concept has proven itself to me time and time again. To hold religion exempt from this and simply have faith because someone else told me to is far different from not caring about a theory or equation that I will never personally need to use. It's not as if Maxwell's Equations demand I worship them or be punished in the afterlife.

I don't see how saying that God doesn't manifest himself because you don't have enough faith is any different than saying skeptics don't experience ghosts because their negative energy drives them away. It's a convenient exuse to perpetuate an unfalsifiable claim. If you believe something strong enough, your mind will fill in the gaps and you will have experiences that confirm your preconceived belief.

Oh, and carefully run physics experiments will return (near) the same result every time, rather than the myriad of different responses people get when praying. To me, that says quite a bit.

Edited August 11, 2008 by DigitalShadow

[HiJolly]

It is my experience that everyone who claims to have supernatural power, can't seem to reproduce it in conditions that would prove they are not a fake. Coincidence? Maybe, but I find it far more likely that such powers simply do not exist and there are a some very talented con artists in the world.

You're right, it's no coincidence. It's by design, to drive people like you nuts. -----OK, there's a different reason, but it won't make you any happier than the 'drive you nuts' reason...

HiJolly

[DigitalShadow]

You're right, it's no coincidence. It's by design, to drive people like you nuts. -----OK, there's a different reason, but it won't make you any happier than the 'drive you nuts' reason...

It doesn't drive me nuts. Unless they plan to use their powers on me, it doesn't really affect me either way. Plus bad con artists are an endless source of amusement to me :)

[Moksha]

Proof

[Vort]

I agree with you to an extent, but I think your logic is off.

Okay, that's possible. But you never got around to mentioning where my logic was defective. Please point out my faulty logic.

Your list of items I admit that I could not do most of them myself, but then again, I don't use most of them or care one way or the other about them.

Yet that has nothing to do with my point.

I'd also like to point out that skepticism is a different concept than the scientific method (yes there is a lot of overlap, but you can be a skeptical without the scientific method and you can follow the scientific method without being skeptical).

So I'm skeptical about, oh, I don't know, cell theory. I think it's bogus. I looked through a microscope once and I didn't see anything that looked like so-called "cells". Now, I'm a skeptical sort, so you have to convince me. But I ain't looking through any more microscopes; I already did that once, and I didn't see any cells. (In fact, I didn't see anything at all but a blurry mess. So much for microscopes being "fine instruments"!) I'm convinced it's a con. Now convince me otherwise. (Don't bother with your so-called "photographs", by the way. They are waaaaay too easy to fake. And if you think an appeal to authority or to number of believers in your cockamamie "cell" theory will sway me, think again.)

Still waiting to be convinced...

Still waiting...

Well, I guess I've shown you. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and you can't produce the first piece of real evidence to substantiate your silly position about so-called "cells". Thus, I conclude that cell theory is just a crutch for the weak-minded who can't accept reality.

To hold religion exempt from this [requirement of extraordinary proof for extraordinary claims] and simply have faith because someone else told me to is far different from not caring about a theory or equation that I will never personally need to use.

Yes, and chocolate is different from vanilla. So what?

By the way, Latter-day Saints don't tell you to "have faith because someone else told [you] to". Latter-day Saints tell you to build your own house from the ground up. They simply describe the tools to you. If you think the hammer sounds like a really stupid tool and therefore you won't use it, that's fine, but don't blame Mormons or other religious folks for giving you useless tools.

I don't see how saying that God doesn't manifest himself because you don't have enough faith is any different than saying skeptics don't experience ghosts because their negative energy drives them away.

This is because you don't understand what faith is. You think faith means nothing more than belief without knowing.

It's a convenient exuse to perpetuate an unfalsifiable claim.

It is true that belief in God's existence is unfalsifiable, and therefore unscientific. But then, belief in your own existence is unfalsifiable. Therefore, belief that you exist is unscientific.

So does that mean you don't really exist?

If you believe something strong enough, your mind will fill in the gaps and you will have experiences that confirm your preconceived belief.

Now you're the one making extraordinary claims. Your proof, please, especially in regards to belief in God.

Oh, and carefully run physics experiments will return (near) the same result every time, rather than the myriad of different responses people get when praying.

Incorrect. A "carefully run" search for God will likewise yield the same, or similar, results every time. The fact that people get different results only illustrates that those people don't grasp the fundamentals. You probably wouldn't be surprised if a bunch of 14th-century people got widely varying results in post-operative recovery after, say, appendix removal. But they, not understanding microbiology or (that stupid, illogical) cell theory, would be mystified why sometimes people healed and other times they got infections and died. This would be true, even if they were very, very careful and tried REALLLLLLY hard.

To me, that says quite a bit.

Yes, and also to me. Mostly that you don't understand what faith is or how to exercise it. (Which is not meant as a slam or criticism, so forgive me if that's how it comes across. But as per my cell theory example, I assume that if I actually said that, your reply would be that I understand neither cell theory nor the scientific method. That's pretty much all I'm saying to you.) Edited August 11, 2008 by Vort
typos

[DigitalShadow]

...

I had a carefully typed up point by point response, but then I accidently hit backspace while not in the text window and the browser went back and deleted it all. It's probably for the better since I don't think we're really getting anywhere here. Instead, I will only respond to what I think is the heart of this matter and I honestly want to hear what you think about it.

Incorrect. A "carefully run" search for God will likewise yield the same, or similar, results every time. The fact that people get different results only illustrates that those people don't grasp the fundamentals. You probably wouldn't be surprised if a bunch of 14th-century people got widely varying results in post-operative recovery after, say, appendix removal. But they, not understanding microbiology or (that stupid, illogical) cell theory, would be mystified why sometimes people healed and other times they got infections and died. This would be true, even if they were very, very careful and tried REALLLLLLY hard.

What kind of specialized knowledge do you need to get a "real" result from prayer? Why is it that a loving God would require such specialized knowledge (that you liken to microbiology) to communicate with His children? If you get a response to prayer, what criterea do you use to determine if it is genuine or if you are one of the billions of people who simply believe they talked to God, but failed? I've seen people from different religions that were 100% convinced that their religion is the one true religion and that they prayed and recieved and God even told them so. If prayer is a reliable source of determining what is true and what is not, how is it that so many people get it wrong and how do you know you are not one of those people?

I ask these things in all seriousness, and I will genuinely consider your response.

Edited August 11, 2008 by DigitalShadow
Stupid typo

[Vort]

I had a carefully typed up point by point response, but then I accidently hit backspace while not in the text window and the browser went back and deleted it all. It's probably for the better since I don't think we're really getting anywhere here. Instead, I will only respond to what I think is the heart of this matter and I honestly want to hear what you think about it.

I'll do my best to give you a well-reasoned response. Obviously, I speak only for myself and not for the LDS Church as a whole or any other of its members, unless I specifically cite Church doctrinal sources.

What kind of specialized knowledge do you need to get a "real" result from prayer?

James seems to answer this question:

James 1:5-7 "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord."

Specialized knowledge, as such, is not required. Asking in faith is required.

Why is it that a loving God would require such specialized knowledge (that you liken to microbiology) to communicate with His children?

To be clear: I did not liken communication with God to knowledge of microbiology. Rather, I compared using a faulty model of communication with God and then concluding that God doesn't exist based on that faulty model with using a faulty model of microbiology and then concluding that cell theory is false based on that faulty model.

Why would God require such from his children in order to give an answer? That is a very broad question with deep ramifications. Books, entire encyclopedias, could be written to answer that question. To distill my understanding down to a few lines:

What does God promise his faithful (note the word) followers? In LDS parlance, eternal life. All Christians agree that God promises "all that the Father hath"; the Latter-day Saints have perhaps a bit more literalistic interpretation of this. So what does the Father have? Kingdoms, thrones, powers, principalities...such terms have been used historically to describe God's dominion and creation. Today, those of an astronomical bent might say planets, stars, and galaxies. Those of a more familial persuasion might say families, children, posterity. Those of a political mind might say nations, monarchies, complete rule.

The point is, whatever it is that God has and that he promises to his faithful (again, note the word) disciples is something of inestimable worth and power. So if you had to pick the one ultimate monarch that would be the absolute ruler of the earth (couldn't be you or any of your close relatives or friends :) ), would you choose some great and knowledgeable scientist? Doubtful; being a great scientist hardly qualifies you to be a great king. Maybe the most athletic person you have ever seen? Ha ha ha. You would probably choose someone who best embodies principles such as justice, compassion, maturity, strong-mindedness, incorruptibility, love, compassion, fairness, willingness to follow through, and so forth.

I submit that these are the exact qualities that God wants, indeed requires, of those who follow him. But how are such qualities to be developed? Answer: through faith. Through seeing a distant goal and determining that one will get there, indeed must get there, even if the road is unknown; planning one's route for the trip as best one can; starting the trip and persevering, even when the going gets rough or seems impossible; being willing to change the route as one finds oneself blocked; and always being humble enough to ask for and accept correction from God himself, from his chosen servant helpers, and from others who might have insight.

The first baby steps one must master when starting on this path are the steps of being willing to believe there is a God who speaks to you, then seeking after him and opening yourself to hear him speak to you, even if that means (as it most certainly will) that you must make uncomfortable, even painful, changes in your life and in your very way of thinking. Anyone and everyone is capable of doing this much, though not everyone is willing to do so.

If you get a response to prayer, what criterea do you use to determine if it is genuine or if you are one of the billions of people who simply believe they talked to God, but failed?

How do you back up the implicit statement that billions of people believe they have spoken with God, but really haven't? I reject the statement, and therefore the construction of the question.

I've seen people from different religions that were 100% convinced that their religion is the one true religion and that they prayed and recieved and God even told them so. If prayer is a reliable source of determining what is true and what is not, how is it that so many people get it wrong and how do you know you are not one of those people?

Depends on what you mean by "get it wrong". No one, not even Joseph Smith, claimed that revelation to them made them infallible. (Okay, maybe some have claimed that, but no sane and honest person has.)

To use a profane example: Suppose you are convinced of the validity of cell theory, and then go about telling your friends how everything is really constructed of cells. The wood you see is actually just cells! Your hand is nothing but a collection of cells! The hair on your head is really just cells! Your wedding ring is actually just made of cells! The sun itself is a gigantic, glowing ball of cells!

The fact that you are beginning to understand cell theory does not mean that you understand it in full, or that you can correctly and meaningfully apply that understanding in all cases. There is still lots of room for misunderstanding, misinterpretation, and error. God teaches us line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little. We aren't given everything at once, because we could not possibly understand it. We are allowed to grow in our understanding as our faith and abilities grow.

I ask these things in all seriousness, and I'm will genuinely consider your response.

Hope my answers made some sense.

[Snow]

Do you believe in:

Ghosts?

Levitation?

Telepathy?

Before you answer, consider that there is a:

Spirit World

Jesus Walked on Water

Jesus could read the thoughts of others

Okay answer now. :)

It's one thing to say that God walked on water and knows all things, it is another thing to say that ghosts live among us that that people can read other people's minds and defy gravity.

...but yes, ghosts, mind reading and levitating are real... as real as Dolly Parton's smile, John Edward's fidelity, big foot, aliens and kidnapping farmers for some serious probing.

[choice]

MORE PROOF

(via a-train)

[choice]

[choice]

not so camera shy after all...:)

[mike_uk]

Oooohhh great topic!

I believe in ghosts without any doubt whatsoever. Ive had 1st hand experience with them, well kind of ! LEt me tell you some stories.

Years ago when I was still a child and my nan was alive she would come to uor house for a visit and religiously sit in te same chair, every single time. It was her chair hehe. Anyway, nan had an aroma that was hers, must have been her purfume or washing powder etc. It was my nan's smell lol. She was also quite a large lady! Well unfortunately she became ill and eventually passed away and the whole family not long after her funeral were all in the living room. My brother happened to be sitting in nan's chair and after some time bolted off that chair, white as a ghost and shaking like a leaf. Eventually we got out of him that a really heavy weight was sat on him making it impossible to get off. Infact he was unable top breathe for the whole time. He even said he could smell nan. No doubt about it, nan came for a sit down.

The other experience I kind of had involved my mum who has a tendancy to see strange things. Anyway, she was stood at the sink washing up when to her left appeared a hand with a lacy sleeve. For a second or two she thought nothing of it becasue her husband was in the house. But the hand she said was very feminine and her hubby certainly didnt wear lacy clothing. She called out to him but he happened to be upstairs. Hmm, this freaked her out somewhat and she certainly is not crazy. It kind of makes sense becasue she told me that things turn themslelves on around the house, things go missing etc. I also used to notice that her bathroom used to be absolutely freezing which is one of the signs of a haunted room. I was active at the time and went to her house and everyone left me alone in their. Blimey I was a bit scared. I dedicated the home and in the middle of the prayer I had to stop for a second and look around becasue something was behind me, or atleast it felt like it. I carried on and finished up. Mum said the house felt great afterwards.

Now this final one is certainly strange and again involces mum. Not sure why these things happen to her.

Her last experience was when she was in hospital awaiting an appointment. She was in the clinic, totally alone. She fet really lonely and miserable, basically really down in the dumps. Then she was absolutely speechless by what she witnessed. She looked over at the wall opposite her and witnessed an absolutely beautiful figure, radiant and smiling at her. He had his hands clasped and was looking at her. The thing is this figure was really really tall and winged. The feeling she had was out of this world. I have been the only person she has spoken toabout this though becasue she thinks people would think her as loosing her mind.

Just 3 storeis for you.

[debi56]

Yes I believe in ghosts or hauntings. Levitation, it says that with faith we could move mountains. Telepathy, not sure.

[funkymonkey]

Oooohhh great topic!

I believe in ghosts without any doubt whatsoever. Ive had 1st hand experience with them, well kind of ! LEt me tell you some stories.

The other experience I kind of had involved my mum who has a tendancy to see strange things. Anyway, she was stood at the sink washing up when to her left appeared a hand with a lacy sleeve. For a second or two she thought nothing of it becasue her husband was in the house. But the hand she said was very feminine and her hubby certainly didnt wear lacy clothing. She called out to him but he happened to be upstairs. Hmm, this freaked her out somewhat and she certainly is not crazy. It kind of makes sense becasue she told me that things turn themslelves on around the house, things go missing etc. I also used to notice that her bathroom used to be absolutely freezing which is one of the signs of a haunted room. I was active at the time and went to her house and everyone left me alone in their. Blimey I was a bit scared. I dedicated the home and in the middle of the prayer I had to stop for a second and look around becasue something was behind me, or atleast it felt like it. I carried on and finished up. Mum said the house felt great afterwards.

Just 3 storeis for you.

Go Mike! Way cool stories.

You know, your story fits perfectly as a spiritual experience on your own thread "when you prayed...". You have had your own spiritual experiences ... if there are ghosts there has to be a God right?

[funkymonkey]

not so camera shy after all...:)

I've been looking for that unicorn everywhere!