Selective Skepticism

A thought experiment for Christians, here's the starting point:

You read a report from a stranger online. The stranger claims that the returned Christ is at large. In the report the stranger claims that the man he takes to be Jesus demonstrated his divinity by floating in the air and emitting a brilliant light. The stranger claims that he, and others witnessed the event. There is no testimony from any of the other unnamed witnesses. Since writing the report a few days ago, the author died.

I want you to add extra details or modifications to this scenario up to the point at which the balance would be tipped and your instincts would lead you to accept the mans story.

---

Sai Baba:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sathya_Sai_Baba#Beliefs_and_practices_of_Sathya_...

Dawkins rap lol
http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=eaGgpGLxLQw

Category:

Education

Tags:

• evidence
• Jesus
• resurrection
• risen
• skepticism
• double
• standard

[toddf321]

I'm a Christian, and pretty cynical about crazy claims. My faith is based on witness from the Holy Spirit. Examination of evidence came after the fact. A video of a guy glowing and floating would not be convincing to me. What would help swing the balance is if a credible and prominent citizen who had nothing to gain (and something to lose) insisted on convincing others that this is indeed the 2nd coming of Christ. That's what we have with primary source documents from the persecutor Paul.

[bitbutter]

"My faith is based on witness from the Holy Spirit"

I'm not sure what you mean. How have you been able to satisfy yourself that this holy spirit is real, and not something you may be imagining (or wishing for)?

[antipelagian]

Matt. 24:22-24

22 If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened. 23 At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'There he is!' do not believe it. 24 For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect—if that were possible.

If a Christian presupposes the truth of the Bible, he would be necessarily be skeptical of such claims.

[bitbutter]

"If a Christian presupposes the truth of the Bible, he would be necessarily be skeptical of such claims."

Yes. Here I'm addressing Christians who believe because they feel persuaded by the evidence. Not fideists or presuppers who've fallen into a mind trap that prevents them from even entertaining the possibility that they are mistaken.

[whirlpoolzend]

(3)Two months later one was found dead on a Tasmanian Highway...still the conspiracy theorists were talking that it was "planted"! Then more credible sightings and another found dead on the road. It's broadly accepted now that we have a (small) fox population.

(Which is bad news for some of Tassie's unique wildlife I might add).

It's interesting to note how skepticism (for some) can be quite selective!

[bitbutter]

yes, that story is a good illustration.

[tylenator552]

are your eyes realy that big or are you wearing contacts

[indiehouse]

I agree.

[indiehouse]

If your arguement is to state that all things come from somewhere or someone and that something cannot come from nothing, the logical conclusion is that God was also created from somewhere or by someone. By your reasoning, God is not the creator of all things.

[RaminHAL9001]

This is a very good thuoght experiment. If you could work on the presentation, make it more interesting to listen to and perhaps accompany it with slides or video clips, you would have something really useful in a portfolio of materials for teaching skepticism.

[calvinhobbesliker2]

continued... BTW, the Information Paradox is not a 'whole' [sic] in one theory, it's a contradiction between TWO theories. All this shows is that no theory is perfect. Scientists are working to modify the theories so this can be taken into account. The imperfection of theories does not mean that we should abandon them and opt for a supernatural explanation for which there isn't sufficient evidence.

[calvinhobbesliker2]

When was I saying anthing about 'before the big bang.' The big bang, as far as we know, was when time began, so there was no 'before.' Finally, you're referring to the first law, not the secong. It can be violated, but only for a short period of time, inversely related to the amount of energy. This comess from the uncertainty principle of energy and time: The less uncertainty of the amount of energy, the more uncertainty of the amount of time said energy is transmitted.

[Groudie101]

It is interesting.Most scientist would out right admit that they have no idea what the universe was like before the big bang.Even experiments from the LHC can't tell us that.What ever theories are given are full of wholes like the"information Paradox" nonsense.What you are doing is being intellectual dishonest and it does contradict the 2nd law of thermodynamic and also flies in the face of common sense.Something cannot come from nothing

[calvinhobbesliker2]

Yes, they do. Read up on quantum mechanics, which is one of the most empirically verified scientific theories. BTW, the second law is not violated by this; the entropy of the universe still increases.

[Groudie101]

clearly a failed attempt at sounding scientific.Before passing these words of to someone you should know what their background in science is.Fluctuations doesn't happen to "nothing".You've violated every facet of the second law of thermodynamics but it's nice to see science has reached a point where mediocre theories having more weight than actual,proven scientific laws....This is nor a character attack but you aint fooling anyone buddy

[calvinhobbesliker2]

First of all, the laws do not come from anywhere; humans invented them to describe the behavior of the universe. Yes, the formation of the universe was caused by a quantum fluctuation that temporarily created energy from nothing, and then split into positive mass energy and negavive gravitational potential energy, making the net energy in the universe zero. Postulating an intelligent being doesn't explain anything as you don't know how the being came into existance.