'Design vs. Chance' by PZ Myers, AAI 2009

I fully agree under normal natural circumstances it is impossible.
However, Isaiah says that he was inspired by God thus attributing this supernatural act to God.
There is a lot of evidence that says the book was written before the actual events, but we say that evidence must be wrong because it's impossible to do what he did.
So give me an example of what it would take to convince you personally that God does exist?

This convo started on the dating of the book of Isaiah.
Isaiah's book contains certain prophecies hundreds of years before the actual events.
Now this is explained away naturally by saying that no man can do that, so part of the book had to be written later and that is cited as evidence.
That's not evidence, that's just people starting out on a faith based assumption that what he did was impossible to begin with.

Your 3rd post is very interesting.
There is no proof of anything supernatural.
So my question is how do we know we are looking at proof sine we try to explain everything away naturally?
What would convince us? We are gonna start out on this faith based belief that there must be a natural explanation.
And how can we use natural means to prove the supernatural? The supernatural is not governed by the laws of the natural realm.

Now your second post you say that you've never seen anything supernatural, ok I take your word for it.
And you wouldn't rush to a conclusion to call anything you can't explain as supernatural, and again that's resonable,but the last phrase kinda says that there is a natural explanation for everything, so are you ruling out the possibility of the supernatural?
What happens when there is no natural explanation? Then we actually have to take it on faith that there is a natural explanation.

Thanks, yes the chineese teapot does sound like nonsense but is it possible to acheive? My point exactly, and it wouldn't even take a supernatural act to accomplish that.
It is natural for man to want to find a natural way to explain things, but since we can't rule out the possibility of the supernatural there is a chance that some supernatural things have been explained away as natural or written off as just not possible.

The total absence of proof for supernatural shows that supernatural things most likely dont exist. This is why things must be proven true, or show evidence for their existance, before you can take it seriously. You cannot make a claim totally without proof or evidence and think that people have to prove you false before it is accepted as truth.
And you can find pretty much everything in the Bible to serve your own purpose if you interpret in the way you want.

If just say if you saw something supernatural happen right before your eyes, how would you explain it? Magic? A trick? Fake? That's my point exactly even if you did see it you wouldn't believe it.
The only way that you can know for sure that something is impossible is to know all possibilities, do you know everything?

Well I have never seen anything supernatural happening in front of my eyes. If I would see something I could not understand, I would first look if it could be explained naturally. You are missing the point. If I see something, I believe it. It is just that I wouldnt rush to interpret it as supernatural, as there is a natural way to explain it.

Then there is this claim God does not exist.
Is this another one that you can prove? You don't have to it's a negative, only problem God said he created the world and life and it's here, so prove he didn't.
Also prove life just happened that's one of your positive claims so go ahead.

Prove that there isnt a red chinese teapot orbiting around the planet mars? Sounds like nonsense? Prove it? Well any reasonable man would realise that this claim is nonsense. You cant disprove something which has no information what it is and where it is. There is a chance that God does exist, but the probability of that is so very tiny, that we can regard it as nonsense, just like the chinese teapot. And things have to be proven true, for them to be true. Real evidence, not belief-based.