tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5087179578927731422.post7360647359991970328..comments2012-12-04T19:22:16.597-08:00Comments on is god real?: further appreciation of martin reesunkleEhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12207729664951716799noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5087179578927731422.post-38239216476298239592011-05-09T14:33:44.635-07:002011-05-09T14:33:44.635-07:00Yes, if science is the only way to know things, we...Yes, if science is the only way to know things, we cannot measure the Holy Spirit so he mustn't exist. But no-one in normal life believes such a limited way of knowing things.<br /><br />Another problem is that conclusions are often assumed in the premises. e.g. the resurrection cannot occur because we know how human bodies behave and we are <i>assuming</i> there's no God to make one particular human body behave differently.unkleEhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12207729664951716799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5087179578927731422.post-62594707160722329532011-05-09T12:11:58.440-07:002011-05-09T12:11:58.440-07:00Not having read his book I'll withhold any def...Not having read his book I'll withhold any definitive judgment, but my guess is that he views the scientific method as the only method and that he jumps from methodological naturalism to metaphysical naturism.<br /><br />Supposing that the resurrection of Jesus is the event "debunked" by biology, I guess that leaves physics to "debunk" the "holy ghost"??? :SIgnorancehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08840540848601019925noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5087179578927731422.post-37586626125193325312011-05-08T18:03:29.605-07:002011-05-08T18:03:29.605-07:00The Guardian discussion was interesting, thanks. B...The Guardian discussion was interesting, thanks. But I would like to see Sam Harris challenged on his statement: <i>" We have Christians believing in the holy ghost, the resurrection of Jesus and his possible return – these are claims about biology and physics which, from a scientific point of view in the 21st century, should be unsustainable."</i> I don't recall anyone ever conducting a scientific experiment that attempted to demonstrate that the "holy ghost" doesn't exist, let alone actually demonstrate that fact with 95% confidence limits. Ditto the resurrection. And if the experiments haven't been done, how is such belief <i>"unsustainable"</i>?unkleEhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12207729664951716799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5087179578927731422.post-48434387344544551402011-05-08T08:36:02.151-07:002011-05-08T08:36:02.151-07:00There was a discussion about this in the Guardian ...There was a discussion about this in the Guardian involving a man named Sam Harris:<br /><br />http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2011/apr/16/conversation-science-religious-faith<br /><br />Now there have been plenty of discussions of it, of course. Richard Dawkins.net bustled with coverage about this. It was quite an issue for them.<br /><br />Though I must say that I liked Michael White's calm and nuanced take on the subject best! :)Ignorancehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08840540848601019925noreply@blogger.com