The Movie Paranormal Activity

And I am answering "That is unknown."And I can't investigate GOD because I do not know of a method.It really is that simple.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

So are next week's lottery numbers. So what is your point? I expect that there are all sorts of wholly natural and potentially knowable things which you personally don't know any method of investigating. So what is your point? Do you think GOD is inherently immune to scientific investigation for some reason? Or just an 'as yet unknown'?Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

Don't know. Sorry but I can't make it much clearer.It really is that simple.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

quote:

---

Do you think GOD is inherently immune to scientific investigation for some reason? Or just an 'as yet unknown'?

---

We have no way of obtaining a sample. At best, we can investigate the human methods of attempting to investigate.Unknown seems a better category than assuming God definitely does or does not exist as a given. Beliefs cannot be labeled and assigned in as neat and tidy of categories as assumed knowledge.It is arrogant for anyone to attempt to frame the rationale of belief as having to follow certain logic.

Why does he need to consider the possibility that God is real? Is it to validate your beliefs? Why can't you even begin to consider the possibility that God and other supernatural forces are not real? Why won't you validate other people's belief instead of trying to force yours on to them? Why does your beliefs need other people to change their beliefs to validate yours? Can't you believe in something and validate your beliefs other than pestering other people to change theirs?And please, don't respond to these questions with other questions as I find that quite rude.You should really stop pestering Jar about this and let him be. He doesn't have any answer for you, and you keep saying he should have.

Bacuse jar believes that GOD is real and that he is the "creator of all that is seen and unseen" (to quote him). Not at all. I don't believe in the existence of any gods or other supernatural beings at all. I am asking jar about his own stated beliefs. Not mine. You seem to have the wrong end of the stick here. I am asking jar about the inconsistency in his own beliefs. Namely him insisting that the common usage of terms like 'supernatural' and 'paranormal' are "meaningless" and necessarily referring to things which are "unreal" despite him believing in both GOD as the creator of "all that is seen and unseen" and some sort of post death state of existence. Both of which are supernatural in exactly the way he is insisting to be "meaningless" and "unreal". Maybe you should actually understand who is saying what before you comment? Firstly - Jar is more than capable of looking out for himself and he can stop replying any time he so chooses.More to the point - Jar seems intent on deriding people like Slevesque when they use terms like "supernatural" with regard to the things they believe in whilst jar himself holds equally supernatural (albeit more vague) beliefs himself.This is hypocritical.Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

Well if you don't know you cannot definitively say that "No, GOD cannot be scientifically investigated or understood" can you?You want to have your cake and eat it jar. You want to play the 'oh so rational' game when talking to Slevesque and tell him that his use of terms like 'supernatural' and 'paranormal' are "meaningless" and "unreal" when he uses them in the context of his beliefs. But then when it is pointed out that your own (albeit more vague) beliefs are equally accurately described as 'supernatural' you simply refuse to confront the dilemma you have created for yourself. Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

This thread isn't about anyone's individual belief system.The Coffee House is lighter discussion, but participants are still asked to stay on topic or at least close.Please reread the OP and adjust accordingly.Note to Straggler: Reread Message 91Thanks
AdminPD

What do you think jar means by this?
How does he know GOD cannot be scientifically investigated?
Is it because he has defined GOD as being apart from the physical natural world in some sense? It is both arrogant and hypocritical to tell one person that their use of the term 'supernatural' is "meaningless" and necessarily referring to things which are "unreal" because they say it refers to things which are outside of nature and not limited by natural laws whilst simultaneously citing the object of your own beliefs as matching that exact same description.Jar thinks he can play at being the voice of rational reason when talking to overt supernaturalists such as Slevesque. But if you look at his own positions and arguments in this thread they differ from those of overt supernaturalists only in terms of ambiguity and vagueness. Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

So demons, if they exist, are they in your supernatural folder or your unknown folder?Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

While I am alive and just human I don't see how I could ever put anything in the supernatural folder. If I experienced something demonic I would place it in the Unknown Folder.

So why did you say that demons, if they exist, would be supernatural?

If demons actually existed then they would be supernatural, but as I said above, as long as I am alive and a human I see no way I could ever place anything I experience in the supernatural category.How could I know I experienced a real demon?

Those who believe that demons actually exist have effectively placed them in their supernatural folder (e.g. Slevesque in this thread)You derided him for doing so.Yet apparently in your supernatural folder we find, if they exist, GOD and demons. What about things you haven't yet experienced - E.g. GOD. Is he is in the supernatural folder? The answer appears to be - Yes.

Other people are of course free to assert most anything.GOD, if GOD exists would be supernatural.I deride anyone who asserts stuff without evidence.If Slevesque asserts demons actually exist then I would ask for evidence, but as i have said I see absolutely no way anyone could show, evidence, experience or know something was supernatural.