The Movie Paranormal Activity

But I still have no idea what you mean by 'paranormal' or 'supernatural' Can you explain what you mean by these terms? Yet both your description of GOD and this once-I-am-dead state of existence you keep referring to are supernatural/paranormal by common usage of these terms aren't they? Are you describing the objects of your own beliefs as necessarily meaningless and unreal? Because (if he exists) he is supernatural? Or for some other reason? Do you think the idea that "you" can go round knowing things or testing them once you are dead is any less hypothetical or evidence-defying than any of the other scenarios you have been confronted with in this thread?

I would have thought that the MAYBE part was implicit in the description as "hypothetical". But if you are going to be that pedantic I'll rephrase the question accordingly:Do you think the idea that "you" can MAYBE go round knowing things or testing them once you are dead is any less hypothetical or evidence-defying than any of the other scenarios mentioned in this thread that MAYBE will lead to a similar ability to know or test such things? (divine revelation etc.) But as you keep telling me - MAYBE once you are dead you will be able to. And if these things are real they can meaningfully be called "supernatural" by any common usage of the term can't they? Could you actually explain what you mean by 'paranormal' or 'supernatural' in this context? Because (if he exists) he is supernatural? Or for some other reason?

It is proving hard enough to get answers out of you whilst you are alive. So do you consider it more likely that being dead might provide you with a method of testing for supernaturality than divine revelation whilst alive (for example) might provide you with a method of testing for supernaturality? I agree but am bewildered as to why you think your once-I-am-dead state of being is any less hypothetical than any of the other hypotheticals being bandied around in this thread. If this GOD of yours is real (as you believe) then it is "supernatural" by any common usage of the term isn't it? Why?

I am not asking you to test for the existence of GOD while you are alive. I am asking you to consider the possibility that this GOD of yours is real (as you believe to be the case) and asking you if this GOD as you have described it to be ("the creator of all that is seen and unseen") qualifies as supernatural by common usage of that term as used by myself, Slevesque and Mod in this thread. Why?

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.

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

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.

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

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.

Are you putting demons and GOD in your unknown folder? Or your supernatural folder?If you are putting them in your unknown folder - How are you deciding which unknowns would be supernatural if they existed and which wouldn't? Should I point out the irony here or simply deride you for your assertions?Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

For comparison - Is dark matter in your unknown folder?How are you deciding which things in your unknown folder would be supernatural (e.g. demons) if they existed and which wouldn't?

So you put them in your 'unknown' folder. How are you deciding which things in your unknown folder would be moved to the supernatural folder if they existed and which wouldn't?

What evidence leads you to conclude that demons, if they exist, will be supernatural?How are you deciding which things in your unknown folder are going to be (i.e. if they exist) supernatural and which aren't?This has nothing to do with you being dead. The claim that some things will be supernatural if they exist is being made by you now. While you are very much alive.What is the basis of this claim?