Agreed. The space for God has gotten progressively smaller over the centuries.
And if that second tool can not be tested for reliability perhaps it is best not to use it?
Let me reiterate, if the spiritual realm impinges on the physical in any way it can be tested.
Wrong conclusion. I am pointing out that Moses had no evidence of the burning bush–it was a personal account of a personal event. I am pointing out what skeptics (early on and now) have said about Moses’ personal account.
Personally, I stand with those who listen to this account and find no reason to discredit it. Then again, I stand with those give accounts of the Resurrection, so I doubt this lends much credit to those who have no belief in a burning bush to start with.
I believe there was a flood, but not one that covered the planet. I believe Noah took ordinary livestock aboard his Ark–not kangaroos from Australia or Pandas from central China. I believe the lesson of Noah was that when Noah was given a chance to start over…once again–almost immediately–sin entered the picture through a man who was called righteous.
Another way of looking at it is that God has become less diluted over the centuries. In many ways He has become more knowable.
How are you planning to test it?
this seems like a strange way to admit god isnt logical and doesnt make sense in terms of what we know about the universe - might as well just pull out the mysterious ways / cant comprehemd card. Its usually the last resort when apologists have no answers. I agree. God is not logical and makes no sense to our human minds - maybe because its not real?
Right. That’s what I’m saying… 
It is a fair point. Miracles from ancient times are difficult to verify. We can look through archaeology to see if there are things that help verify the possibility. Some of the Hebrew miracles in Egypt look a bit suspect as there is reason to doubt some of the fundamentals of the Exodus story.
Tell me how the spiritual impinges on the physical, then we can discuss how to test.
We have already discussed this. I asked you to think of times in your life that fit a saying of Jesus: “The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak.”
Have you ever had a premonition? I lean towards very suspicious when it comes to fortune tellers. On the other hand I’ve had at least two premonitions where a peek into the future is the only possible, only logical explanation. In each of these two peeks, I came to a minor conclusion that made perfect sense to someone who had not yet lived through the experience–but none-the-less was an error.
The reason I bring this up is because I see two possible alternatives (meaning there could be more) and I have no way of proving either. One is that the spiritual realm gave me a peek of what would happen. While both these experiences were upsetting to live through, having had a peek in no way served me or the real situation. The other alternative is whether time loops in such a way that every so often two loops touch and we get a brief look at what will happen. Fun to think about every so often, but I have no way of knowing and no way of testing.
Another story I’ve often told is one where I was having financial difficulties and I asked my deceased grandmothers to join my prayer that I might find a way to work through this problem. They promptly ratted me out to my mother (in two separate dreams, one night after the other). There was no way my mom could know of that brief financial hardship–we lived hundreds of miles apart and there was no reason to think anything was wrong. (By the way, my grandmothers did not specify the help I needed, they just told my mom I needed help.) Later Mom told me her phone call to me was the most embarrassing one she ever had to make. She was that certain I would recommend a good psychiatrist. 
These are a couple of my experiences, but they are meaningless to anyone else. This why I encourage you to think along the lines of “The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak.”
i get it. God is beyond human logic and too hard to comprehend by humans. Therefore apologists can say whatever they want and just fall back to that if something doesnt make sense…very convienient. If god is so incrompehensible and beyond human logic why even bother outside of asserting ones own “spiritual connection” … i get a spiritual connection when i watch a good movie. Is that “god” or is that just dopamine? Must be god and if you try to say no i can just inform you that the movie isnt compregendible to you and beyond your capabilities to appreciate
You knew that already.
Except we don’t say “whatever we want.”
And this whole discussion evolved out of the concept of faith.
You choose it, or you choose not to have it. (And some people choose to take anything said on the matter and find a way to disagree with it. That’s a choice too, though I don’t see the point in pressing that with someone who holds faith. It just seems like that choice is exercised by the person to convince himself why he has chosen not to pursue faith.)
its always those pesky atheists asking questions…like why cant they just nod and not ask questions and stop critique leading cultural ideas about religion and spirituality. Who do they think they are? You choose to have faith for a reason. If it isnt logical/empirical its purely emotional
That might be how you see yourself, but that’s certainly not what I said.
What you are saying isnt very clear… unless all youre saying is people have faith and that transcends human logic and empirical knowledge. Otherwise it wouldnt be faith. But surely you can see why non christians object to such a worldview and theres nothing wrong with objecting to it, in this thread, or anywhere else… faith is faith only because nothing else makes sense in any logical or empiracle form. Simply repeating a mantra in ones head in order to feel better doesnt mean anything to me beyond “happy thoughts make me happy” - it doesnt follow that the thoughts reflect anything outside ones own psyche…they say its a “spiritual” dimension. Its not. Its just emotions
1 Like
God is limited to logic. Logic itself might as well be God itself. And since i just posted it, thrn it must be so. All youre doing is defining God as outside the question so that an answer isnt needed
1 Like
Of course I can see it.
And nowhere did I say there was anything wrong with objecting to it.
The god you have created might be.
I wouldn’t want to believe in that god either.
Ok. Then i dont understand why you posted the above
