Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/jharp741/public_html/blogjones/WordPress/wp-includes/cache.php on line 36

Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/jharp741/public_html/blogjones/WordPress/wp-includes/query.php on line 21

Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/jharp741/public_html/blogjones/WordPress/wp-includes/theme.php on line 508

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/jharp741/public_html/blogjones/WordPress/wp-includes/cache.php:36) in /home/jharp741/public_html/blogjones/WordPress/wp-includes/feed-rss2-comments.php on line 2
Comments on: I am not dead. http://www.blogjones.com/WordPress/2006/04/28/i-am-not-dead/ I'm not crazy! I'm going sane in a crazy world! Mon, 21 May 2012 12:18:46 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 By: Mark VandeWettering http://www.blogjones.com/WordPress/2006/04/28/i-am-not-dead/#comment-8794 Mark VandeWettering Tue, 02 May 2006 05:32:03 +0000 http://www.blogjones.com/WordPress/2006/04/28/i-am-not-dead/#comment-8794 While this article may not (or may) reflect Swinburne's argument, assuming for the sake of argument that it at least bears some resemblance to Swinburne's argument, I'd like to know how one could reasonably determine the probility God exists or the God would choose to incarnate (is this a verb? oh well) himself amidst his subjects. I mean really, can you take seriously any such claim? Do we have a supply of alternative universes, each with or without God's influence, that we can draw these statistics from? It's patentedly obvious that any attempt to assign numbers to these is just absurd handwaving. Hence, any mathematical argument relying on such numbers is just so much air in motion. While this article may not (or may) reflect Swinburne’s argument, assuming for the sake of argument that it at least bears some resemblance to Swinburne’s argument, I’d like to know how one could reasonably determine the probility God exists or the God would choose to incarnate (is this a verb? oh well) himself amidst his subjects. I mean really, can you take seriously any such claim? Do we have a supply of alternative universes, each with or without God’s influence, that we can draw these statistics from?

It’s patentedly obvious that any attempt to assign numbers to these is just absurd handwaving. Hence, any mathematical argument relying on such numbers is just so much air in motion.

]]> By: Blog Jones http://www.blogjones.com/WordPress/2006/04/28/i-am-not-dead/#comment-8617 Blog Jones Sat, 29 Apr 2006 13:36:50 +0000 http://www.blogjones.com/WordPress/2006/04/28/i-am-not-dead/#comment-8617 That's possible, but the report ought to be able to get at least the basic assumptions right. Assuming he did--assuming that the professor does start with a 50/50 chance for God's existence and ends up with a 97% chance that Jesus was resurrected, then my argument stands. That’s possible, but the report ought to be able to get at least the basic assumptions right. Assuming he did–assuming that the professor does start with a 50/50 chance for God’s existence and ends up with a 97% chance that Jesus was resurrected, then my argument stands.

]]> By: filosofo http://www.blogjones.com/WordPress/2006/04/28/i-am-not-dead/#comment-8605 filosofo Sat, 29 Apr 2006 03:43:58 +0000 http://www.blogjones.com/WordPress/2006/04/28/i-am-not-dead/#comment-8605 It does sound far-fetched, but I doubt such a brief news summary accurately reflects Swinburne's book-length argument. It does sound far-fetched, but I doubt such a brief news summary accurately reflects Swinburne’s book-length argument.

]]>