Spring Break
Ask an atheist! How would you convert an atheist?
Ken Ueda, Columnist, kueda@smu.edu
Issue date: 9/18/08 Section: Opinion
It is an unconvincing prophecy if one prophecizes using vague, unspecific dates, places or times. For instance, if one were to say, "Sometime in the future, a person will be struck by lightning," it wouldn't count as a convincing argument because invariably somebody will be struck by lightning in the future. People often point to Nostradamus for prophecies, arguing that he predicted things like the stock market crash, the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the fall of the Soviet Union and the thing that pisses me off the most, 9/11. Of course, Nostradamus' prophecies are so vague that they could apply to just about anything. For a prophesy to be considered even worthy of consideration of the truth of the religion, the predictions must be unambiguous with little room for interpretation, with specific dates and places.
The prophecies must also be non-trivial. If a prophecy claims that a storm will eventually subside or that a plague will eventually go away, then it is a trivial statement and shouldn't be considered. Prophecies must predict something that is surprising or unique. If a holy text predicted that in the 1969 World Series, a shoe polish play would occur, that would be incredibly impressive.
Prophecies cannot be self-fulfilling or something that human beings can work to make true. If a fortune cookie tells someone that he will be successful in the future, he will probably try to be successful in order to claim that the fortune cookie was true.
2) Scientific knowledge. If the bible or any other holy book contained something about the laws of electromagnetism, the theory of evolution, or even the first 100 digits of Pi, I would be convinced. In fact any sort of scientific knowledge in scripture that predates publication of the scientific theory in any scientific paper would be interesting. If Jesus said something like, "I say unto thee, air moving at a faster rate has a lower pressure" (Bernoulli's law) that would be pretty impressive. Of course these scientific propositions would have to be something specific and unambiguous.
The prophecies must also be non-trivial. If a prophecy claims that a storm will eventually subside or that a plague will eventually go away, then it is a trivial statement and shouldn't be considered. Prophecies must predict something that is surprising or unique. If a holy text predicted that in the 1969 World Series, a shoe polish play would occur, that would be incredibly impressive.
Prophecies cannot be self-fulfilling or something that human beings can work to make true. If a fortune cookie tells someone that he will be successful in the future, he will probably try to be successful in order to claim that the fortune cookie was true.
2) Scientific knowledge. If the bible or any other holy book contained something about the laws of electromagnetism, the theory of evolution, or even the first 100 digits of Pi, I would be convinced. In fact any sort of scientific knowledge in scripture that predates publication of the scientific theory in any scientific paper would be interesting. If Jesus said something like, "I say unto thee, air moving at a faster rate has a lower pressure" (Bernoulli's law) that would be pretty impressive. Of course these scientific propositions would have to be something specific and unambiguous.
Viewing Comments 1 - 3 of 3
Josephine
posted 9/18/08 @ 5:56 PM CST
Great article. I agree entirely.
Jim Watson
posted 9/20/08 @ 7:55 AM CST
Excellent article. Brilliant reasoning and clear explanations. May I quote it (and give credit to the author)?
Thanks, Jim Watson
Sari
posted 9/21/08 @ 5:57 PM CST
Thank you for this. Why don't more people just think rationally and logically about the world we live in?
Post a Comment