What ever happened to god's miracles?

Renshia
Renshia's picture
Posts: 28
Joined: 2007-06-11
User is offlineOffline
What ever happened to god's miracles?

One thing I do not understand, and admit it was a huge part in my departure from christianity is where are all the signs and wonders that god is said to be capable of?

For me I actively fight against religion because the entire structure is based on this god that in the past is claimed to have been extremely active in messing around in humanities affairs. Basically getting his point across to us dullards, as in old testament stuff. Even active in more modern times.. with new testament miracles. But then ever since man has developed the ability to group information together.. Poof no sign of god…

Where are the blind healed?.... Where are the lame that walk?…. where are the hungry fed with just a couple fish….

Why is the world is the UN food agency worried about shortages. There should be at least a couple believers that could pass a few loaves of bread and a couple of fish around and feed them surely?


Show me one person that was completely blind, crippled or on a death bed with cancer that was healed. One truly verifiable miracle. Why would god feel the necessity’s to send his son down to die and dispatch his disciples into the world to and then just disapear?

In the bible in Mark V16:15-18 the bible states;


“He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation.
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues, they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”

Seems mighty fishy that as soon as we would all be able to witness this awesome power of our said Lord he retracts his influence and expects everything to be based on faith….

I may not be an overly smart person, but he states the credentials of his followers,  where are the signs that "will accompany those who believe?

I spent a number of years devotely following a chritsian faith… I never seen a miracle that did not have an obvious explanation. I never did see the blind healed. Hell never even met anyone that has or at least could prove they have.

So where is your god, what is he doing taking a holiday on Bazor?


Really if people don’t use there common sense and see religion for the fruit it doesn't bear, then i think they really do deserve to be slaves.

Renshia
-------------------------------------------------------------
I just can’t believe that people waste all this time being one thing for something else, they waste all this time and energy on developing some mythological construct as an excuse to live as a person should. What a pathetic waste of energy.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3661
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
I am basically through

I am basically through running in circles with you concerning miracles and their many interpretations and misinterpretations.  You say that the parting of the Red Sea ( Exodus 13:17 to 15:12 ) is not something that you consider as a miraculous event.  That statement alone indicates to me that you are unfortunately living in a mindset that has no referent to reality

Further discussion with you is pointless I'm afraid.

It amazes me that Christians who think like yourself can, for example, refer to something as commonplace as human childbirth ( 6 billion births and counting ) as a miracle yet the examples that I have given to you from your own Bible leave you scratching your head in indecision.

 

 Concerning God and his "miracles" my thesis was clear and unambiguous.  I issued a simple challenge and was rewarded with....nothing.

http://theatheistconservative.com/

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:I am

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
I am basically through running in circles with you concerning miracles and their many interpretations and misinterpretations.  You say that the parting of the Red Sea ( Exodus 13:17 to 15:12 ) is not something that you consider as a miraculous event.  That statement alone indicates to me that you are unfortunately living in a mindset that has no referent to reality .

What's really confusing me is how you continue to go back and forth from today's world to the bible.  Why?  What am I missing?  You've totally confused me from trying to go between acts of God to what I was talking about.  I have no idea what the hell now...

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
It amazes me that Christians who think like yourself can, for example, refer to something as commonplace as human childbirth ( 6 billion births and counting ) as a miracle yet the examples that I have given to you from your own Bible leave you scratching your head in indecision.

I still have no idea what the hell you are talking about now.  What in the world is a miracle to you then?  It's a simple question, one that has yet to be answered, one that I guess you can't answer, perhaps because you have no answer because, as I suspect, you do not believe in miracles.  Am I right?

I've never heard of those things referred to as miracles.  It was God doing his thing.  Now you didn't say the Red Sea, you said the deaths of Egyptians so I assumed you talked about the plauges and such.  You said the walls crumbling.  God was directing the battle that Joshua was instructed to do.  He foretold the walls would crumble if he did a siege for 6 days.  Since it was God's work, OK sure, call it a miracle.  I just never heard of it referred to that way and I never really thought of it that way.  I never said I knew everything.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
Concerning God and his "miracles" my thesis was clear and unambiguous.  I issued a simple challenge and was rewarded with....nothing.

There was a thesis there?  Hmm ok.

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
...

The greatest God's miracle is existence. We know, that matter and energy can not be created, and yet it exists quite a lot of it around here. Anything in existence is a miracle.
Then, there are "miracles", which involves a manipulation with already existing matter and energy, which appeared in the beginning of the universe. This manipulation can be very surprising, unbelievable, or unusual (it's very relative), but it is only playing with what already was created, it's using of the existing laws of universe. Such a 'miraculous' manipulation can be done by technical, spiritual, or combined means, by human or non-human beings, it happens in various cases quite often and is observed by believers and non-believers, in all times and places. Shortly said, it isn't such a big deal.  Manipulation definitely isn't a  work of God Himself, the creator of universe, it's an "inside job", performed by beings and means which exists inside of this universe.
A man changing a water into wine, or another man, materializing trinkets, is principially similar to a traveller, showing to tribesmen in jungle some technical things, like a miraculously growing "legs" of a camera tripod. (they were quite startled)
The real miracle happened about 14 milliards of years ago, and it's the first source of everything.

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
That was way COOL , Luminon.

That was way COOL , Luminon. I must play with that  [ play ] +

[  ]  God's miracle is existence. We [ suspect ] , that matter and energy cannot be created, and yet it exists; quite a lot of it around here .....

Anything in existence is [ the only ] miracle. [    ]

Then, there are "miracles", which involves a manipulation [ reincarnation/recycling ] with already existing matter and energy, which [ we perceive in our TINY  universe of the much much grander ]. This manipulation [ recycling ] can be very surprising, unbelievable, or unusual ....

  

Can something come from nothing ?  Maybe our language and math modeling is primitive .....   (((    )))   The miracle is us !  There is no other !  We can't even die !  "SAVED Eternally"  , all is >>>ONE<<< ....  I AM sorry Xains, and all dogma loons, but you are full of Dogma Shit ..... repent your devil  .... do your 40 days, ALONE , away from civilization .... and when you retune, sing the good words, 

" NO MASTER, WE ARE ONE ! "                ><><><><><><><>< 

  


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3661
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak wrote: What's

razorphreak wrote:

 

What's really confusing me is how you continue to go back and forth from today's world to the bible. 

You really do have an incredibly hard time with language don't you ?  It's the same "world" just  different periods of time.  That's precisely why discussing anything with you is an utter waste of time. 

ps, as it so alarmingly easy to confuse you, you must be an example of the miracle of stupidity.

 

http://theatheistconservative.com/

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:You

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
You really do have an incredibly hard time with language don't you ?  It's the same "world" just  different periods of time.  That's precisely why discussing anything with you is an utter waste of time. 

ps, as it so alarmingly easy to confuse you, you must be an example of the miracle of stupidity.

What's confusing to me is why you do that.  It's like you can't express a straight thought.

Interesting how you took this to insults.  Guess it's over now.

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Religion is an insult ......

Religion is an insult ...... ProzacDW is a lover of honesty, fighting the dogma germ .... 


HisWillness
atheistRational VIP!
HisWillness's picture
Posts: 4100
Joined: 2008-02-21
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak wrote:Granted. 

razorphreak wrote:
Granted.  I suppose I take the high road often enough.  For example, we use the term photosynthesis to explain how plants convert CO2 to O2 using light for energy (I'm keeping it simple so please don't kill me for missing out a few details).  The question as to WHY it happens however I regard as a miracle.  It never had to occur.  But it does and the fact that it does, not how it does, is the miracle.

We have no argument here, since you apply "miracle" to the unknown or awe-inspiring. I think that notion of miracle is fairly widespread, and I've used it myself in regular speech.

razorphreak wrote:
Not accepting that the supernatural exists means that only nature can produce anything that could be regarded as a miracle and hence explainable, i.e. cause and effect, so it wouldn't really be a miracle after all.

Which is exactly why the term is kind of meaningless to me. Extrapolating a supernatural from the natural creates all sorts of problems.

razorphreak wrote:
And my faith led me to believe those events are gifts from God.

I'm sure you've heard this before, but I've never read your answer: why are these gifts not from some other deity? I mentioned "extrapolating a supernatural" because there's a great deal of interpretation that goes on with the supernatural. It's a realm where natural rules don't apply, and for which the possibilities are endless. The fact that you've chosen one representation of that lawless expanse makes me wonder how the rest of the possibilities should be treated. As equals? Or is "God" the entirety of the supernatural, whatever that turns out to be?

razorphreak wrote:
It's not how a person uses those skills but rather the sheer fact that the individual actually had the ability to learn those skills is what I regard as a miracle, a gift from God.

So in your supernatural, there's a gifting God. I'm sure God has other attributes, too. The only problem I have here is that God's "realm" seems to shrink with the progress of understanding in the natural world. It puts the natural and the supernatural worlds at odds, so that the more understanding we have of the natural world, the less space we have for pre-conceived notions of the supernatural. The supernatural, then, must be just as subject to falsification in our understanding as the natural world, unless we want to find ourselves in a quagmire of cognitive dissonance.

For example: the stuff about insects having four legs in the Bible, and rabbits chewing the cud. Whatever. Obviously insects don't have four legs, and rabbits don't chew cud. I think a reasonable person would just let it go. But if the Bible is the word of God, then God has left us a strange message that could (at best) be interpreted as a riddle.

Here's where we get to interpret and put our own attributes on to God. Anthropomorphizing the unknown isn't new or unusual - people often give their pets voices, as though privy to the thoughts (in English) of their dogs. When we do it for the imagined Supreme Commander of Everything, though, it gets dicey. People tend to disagree enough about the nature of this Great Leader that they decide to use God/Allah/Whoever as a great excuse to act human: that is, to kill one another in packs.

Why would our first instinct be to congratulate such a being instead of making it our enemy? If such a being exists that would send us mixed messages and give us an excellent vehicle for us-and-them thinking, why don't we fight it?

Saint Will: no gyration without funkstification.
fabulae! nil satis firmi video quam ob rem accipere hunc mi expediat metum. - Terence


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
HisWillness wrote:We have no

HisWillness wrote:
We have no argument here, since you apply "miracle" to the unknown or awe-inspiring. I think that notion of miracle is fairly widespread, and I've used it myself in regular speech.

...

 

Which is exactly why the term is kind of meaningless to me. Extrapolating a supernatural from the natural creates all sorts of problems.

So how would you label what I call a miracle?  If you want an example, use the idea of once the Earth was formed and life began, why did photosynthesis begin?

HisWillness wrote:
I'm sure you've heard this before, but I've never read your answer: why are these gifts not from some other deity? I mentioned "extrapolating a supernatural" because there's a great deal of interpretation that goes on with the supernatural. It's a realm where natural rules don't apply, and for which the possibilities are endless. The fact that you've chosen one representation of that lawless expanse makes me wonder how the rest of the possibilities should be treated. As equals? Or is "God" the entirety of the supernatural, whatever that turns out to be?

Yep I've heard it.  The only answer I have really is I don't know those "others."  I've done some studying of world religions and I can't say if what they call a deity isn't in fact a different named version of the who I refer to as God.  All I do know for certain is from personal experiences (not tragedies) that have led me to believe in the God from the bible.

HisWillness wrote:
So in your supernatural, there's a gifting God. I'm sure God has other attributes, too. The only problem I have here is that God's "realm" seems to shrink with the progress of understanding in the natural world. It puts the natural and the supernatural worlds at odds, so that the more understanding we have of the natural world, the less space we have for pre-conceived notions of the supernatural. The supernatural, then, must be just as subject to falsification in our understanding as the natural world, unless we want to find ourselves in a quagmire of cognitive dissonance.

For example: the stuff about insects having four legs in the Bible, and rabbits chewing the cud. Whatever. Obviously insects don't have four legs, and rabbits don't chew cud. I think a reasonable person would just let it go. But if the Bible is the word of God, then God has left us a strange message that could (at best) be interpreted as a riddle.

I find it interesting how you describe this as a shrinking realm.  I've never seen any conflict between the natural and the supernatural worlds.  The confusion, the conflict comes from people and their own desires to make it.  "Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows." (James 1:17) 

Everything on this planet no matter how bizarre is from God.  From the air we breath to the cyclones that can kill thousands.  It's hard to accept that a "good God" would allow such suffering to happen but everything that happens on this planet to each individual serves a purpose.  This of course is part of the very core of the belief in God and probably one of the biggest points that no one other than another theist on this site will agree about.  I write it only because it is the reason why the supernatural and the natural can and do coexist without conflict.  Nothing happens on Earth that isn't without reason and every scientist agrees with this.  Why it actually does happen however, not the why it happens or even how but why it happens for the benefit of the planet and all that live on it is the miracle and the gift from God.

I think I might have laid the theology on a bit thick there but I felt like it was the only way to express what it was that I was thinking on this point.

HisWillness wrote:
Here's where we get to interpret and put our own attributes on to God. Anthropomorphizing the unknown isn't new or unusual - people often give their pets voices, as though privy to the thoughts (in English) of their dogs. When we do it for the imagined Supreme Commander of Everything, though, it gets dicey. People tend to disagree enough about the nature of this Great Leader that they decide to use God/Allah/Whoever as a great excuse to act human: that is, to kill one another in packs.

Why would our first instinct be to congratulate such a being instead of making it our enemy? If such a being exists that would send us mixed messages and give us an excellent vehicle for us-and-them thinking, why don't we fight it?

James 1:13-15 For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

What you wrote made me immediately think of preachers like Hinn or John Hagee or even more recently like those of Jeremiah Wright.  I guess I'm wondering, which "being" is supposed to be fought?

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


RepresentatifOfGod (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
At the end of the day God

At the end of the day God doesn't like giving us files of evidence of supernatural things, cause nobody is ever going to get proofed into a relationship with God.  IT IS BY FAITH. So tough! If you believe you may get to see a few miracles, like myself. But you'll always be able to explain them away or the evidence won't be there or something. That's the wonderful nature of doubt and the fickleness of the human mind.

My Mum got cured from cancer twice when I prayed, but died the third time. God didn't ask me to pray for a cure that time. Instead, I prayed for a demon to leave her and she promptly believed in Jesus and then went to church and participated in the worship. Something my family consider amazing considering her frail state of body and mind. But of course all this can be explained away even the miracle of new faith itself.

I asked for a wife. God granted. Everything I have asked for in faith for her he has granted - her initial faith, people around her to support her, her friends and acquaintances becoming Christians - amazing to watch someone become a Christian btw - I count it the greatest miracle. Her becoming a church leader... all can be explained away - what is belief anyway, just a decision? How strange it is that sometimes we decide to do something yet still don't believe we can do it. We don't have the faith. Is God mean to withhold faith from us - no he does it for our own good sometimes.

(He wasn't really dead when he got raised from the dead. Try Ian McCormack. He just got lucky? It was the devil? It was aliens? He's a liar? I believe it was God. So does he.)

 

Miracles, Miracles, Miracles...

Mat 12:39  But He answered and said to them, An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign. And there shall be no sign given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah.
Mat 12:40  For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the huge fish, so the Son of Man shall be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
 

but yet...

Joh 14:11  Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the very works themselves.
Joh 14:12  Truly, truly, I say to you, He who believes on Me, the works that I do he shall do also, and greater works than these he shall do, because I go to My Father.
 

Jesus is talking about miracles, so I ought to be able to heal the sick and raise the dead and walk on water, cast out demons, right, because I believe in Him. The condition is faith. So God's got a get out clause to stop me doing all kinds of wacky stuff that are against his will, he just doesn't give me the faith. I had the faith for my mum to get cured from cancer twice, but the third time I did not. God told me to do something else.

Sorry, I want to keep my life and works hidden like God, so I'm not going to make it easy for you to look into my life. I can explain away or doubt every miracle in the Bible in different ways, yet I still believe them, because God has given me faith.

Dear readers of this forum. Seek God with all your heart and you'll find Him (He's found in Jesus - no other way). Ask for faith to be saved and you'll receive it.

1Ti 2:3  For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
1Ti 2:4  who will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

People will say you're a fool, and maybe like me you'll even think you're a fool yourself, but a fool for Christ is better off in the long run than a smartypants for anyone else. God says so. The true fool is the one who says in his heart there is no God. For who can disprove his existence, eh?!

 


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1230
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Let's try this: What isn't a miracle?

Sorry I'm late. 

razorphreak wrote:
I see that everything can be attributed to God, the "miracle" can be small to large.

razor, the present point of contention is that you have expanded the constraints of what a miracle is:  from instances for which we (currently) have no natural explanation and which in fact contravene the accepted laws of nature -- such as a man walking on the surface of water or spontaneously generating large amounts of food from a small source, or reviving individuals who were presumably dead -- to those for which there is a perfectly natural and mundane explanation, with no natural laws violated, and no impetus to default to a divine agency.

razorphreak wrote:

Granted.  I suppose I take the high road often enough.  For example, we use the term photosynthesis to explain how plants convert CO2 to O2 using light for energy (I'm keeping it simple so please don't kill me for missing out a few details).  The question as to WHY it happens however I regard as a miracle.  It never had to occur.  But it does and the fact that it does, not how it does, is the miracle.

The particulars of photosynthesis are certainly fascinating -- even if it's perfectly within the laws of nature (whereas psychically withering a fig tree or bringing clay pigeons to life is not).  It is also quite fascinating that Yersinia pestis found a way to hitch a ride on fleas, which in turn hitched a ride on rats, which in turn have wrought devastation on humanity many times throughout history?  Do you consider bubonic plague a miracle?  How about the fascinating ability of tornadoes to form from thunderstorms and then juggle trailers in Kansas?  Do you consider that miraculous?

razorphreak wrote:

Millions saw on a Tuesday morning airplanes slam into some buildings in New York and yet some who "saw it" have concluded that it was a missile or smaller plane that caused some or all of the damage.  What you see vs. what I see are perceptions and when you see someone saved by an EMT, you call daily life, I call a miracle that we were given the ability to learn how to do such a thing and a miracle that it could be done at that moment for that person to live.

In order for you to see an EMT save someone on that day, 19 men in the prime of their lives had to use simple box cutters to take over passenger planes, and knowingly fly to their own fiery deaths.  Do you call it a miracle that they were given the ability to learn how to do such a thing and a miracle that it could be done at that moment for thousands of innocent people to die?

Not trying to spoil the cheerful mood we're all in, but since you have chosen to relax the definition of what a miracle is, it would help if you would present a definition of what you don't consider a miracle. 

Or perhaps we just need to make the OP question more specific:  Why do miracles no longer occur of the sort where the laws of nature have to be suspended?  Why the downgrade to miracles of the "everyday" sort?

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
RepresentatifOfGod wrote:At

RepresentatifOfGod wrote:

At the end of the day God doesn't like giving us files of evidence of supernatural things, cause nobody is ever going to get proofed into a relationship with God.  IT IS BY FAITH. So tough! If you believe you may get to see a few miracles, like myself. But you'll always be able to explain them away or the evidence won't be there or something. That's the wonderful nature of doubt and the fickleness of the human mind.

Sounds like the portrayal of Satan in the movie "The Devil's Advocate". Why make it easy.

RepresentatifOfGod wrote:

My Mum got cured from cancer twice when I prayed, but died the third time. God didn't ask me to pray for a cure that time. Instead, I prayed for a demon to leave her and she promptly believed in Jesus and then went to church and participated in the worship. Something my family consider amazing considering her frail state of body and mind. But of course all this can be explained away even the miracle of new faith itself.

Sorry for your loss. It sounds as it she went into remission, you know that happens of course. Demons don't exist for me any more than your god and have even less basis in Hebrew scripture.

 

RepresentatifOfGod wrote:

Miracles, Miracles, Miracles...

Mat 12:39  But He answered and said to them, An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign. And there shall be no sign given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah.
Mat 12:40  For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the huge fish, so the Son of Man shall be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

As this was written in 100 CE the supposed event was 70 years in the past and proof is lacking.
 

RepresentatifOfGod wrote:

but yet...

Joh 14:11  Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the very works themselves.
Joh 14:12  Truly, truly, I say to you, He who believes on Me, the works that I do he shall do also, and greater works than these he shall do, because I go to My Father.

Still haven't seen anyone doing miracles as of today.
 

RepresentatifOfGod wrote:

Jesus is talking about miracles, so I ought to be able to heal the sick and raise the dead and walk on water, cast out demons, right, because I believe in Him. The condition is faith. So God's got a get out clause to stop me doing all kinds of wacky stuff that are against his will, he just doesn't give me the faith. I had the faith for my mum to get cured from cancer twice, but the third time I did not. God told me to do something else.

There is always the out isn't there?

RepresentatifOfGod wrote:

Sorry, I want to keep my life and works hidden like God, so I'm not going to make it easy for you to look into my life. I can explain away or doubt every miracle in the Bible in different ways, yet I still believe them, because God has given me faith.

Dear readers of this forum. Seek God with all your heart and you'll find Him (He's found in Jesus - no other way). Ask for faith to be saved and you'll receive it.

I'm sure this will be effective to convert us heathen atheist non-believers.

RepresentatifOfGod wrote:

People will say you're a fool, and maybe like me you'll even think you're a fool yourself, but a fool for Christ is better off in the long run than a smartypants for anyone else. God says so. The true fool is the one who says in his heart there is no God. For who can disprove his existence, eh?!

 

I don't think you are a fool, just misinformed.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3661
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak

razorphreak wrote:

 

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
Concerning God and his "miracles" my thesis was clear and unambiguous.  I issued a simple challenge and was rewarded with....nothing.

There was a thesis there?  Hmm ok.

Of course there was a thesis !!!   .......must I spell it out for you ?

Remember, my references for you to "put up or shut up"  regarding the supposed existence of God's miracles ? Well, that example of colloquial speech translates as..... validate your claims.  

 

Allow me to break it down for you even further.  

Because of the lack of verifiable evidence combined with the extreme unlikelyhood of these miracles ever occurring it is only appropriate that I would approach this topic with extreme skepticism.

My thesis was that I require more than scripture references, anecdotal testimony or personal musings to accept such a preposterous claim regarding the occurrence of supernatural miracles. 

I require verification .....otherwise the claim is rejected.

You have, no matter how well intentioned your motives, only frustrated me with your theological obfuscations, prevarications and other such devices.  To this I can only resort to the use of an even more fitting turn of phrase...talk is cheap!

 

 

 

 

I apologize for inferring that you were stupid but you really require an inordinate amount of information to comprehend even the most basic concepts. 

Cheers.

http://theatheistconservative.com/

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:Of

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
Of course there was a

thesis !!!

 

  .......must I spell it out for you ?

Remember, my references for you to "put up or shut up"  regarding the supposed existence of God's miracles ? Well, that example of colloquial speech translates as..... validate your claims.  

 

Allow me to break it down for you even further.  

Because of the lack of verifiable evidence combined with the extreme unlikelyhood of these miracles ever occurring it is only appropriate that I would approach this topic with extreme skepticism.

My thesis was that I require more than scripture references, anecdotal testimony or personal musings to accept such a preposterous claim regarding the occurrence of supernatural miracles. 

I require verification .....otherwise the claim is rejected.

You have, no matter how well intentioned your motives, only frustrated me with your theological obfuscations, prevarications and other such devices.  To this I can only resort to the use of an even more fitting turn of phrase...talk is cheap!

OK I understand what your position is now.  Now in my defense, I didn't think I had to prove anything in this discussion simply because it was about attempting to define what a miracle is or more so what it could be.  We can't even agree what could or couldn't be referred to as a miracle so how can any proof of a miracle be accepted until we agree what it is to begin with? 

My responses have been an attempt to define and give examples of what a miracle could be and I have not gotten any confirmation that yep, that could be called a miracle even from a secular point of view.  Since I did not, that's where I came out saying I don't think any non-believer ever accepts anything called a miracle, even if they were witnesses to it.  

Again, I simply am confused as to what exactly we are discussing since the subject seems to have changed again.  First it was about the miracles from the bible, then to what is a miracle, now trying to prove miracles exist from supernatural sources but before we've even agreed upon what a miracle is.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
I apologize for inferring that you were stupid but you really require an inordinate amount of information to comprehend even the most basic concepts. 

Cheers.

Hard to know exact meanings sometimes since it's obvious neither of us are of the same point of view.  I'd rather make sure there are no assumptions.  Call it my reaction to how many of this site approach theists.  Sorry if I'm a source of frustration...

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
zarathustra wrote:Not trying

zarathustra wrote:
Not trying to spoil the cheerful mood we're all in, but since you have chosen to relax the definition of what a miracle is, it would help if you would present a definition of what you don't consider a miracle.

Sorry I put this out of order, but ya man, talk about a freakin buzz kill...

...just kidding Smiling

zarathustra wrote:
razor, the present point of contention is that you have expanded the constraints of what a miracle is:  from instances for which we (currently) have no natural explanation and which in fact contravene the accepted laws of nature -- such as a man walking on the surface of water or spontaneously generating large amounts of food from a small source, or reviving individuals who were presumably dead -- to those for which there is a perfectly natural and mundane explanation, with no natural laws violated, and no impetus to default to a divine agency.

Forgive me.  I've never been one who can explain through words well.  I try my best but I know I fail.

Actually what you refer to does break natural laws because what those things do not happen in daily life.  When someone dies, you're dead.  Reviving someone who has died (and I'm not talking about dead only a few seconds or even a few minutes but days) is a supernatural event.  I call it an act of God because only God can perform such an act.  And since it does fit the definition of a miracle I guess it is one.  I've not used those as examples because I know many here reject the bible as anything but a work of fiction so I never went there for examples.

zarathustra wrote:
Do you consider bubonic plague a miracle?  How about the fascinating ability of tornadoes to form from thunderstorms and then juggle trailers in Kansas?  Do you consider that miraculous?

Those things are part of the natural world.  Things, events, that cause hardship and trials are part of the planet we live on.  I don't think many would regard them as anything but a disaster but if they had never occurred, would we have the science that goes with them now?

I'd imagine that right about now you'd probably be asking "so why didn't God just prevent them in the first place?"  Hard to say really but the bible does give clues.

If you've never read the book of Job from the bible, I'd recommend it.

zarathustra wrote:
In order for you to see an EMT save someone on that day, 19 men in the prime of their lives had to use simple box cutters to take over passenger planes, and knowingly fly to their own fiery deaths.  Do you call it a miracle that they were given the ability to learn how to do such a thing and a miracle that it could be done at that moment for thousands of innocent people to die?

No.  It's no miracle when people use their own desires to do evil.  The gift that we were given to have free will to choose which desire to follow goes hand in hand with knowing right from wrong.  But it is a miracle that all humans can learn things, good or bad.  My point here is you have to separate attributes that all humans possess from desires.

zarathustra wrote:
Or perhaps we just need to make the OP question more specific:  Why do miracles no longer occur of the sort where the laws of nature have to be suspended?  Why the downgrade to miracles of the "everyday" sort?

I think this goes in part to my last post regarding how the supernatural and the natural worlds coexist without conflict.  If something were already a part of nature, it's no miracle that they occur.  My position here is the miracle is the fact that they exist.

 

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1230
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak wrote:Sorry I

razorphreak wrote:


Sorry I put this out of order, but ya man, talk about a freakin buzz kill...



Yeah, eye no.   If you could get jesus to stop by and do a few of his famous parlor tricks, it might lighten the mood.

razorphreak wrote:


zarathustra wrote:
razor, the present point of contention is that you have expanded the constraints of what a miracle is:  from instances for which we (currently) have no natural explanation and which in fact contravene the accepted laws of nature -- such as a man walking on the surface of water or spontaneously generating large amounts of food from a small source, or reviving individuals who were presumably dead -- to those for which there is a perfectly natural and mundane explanation, with no natural laws violated, and no impetus to default to a divine agency.


Forgive me.  I've never been one who can explain through words well.  I try my best but I know I fail.

Actually what you refer to does break natural laws because what those things do not happen in daily life. 


That was essentially my point.  I was drawing a distinction between those jesus tricks from the gospels where the laws of nature are suspended (and whose absence in modern times Renshia is questioning), and the 'miracles' you refer to today (photosynthesis, emergency medical service) -- mundane examples which fall well within the natural order.  Sorry if obvious distinction wasn't obvious.

razorphreak wrote:

Those things are part of the natural world.  Things, events, that cause hardship and trials are part of the planet we live on.  I don't think many would regard them as anything but a disaster but if they had never occurred, would we have the science that goes with them now?


My point in mentioning plague and tornadoes is that they are every bit part of the natural order as is photosynthesis.  We may find their effects far less salutary, but they are just as miraculous -- or non-miraculous (photosynthesis is a process which developed due to plants' effort to survive; plague finds its way to humans due to bacteria, fleas and rats, each in turn trying to survive).
 

You've maintained that the real miracle is not what happens, but why it happens.  But the truth is, plague occurs for the same "why' that photosynthesis occurs.


Therefore, please state your defining term for the miraculous, if it is not a contravention of the natural order.  To choose only those natural instances which we find favorable as modern miracles, and exclude those which we don't, is highly subjective.

razorphreak wrote:


I'd imagine that right about now you'd probably be asking "so why didn't God just prevent them in the first place?"  Hard to say really but the bible does give clues.

If you've never read the book of Job from the bible, I'd recommend it.

No, I'm sticking to the OP question, and given your response I'm asking your criteria for labeling some natural events as miraculous and not others. 

Your recommendation is certainly appreciated, but as a former christian rehabilitated to atheism (how's that for miraculous?), I can assure you I've read the bible.  I'd recommend you stop recommending.

razorphreak wrote:


No.  It's no miracle when people use their own desires to do evil.  The gift that we were given to have free will to choose which desire to follow goes hand in hand with knowing right from wrong.  But it is a miracle that all humans can learn things, good or bad.  My point here is you have to separate attributes that all humans possess from desires.

My point is that however depraved and evil you and I find it, the 9-11 attackers are as much a testimony to human endeavor as the rescue workers who came rushing to help.  Bear in mind also that the attackers themselves thought that they were doing something good in their god's eyes.  bin laden himself thought in an act of god that the towers collapsed in full.  For you to dub the latter instance as miraculous and the former as simply evil is again subjective.

razorphreak wrote:


zarathustra wrote:
Or perhaps we just need to make the OP question more specific:  Why do miracles no longer occur of the sort where the laws of nature have to be suspended?  Why the downgrade to miracles of the "everyday" sort?


I think this goes in part to my last post regarding how the supernatural and the natural worlds coexist without conflict.  If something were already a part of nature, it's no miracle that they occur.  My position here is the miracle is the fact that they exist. 

You yourself conceded above that the jesus tricks "break natural laws because what those things do [sic] not happen in daily life. "  So my question stands.  Why no more nature-breaking miracles?  Why the downgrade to miracles of the "daily life" sort?

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
..

Wanna miracles? Here's a list. Are they too worldly, or unsignificant? In most of cases, I don't think so, they certainly break the laws of nature. And it's just one of several such sections on the website. 
Thanks God at least for them, I certainly wouldn't prefer a miracle of parting the waters, when it's a swimming pool which I'm diving in.

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


Boon Docks
Posts: 415
Joined: 2007-03-04
User is offlineOffline
Good medicine vs miracles

 I think if a few people are cured of cancer that is called damn good medicine.  Now if the entire world were cured of every form of cancer in one day, that my friends would be a miracle.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Luminon. I AM lost for words

Luminon. I AM lost for words as usual /// Interesting site. I love eastern "philosophy" ....

Since I was about 12 yrs old I've been amazed and sad, because what we call "Masters of Wisdom", or "Great Leaders" etc etc, is simply common sense, so lacking in the general masses. This can and will only be changed with devotion to world education, based on the "ethics" of WE ARE ONE .....

  As much "common sense" there is in that site, the so called "miracles" presented there, IMO without elaborating, do a dis-service .....  

 As you seemed basically to say before, existence is the only "miracle" (simply meaning the unknown)

Just to add to the understanding of that site "Share International" and the essay there on "Maitreya" , read these two first, just the opening summaries, then the essay,

"Maitreya"  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maitreya

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_eschatology

 Essay:  "Frequently asked questions about Maitreya"

http://www.share-international.org/maitreya/Maitreya_faq.htm

 Starts:

Q. What does Maitreya think is the most urgent problem in the world at present?

A. The most important action with which Maitreya is concerned is the saving of millions of people who currently die from starvation in a world of plenty. He says that nothing so moves Him to grief as this shame: “The crime of separation must be driven from this world. I affirm that as My Purpose.” So the first aim of Maitreya is to show humanity that we are one and the same: wherever we live, whatever our colour, background or religious belief, the needs of all are the same.

    Equally important and just as urgent is the saving of our planet from the destruction on which it is set from our misuse of the resources of the planet.

  I AM a disciple of "COMMON SENSE" , as so very proud of the many "Masters of Wisdom" here at RRS and growing in numbers everywhere on our small one world ....  Did I say I love you teachers ? I love you !   

 

 

 


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
I AM GOD AS YOU

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

Luminon. I AM lost for words as usual /// Interesting site. I love eastern "philosophy" ....

Since I was about 12 yrs old I've been amazed and sad, because what we call "Masters of Wisdom", or "Great Leaders" etc etc, is simply common sense, so lacking in the general masses. This can and will only be changed with devotion to world education, based on the "ethics" of WE ARE ONE .....


I'm glad you like the site, it's interesting, just as the related magazine they publish. Yes, there is a lot of a common sense in that, but also some very deep and revolutional insights into psychology, sociology, and economics. Things like love or devotion, are nice, but for other people it's only words or letters, you can hardly just transfer your feelings on other people. They need something more than that. Something like, which there is, a specific plans of a global resource sharing system on level of nations. Or, for example, a science of finding a purpose of individuals and societies, the science of living. This  extensive, practical wisdom was deliberately created. I've got several of books dictated by one Master of Wisdom (the mentioned Maitreya) at home and it's much more complicated and advanced reading than usual popular New Age books, it's dense with informations.

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:
  As much "common sense" there is in that site, the so called "miracles" presented there, IMO without elaborating, do a dis-service .....  

 As you seemed basically to say before, existence is the only "miracle" (simply meaning the unknown)


Well, then these small wonders are here to prove the existence of Masters of Wisdom Smiling Unless they show (and mysteriously disappear) as themselves, which happens to many people on the world, and locally, to some our family friends. Latest showing I heard about yesterday, was just a friendly smile and nod from a completely unknown, unusually bearded man with intriguing eyes, sitting  in a practically empty cafeteria. A second after ...well, that man just wasn't there. Later, the woman who saw him,  about a half of year, saw at my  home some photographs of a Master of Wisdom. She kept that encounter in memory, because it was very unusual, and she was now very surprised to recognize the man from cafeteria on the photographs of Maitreya. Miracle or not, I always like to hear when such an event happens around.
 

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:
  I AM a disciple of "COMMON SENSE" , as so very proud of the many "Masters of Wisdom" here at RRS and growing in numbers everywhere on our small one world ....  Did I say I love you teachers ? I love you !   

 I'm sure you'd like to have a look at one wonderful lady, called Bridgebuilder. Look for her topics and posts at this link, I think you'll agree with her just as much as I do, she has the most of truth, in the place where everyone thinks, they have it. She knows the love!
http://www.christiandiscussionforums.org/v/forumdisplay.php?f=103

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


HisWillness
atheistRational VIP!
HisWillness's picture
Posts: 4100
Joined: 2008-02-21
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak wrote:So how

razorphreak wrote:

So how would you label what I call a miracle?  If you want an example, use the idea of once the Earth was formed and life began, why did photosynthesis begin?

I'd call that a "process". I'm not being dismissive, there's just no real reason for me to think that nature interacted with supernature, since we have no evidence that a supernature exists.

razorphreak wrote:
Yep I've heard it.  The only answer I have really is I don't know those "others."  I've done some studying of world religions and I can't say if what they call a deity isn't in fact a different named version of the who I refer to as God.  All I do know for certain is from personal experiences (not tragedies) that have led me to believe in the God from the bible.

Do people often attribute your belief to tragedy? I thought that was a theistic tactic, but obviously both sides of the fence are using that sad-sack of an explanation.

The only problem with the "others" we've come up with on earth is that we could have conceivably produced more, since supernature provides no clues as to how it operates. God doesn't interact with us. Wotan doesn't interact with us. Neither do many guesses at the name of the things that could inhabit supernature. We simply have no way of knowing when we're right and wrong about the characteristics of the supernatural realm.

razorphreak wrote:
I've never seen any conflict between the natural and the supernatural worlds.

Neither have I, since no supernatural world seems to exist.

razorphreak wrote:
James 1:13-15 For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

What you wrote made me immediately think of preachers like Hinn or John Hagee or even more recently like those of Jeremiah Wright.  I guess I'm wondering, which "being" is supposed to be fought?

Ya got me. What you've written there looks, to me, like literal gibberish. Since God apparently created evil and sin, what would be the problem with evil and sin from the perspective of its creator? Why, in the process of creating, would God create something he, himself, didn't want? It's totally nonsensical.

The mystery of the first photosynthesis, too, is a great puzzle to solve. But saying that God did it is arguing ignorance. You have no more working knowledge of supernature than I do, so saying something came out of it, and arguing further that you know what part of supernature it came from (God) is simply pretending to know something you cannot possibly know.

Are we a dream in God's head, such that he occasionally has moments of lucid dreaming where he can change things, and in other moments finds himself powerless against the onslaught of his unconscious desires? That could possibly explain the theistic position.

Saint Will: no gyration without funkstification.
fabulae! nil satis firmi video quam ob rem accipere hunc mi expediat metum. - Terence


Kevin R Brown
Superfan
Kevin R Brown's picture
Posts: 3142
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:Wanna

Luminon wrote:

Wanna miracles? Here's a list. Are they too worldly, or unsignificant? In most of cases, I don't think so, they certainly break the laws of nature. And it's just one of several such sections on the website. 
Thanks God at least for them, I certainly wouldn't prefer a miracle of parting the waters, when it's a swimming pool which I'm diving in.

Luminon, your idiocy just knows no bounds, doesn't it?

At the very, very, very best, those things would count as interdimensional 'gags'. How sickeningly laughable is the prospect that divine beings actually wield such magical power as they are acclaimed, but only flex it in order to confound us lowly mortals with milk-drinking statues and light shows?

Fortunately, each one is quite easily dismissable by any skeptical inquirer of merit, and a head-shaking testament to the 'follow the flock' herd mentality humans happen to share with every other community animal on the planet.

Quote:
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."

- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
Kevin R Brown wrote:Luminon,

Kevin R Brown wrote:
Luminon, your idiocy just knows no bounds, doesn't it?

You're right. A bound for idiocy is IQ of 20, mine is 136, so the idiocy really knows no bounds.

Kevin R Brown wrote:
At the very, very, very best, those things would count as interdimensional 'gags'. How sickeningly laughable is the prospect that divine beings actually wield such magical power as they are acclaimed, but only flex it in order to confound us lowly mortals with milk-drinking statues and light shows?
Thanks for confidence, now we're getting somewhere. It's not as laughable as you think. Actually, your notion of "divine beings" and "lowly mortals" is sickening, like you took it right off the Old testament. Do you think in these 'master-slave', 'space invader - human victim' thought models, do you have to expect a selfish intention behind everything?
Behind the miracles is a necessity to teach humans to help themselves, not to make us inferior to any force, ever.
These events are actually systematic and long-termed attempts to expose this "magical power", to show, that there is more to reality, than meets the eye, to help people become open-minded, and keeping their free will. Nothing more and nothing less is required from these interdimensional gags. If it would be less, people would forget, if more, they would become afraid or fanatic, it's good as it is. Here's, I think, the answer, why nowadays the miracles aren't as big as they once were. Big miracles leads to big religions and big bonfires with heretics up there.
 

Kevin R Brown wrote:
Fortunately, each one is quite easily dismissable by any skeptical inquirer of merit, and a head-shaking testament to the 'follow the flock' herd mentality humans happen to share with every other community animal on the planet.

Yes, by a skeptical inquirer, who didn't see them on his own eyes. You make skepticism look like a form of block-mindness. It is not the intent to convince anyone who just looks at a photograph or reads an article, it helps to expect the unexpected, which is a form of open mind.

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


Boon Docks
Posts: 415
Joined: 2007-03-04
User is offlineOffline
Miracles on ice

  Someone here wrote:          

 [ from instances for which we (currently) have no natural explanation and which in fact contravene the accepted laws of nature -- such as a man walking on the surface of water ]

 

 

I can take pictures of this event happening, but I do not know how add them to the computer.  My daughter might help me out here.  In northern Minnesota we have an activity called ice fishing.  At this time of year all the lakes are frozen over.  During the spring thaw the lakes will have maybe a half inch of water on top of the ice.  That can give the impression of walking on water.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
quote - Luminon. " I'm sure

quote - Luminon. " I'm sure you'd like to have a look at one wonderful lady, called Bridgebuilder. Look for her topics and posts at this link, I think you'll agree with her just as much as I do, she has the most of truth, in the place where everyone thinks, they have it. She knows the love! "
http://www.christiandiscussionforums.org/v/forumdisplay.php?f=103
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I read some of BridgeBuilder's posts and she is very "loving and thoughtful", and that rates of the highest of honors. She makes me think of my cool sister who is a bit of a "new ager", who loved the movie "What the Bleep Do We Know". Sister often calls her self an atheist but I think of her more as a pantheist.

 As amazing as this "awe" of consciousness is, I don't think consciousness exists out side of energy/matter or the "material". Nothing is un-natural, supernatural, or magical .... not in any "percieved cosmic dimension of imagination or mathematical modeling". All is ONE. I don't believe "wise spirits" are causing statues to bleed milk etc. With an open mind, and even with a real wish it was true, I just don't. Ahh, the aliens are doing it ! Now that makes possible sense ... them tricksters ! .....     

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_the_Bleep_Do_We_Know!%3F

 About BridgeBuilders's writing on reincarnation, I would just say, with as many people that have come and gone, I find it not surprising that one would/could find a family nearly identical to your own.

"Progressive" Buddha fans reject the "folklore" that sprang from the ancient wise writings, and many don't use that morphed R word anymore. It just meant all energy and matter is "recycled". Telling the kids you better be good or you might come back as a lizard etc is folklore .....

I often write the way I do, with religious tones/semantics etc, to alter and destroy the present religious perceived definitions of "god , saved , heaven , christ , devil", etc .... ahhh , "the perfect metaphor", if only I could write  .... How bout, "love is the answer to all our problems". ( Shit, then someone yells "suicide works" ! ) 

Superstition and dogma are our enemy(devil) . "Awe"(gawed) is reality, and for me a beautiful thing.  As you seemed to say  before, existence is the miracle, but I would add the "only miracle" ......  ( OR we could say everything is a miracle). I have a deep hunch it always will be, something more to ask in wonder ....   

Thinking of all the children most motivates me to inspire. Just imagine the world "relationship" and progress we could and can have and enjoy. The "needless" suffering, is an old mostly unlearned lesson/teaching. "Love is our broken first law", as some said .... Inspire the kids and everyone. Religion and all hocus pocus is poison and fear, and so hell on earth this day ..... What a shame, as this devil of wrong thinking still rules .....

    understand it >   love is how ... caring indignation    

"But who prays for Satan? Who in eighteen centuries, has had the common humanity to pray for the one sinner that needed it most ...."  cool, Mark Twain  

 


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
Boon Docks wrote:  Someone

Boon Docks wrote:
  Someone here wrote:          

 [ from instances for which we (currently) have no natural explanation and which in fact contravene the accepted laws of nature -- such as a man walking on the surface of water ]

I can take pictures of this event happening, but I do not know how add them to the computer.  My daughter might help me out here.  In northern Minnesota we have an activity called ice fishing.  At this time of year all the lakes are frozen over.  During the spring thaw the lakes will have maybe a half inch of water on top of the ice.  That can give the impression of walking on water.


That's interesting, a photos would be nice. I don't think though, it's Jesus' case, if I remember, he walked on the Galilee lake, it's in quite a hot region, and there were high waves.

Also, this video doesn't seem to take place in a freezing water.
What do you think of that video, is there a glass or translucent plastic, just under the water surface? I don't think so, people are swimming in front of, behind and under that guy, and also, he drops his shoes and they fall on the swimming pool bottom, so it looks like it's nothing below him but water. Maybe someone's really walking on water there.

 

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:
As amazing as this "awe" of consciousness is, I don't think consciousness exists out side of energy/matter or the "material". Nothing is un-natural, supernatural, or magical .... not in any "percieved cosmic dimension of imagination or mathematical modeling". All is ONE. I don't believe "wise spirits" are causing statues to bleed milk etc. With an open mind, and even with a real wish it was true, I just don't. Ahh, the aliens are doing it ! Now that makes possible sense ... them tricksters ! .....  
Well, I think, that things I observe every once a while are natural. When the wise spirits  or aliens says, that they do exist and they're here, I'm not the one to try to change their mind, they have to know it better than me Smiling  So far, they didn't say "we don't exist, stop believing in us", and they haven't been passive either, every month there's a regular worldwide summary of their recent activity. As far as I know the magazine doesn't make up the stories - we sent them one what happened around here, and they printed it. So, I don't believe either, it's not a question of belief, but rational dealing with tons of facts and messages, which the world keeps bombarding me with.
By the way, these statues were supposed to drink the milk, and I'd have a hard time believing that, if I wouldn't see it filmed, on TV. I was still a kid at the time, but I remember it, in that TV document, there was a statuette of elephant god Ganesha, and an Indian guy giving it a milk on a spoon, putting it under Ganesha's trunk. Slowly, the milk disappeared from the spoon in about 25 seconds. I'd like to stay rational in front of others, but it would require to argue with a Hindu statuette about it's drinking habits Smiling

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
zarathustra

zarathustra wrote:

razorphreak wrote:
Sorry I put this out of order, but ya man, talk about a freakin buzz kill...


Yeah, eye no.   If you could get jesus to stop by and do a few of his famous parlor tricks, it might lighten the mood.

You mean he didn't see you first?  He was here at my house, gave me some wine, prechilled no less, and told me the best joke...

zarathustra wrote:
I was drawing a distinction between those jesus tricks from the gospels where the laws of nature are suspended (and whose absence in modern times Renshia is questioning), and the 'miracles' you refer to today (photosynthesis, emergency medical service) -- mundane examples which fall well within the natural order.  Sorry if obvious distinction wasn't obvious.

I don't like to assume, ever, especially on this site.

As to my examples, it seems you missed the point.

zarathustra wrote:
My point in mentioning plague and tornadoes is that they are every bit part of the natural order as is photosynthesis.  We may find their effects far less salutary, but they are just as miraculous -- or non-miraculous (photosynthesis is a process which developed due to plants' effort to survive; plague finds its way to humans due to bacteria, fleas and rats, each in turn trying to survive).

Yes, you did miss the point. The point has never been with my examples those things happening at all.  The reason to give them as examples is to show that they never had to happen in the first place.  Humans never had to gain the ability to think nor did plants ever have to give off oxygen so we would have the ability to live.  The fact that plants to and we think, the fact that they happen, and continue to happen, is the miracle.  "Natural order" is them happening; the "miracle" is the fact that they happened at all.

It actually has nothing to do with the supernatural if you stop to think about it; calling it a miracle is simply being reasonable.

zarathustra wrote:
I'm asking your criteria for labeling some natural events as miraculous and not others. 

Your recommendation is certainly appreciated, but as a former christian rehabilitated to atheism (how's that for miraculous?), I can assure you I've read the bible.  I'd recommend you stop recommending.

How can I stop recommending if my recommendations are recommendable?  At least, I've been told that in the past...

We've only given small examples, so I don't know by what you mean "some" natural events.  This is why I think you missed my point.  Perhaps I've confused myself and didn't make it clear enough...

Miracle = why anything in nature occurs.

Act of God = miracle.

zarathustra wrote:
My point is that however depraved and evil you and I find it, the 9-11 attackers are as much a testimony to human endeavor as the rescue workers who came rushing to help.  Bear in mind also that the attackers themselves thought that they were doing something good in their god's eyes.  bin laden himself thought in an act of god that the towers collapsed in full.  For you to dub the latter instance as miraculous and the former as simply evil is again subjective.

But those who rushed in, that's what they were trained to do.  Heroic as it may be, it was far from any kind of miracle that they went in.

The attackers were following a desire that was in contradiction to their own "faith," to their own religion, and how it was twisted to fit the situation.  The entire subject of 9/11 is subjective in that it was subjective from their point of view that America is evil, our point of view that they are evil men, and subjective that there was anything miraculous about that day.

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
HisWillness wrote:I'd call

HisWillness wrote:
I'd call that a "process". I'm not being dismissive, there's just no real reason for me to think that nature interacted with supernature, since we have no evidence that a supernature exists.

But that process never had to start.  That's the point I'm trying to make.  Even if you don't accept the supernatural had anything to do with those "processes," they exist and they make life possible makes it a miracle.

HisWillness wrote:
Do people often attribute your belief to tragedy? I thought that was a theistic tactic, but obviously both sides of the fence are using that sad-sack of an explanation.

Actually yes.  People think that I came to believe in God, Jesus, the Christian lifestyle, because of some event.

HisWillness wrote:
God doesn't interact with us. Wotan doesn't interact with us. Neither do many guesses at the name of the things that could inhabit supernature. We simply have no way of knowing when we're right and wrong about the characteristics of the supernatural realm.

I don't really agree with that, only because of what my own experiences are, however I won't debate that point really since I don't expect you to believe me.

HisWillness wrote:
What you've written there looks, to me, like literal gibberish. Since God apparently created evil and sin, what would be the problem with evil and sin from the perspective of its creator? Why, in the process of creating, would God create something he, himself, didn't want? It's totally nonsensical.

Well that depends on who you talk to.  Here on Earth, what is good and what is evil are both subjective.  No two people can agree that invading Iraq was the right thing; some call it good, some call it evil.  They are simply words that describe what we perceive.  Since they are both human in nature, not supernatural, it's difficult to simply say "God create it."

HisWillness wrote:
The mystery of the first photosynthesis, too, is a great puzzle to solve. But saying that God did it is arguing ignorance. You have no more working knowledge of supernature than I do, so saying something came out of it, and arguing further that you know what part of supernature it came from (God) is simply pretending to know something you cannot possibly know.

Are we a dream in God's head, such that he occasionally has moments of lucid dreaming where he can change things, and in other moments finds himself powerless against the onslaught of his unconscious desires? That could possibly explain the theistic position.

We are talking about what miracles are, especially from the theistic point of view.  So saying it's "arguing ignorance" is a rather odd thing to say.

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Google, How is the walking

Google, How is the walking on water trick done

I spent just a few mins with this, knowing it's fake ..... it's called "magic". I considered using stage magic etc etc with my band yrs ago, and still think that would be a fun band to see ..... Hey, "Oingo Bongo" add magic ..... 

Water walking (u got to see this)  http://www.mydigitallife.info/2006/07/08/criss-angel-walks-on-water-magic-tricks/

http://www.mightytricks.com/2007/08/criss-angels-walk-over-water.html

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080121172529AAQrbsF

 


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1230
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
   razorphreak wrote: As

 

 

razorphreak wrote:

As to my examples, it seems you missed the point.

You had a point?

razorphreak wrote:

zarathustra wrote:
My point in mentioning plague and tornadoes is that they are every bit part of the natural order as is photosynthesis.  We may find their effects far less salutary, but they are just as miraculous -- or non-miraculous (photosynthesis is a process which developed due to plants' effort to survive; plague finds its way to humans due to bacteria, fleas and rats, each in turn trying to survive).

Yes, you did miss the point. The point has never been with my examples those things happening at all.  The reason to give them as examples is to show that they never had to happen in the first place.  Humans never had to gain the ability to think nor did plants ever have to give off oxygen so we would have the ability to live.  The fact that plants to and we think, the fact that they happen, and continue to happen, is the miracle.  "Natural order" is them happening; the "miracle" is the fact that they happened at all.

[...]

Miracle = why anything in nature occurs.

Act of God = miracle.

Plague and tornadoes never had to happen either.  So is it a miracle that they do happen?  As I already pointed out: Plague happens for the same "why" that photosynthesis does.

If in fact anything that occurs in nature is an example of the miraculous, why did jesus even bother with the traveling magic show?  Why do the Water Walk or the Raising Laz "Я" Us routine, when all he had to do was talk about photosynthesis?  Why no more nature-breaking miracles?  Why the downgrade to miracles of the "daily life" sort?  My question stands.

razorphreak wrote:

zarathustra wrote:
My point is that however depraved and evil you and I find it, the 9-11 attackers are as much a testimony to human endeavor as the rescue workers who came rushing to help.  Bear in mind also that the attackers themselves thought that they were doing something good in their god's eyes.  bin laden himself thought in an act of god that the towers collapsed in full.  For you to dub the latter instance as miraculous and the former as simply evil is again subjective.

But those who rushed in, that's what they were trained to do.  Heroic as it may be, it was far from any kind of miracle that they went in.

Ok, it's my turn to be confused now.  Are you now saying that the rescue workers rushing in isn't a miracle?  Based on your previous statement:

Quote:
when you see someone saved by an EMT, you call daily life, I call a miracle that we were given the ability to learn how to do such a thing and a miracle that it could be done at that moment for that person to live.

I was under the impression you were using the rescue workers' actions as an example of a miracle.  Please clarify.


 

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


HeyZeusCreaseToe
Superfan
HeyZeusCreaseToe's picture
Posts: 675
Joined: 2008-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:Well, I think,

Luminon wrote:

Well, I think, that things I observe every once a while are natural. When the wise spirits  or aliens says, that they do exist and they're here, I'm not the one to try to change their mind, they have to know it better than me Smiling  So far, they didn't say "we don't exist, stop believing in us", and they haven't been passive either, every month there's a regular worldwide summary of their recent activity. As far as I know the magazine doesn't make up the stories - we sent them one what happened around here, and they printed it. So, I don't believe either, it's not a question of belief, but rational dealing with tons of facts and messages, which the world keeps bombarding me with. 

Dude, if aliens were real and made multiple stops to our planet, and their activities were well documented...monthly...it would be the biggest news ever! Just because you told a magazine about a UFO story doesn't mean the magazine is skeptical about people's experiences or that the articles about alien activities are true. It means they will take anything a reader submits, and regurgitate it, in their magazine. This says nothing of the claims and their veracity. The Criss Angel walking on water is just ridiculous man, Criss Angel is an illusionist and basically showed Uri Geller to be a fraud on live tv in his phenomenon show when Uri still claimed to have psychic powers. He doesn't believe in that shit, it is a show, and it has been rumored that he uses paid stooges as well. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTTd68t1Dzg&feature=related

“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” Yoda


Boon Docks
Posts: 415
Joined: 2007-03-04
User is offlineOffline
Walking on water

I used the wrong word here when I said " impression of walking on water", I should have said it is an  'illusion'.  I guess it is the angle that a person uses to focus on the ice, when it has only maybe a half inch of water on it.  The Minnesota DNR even had an interesting article about a trucker that drove his 18 wheeler onto a frozen lake in southern MN 2 years ago.  The trucker thought he was in a big field, fortunately the truck did not go down.  That article can be found at MN DNR archives??  Anyway, ice fishing sucks.  The fishing opener though, this year is cold with ice still on some of the lakes.


Kevin R Brown
Superfan
Kevin R Brown's picture
Posts: 3142
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:Boon Docks

Luminon wrote:

Boon Docks wrote:
  Someone here wrote:          

 [ from instances for which we (currently) have no natural explanation and which in fact contravene the accepted laws of nature -- such as a man walking on the surface of water ]

I can take pictures of this event happening, but I do not know how add them to the computer.  My daughter might help me out here.  In northern Minnesota we have an activity called ice fishing.  At this time of year all the lakes are frozen over.  During the spring thaw the lakes will have maybe a half inch of water on top of the ice.  That can give the impression of walking on water.


That's interesting, a photos would be nice. I don't think though, it's Jesus' case, if I remember, he walked on the Galilee lake, it's in quite a hot region, and there were high waves.

Also, this video doesn't seem to take place in a freezing water.
What do you think of that video, is there a glass or translucent plastic, just under the water surface? I don't think so, people are swimming in front of, behind and under that guy, and also, he drops his shoes and they fall on the swimming pool bottom, so it looks like it's nothing below him but water. Maybe someone's really walking on water there.

 

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:
As amazing as this "awe" of consciousness is, I don't think consciousness exists out side of energy/matter or the "material". Nothing is un-natural, supernatural, or magical .... not in any "percieved cosmic dimension of imagination or mathematical modeling". All is ONE. I don't believe "wise spirits" are causing statues to bleed milk etc. With an open mind, and even with a real wish it was true, I just don't. Ahh, the aliens are doing it ! Now that makes possible sense ... them tricksters ! .....  
Well, I think, that things I observe every once a while are natural. When the wise spirits  or aliens says, that they do exist and they're here, I'm not the one to try to change their mind, they have to know it better than me Smiling  So far, they didn't say "we don't exist, stop believing in us", and they haven't been passive either, every month there's a regular worldwide summary of their recent activity. As far as I know the magazine doesn't make up the stories - we sent them one what happened around here, and they printed it. So, I don't believe either, it's not a question of belief, but rational dealing with tons of facts and messages, which the world keeps bombarding me with.
By the way, these statues were supposed to drink the milk, and I'd have a hard time believing that, if I wouldn't see it filmed, on TV. I was still a kid at the time, but I remember it, in that TV document, there was a statuette of elephant god Ganesha, and an Indian guy giving it a milk on a spoon, putting it under Ganesha's trunk. Slowly, the milk disappeared from the spoon in about 25 seconds. I'd like to stay rational in front of others, but it would require to argue with a Hindu statuette about it's drinking habits Smiling

The aliens, huh?

How big, again, did you say your IQ was?

Quote:
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."

- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
HeyZeusCreaseToe wrote:Dude,

HeyZeusCreaseToe wrote:
Dude, if aliens were real and made multiple stops to our planet, and their activities were well documented...monthly...it would be the biggest news ever! Just because you told a magazine about a UFO story doesn't mean the magazine is skeptical about people's experiences or that the articles about alien activities are true. It means they will take anything a reader submits, and regurgitate it, in their magazine. This says nothing of the claims and their veracity. The Criss Angel walking on water is just ridiculous man, Criss Angel is an illusionist and basically showed Uri Geller to be a fraud on live tv in his phenomenon show when Uri still claimed to have psychic powers. He doesn't believe in that shit, it is a show, and it has been rumored that he uses paid stooges as well. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTTd68t1Dzg&feature=related

You dare to question the strange, alien minds? I mean a policy of our governments. It just isn't an idea of a good citizen, to be aware of unregistered vehicles in our air territory. It's like certain jobs requires to not speak on certain topics, to play with a team, not admitting anything, that a government might look like having no control over it.
On the other side, the witnessing of alien activity is quite profound, like people this and this city observed for a hour a formations of lights crossing the sky. This one magazine I mean actually publishes these messages for more than 30 years, the observation of UFO activity is about as ordinary among people, as having witnessed a traffic accident. Their existence wouldn't be the biggest surprise, the biggest surprise would be, if any government would fully say it out loud and publically in media, instead of denying the obvious.
The story we sent wasn't exactly about UFO. It was about one so-called Ascended master, and his visit at one grammar school. Such a visits are actually much more frequent than UFO, at least in this region, specially in last years, and there is always something not right about that person, like that he disappears faster than he could ever walk away, or that other people can only hear his speech, and not see him at the same moment, for example. We don't bother to send all such cases to that magazine for verification, only that one was a public visit at a school lesson among people not involved in the club activity and totally unaware of what's going on. They were really puzzled, specially that teacher, she wondered all the time, if she invited a natively-english-speaking man on the lesson (as she did sometimes) and forgot about him. Of course, later she verified, that she invited no english speaksman this time, and she never found out, who was there all the lesson, prettending to be one.


Wow, that Criss' trick is really good! Simple, but with great idea. He chose a theme of the trick well, and did a lot for the effect. Got to show this to my mom. I've never heard of him before, so I thought it's some publically unknown guy, illusionists usually warns people, that it's an illusion, before they, for example, move through the Great wall of China.
I thought, when walking on fire is so easy, that walking on water must be too, when I can walk on earth and David Copperfield can walk on air (fly), then completion of walking on all the elements is just a matter of time.
Well, better luck next time Smiling
Uri Geller showed walking on water too? That's interesting, there was a spiritistic magazine in this country, long before WW2 (it's already revived as long as I remember, it has a very old tradition) and one of the old articles in there was an event at a fish pond. The writer of the article heard, that there's around a man known to have psychic powers, so he met up with him in southern area of republic, famous for numerous fish ponds, and they went on a pond in a boat, and the man with psychic powers walked out of the boat  and around it on a water surface, for a while. His top-boots were slightly sunken, the water reached an inch up just like on Angel's shoes on that video. So, these reports of water walking aren't anything new.

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
zarathustra wrote:If in fact

zarathustra wrote:
If in fact anything that occurs in nature is an example of the miraculous, why did jesus even bother with the traveling magic show?  Why do the Water Walk or the Raising Laz "Я" Us routine, when all he had to do was talk about photosynthesis?  Why no more nature-breaking miracles?  Why the downgrade to miracles of the "daily life" sort?  My question stands.

I thought I already settled this.  Yes, those things happening are miracles that they occur.  My regard to things that happen on this planet are miracles because they are acts of God.  It's not right for me to say that only the beautiful are miracles and the destructive are not when both are part of God's creation.

As to why no more nature-breaking things...why does there have to be?  We have the bible, the accounts from those who were there, and accounts that support the events of the time period.  Why does there have to be more?  If there was one today, in another generation or two, it'll be the same question (reminds me of the President of Iran questioning the holocaust).

zarathustra wrote:
Ok, it's my turn to be confused now.  Are you now saying that the rescue workers rushing in isn't a miracle?  Based on your previous statement:

Quote:
when you see someone saved by an EMT, you call daily life, I call a miracle that we were given the ability to learn how to do such a thing and a miracle that it could be done at that moment for that person to live.

I was under the impression you were using the rescue workers' actions as an example of a miracle.  Please clarify.

This is the whole point I've been trying to make from the get go.  Let me attempt it again...

When an EMT or the like goes to do their job, that's not a miracle.  When you saw them rushing in, that isn't a miracle.  All of those actions are heroic in nature but that is part of who they are as people that gets them there.

People possessing the ability to learn how to do such things is the miracle.  If we exclude God from the whole equation and speak only from a secular point of view, over the course of the evolution of the human mind, at no given point in time did humans ever have to gain the ability to learn.  Most animals on this planet live strictly by instinct.  Animals can learn simple actions or from some reactions learn what to avoid, such as teaching a dog to sit or how you see animals avoid some berries over others.  But humans are different in that our learning went into the complex, into levels that this planet has never seen before.  I would regard that as a miracle in that it did not have to happen but it did.  What we've gained from that ability is no miracle as it is the natural course of this "original gift." 

In our back and forth, one thing that I'm really wondering about is why you refuse to label something as a "miracle?"  Is it because of the notion that it is tied to God?  You won't use the term because of either fear that it might damage the notion that God doesn't exist to you or, more realisticly, because it doesn't fit in a God-less world?  If God does not exist then neither can a miracle?

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak

razorphreak wrote:

zarathustra wrote:
If in fact anything that occurs in nature is an example of the miraculous, why did jesus even bother with the traveling magic show?  Why do the Water Walk or the Raising Laz "Я" Us routine, when all he had to do was talk about photosynthesis?  Why no more nature-breaking miracles?  Why the downgrade to miracles of the "daily life" sort?  My question stands.

I thought I already settled this.  Yes, those things happening are miracles that they occur.  My regard to things that happen on this planet are miracles because they are acts of God.  It's not right for me to say that only the beautiful are miracles and the destructive are not when both are part of God's creation.

As to why no more nature-breaking things...why does there have to be?  We have the bible, the accounts from those who were there, and accounts that support the events of the time period.  Why does there have to be more?  If there was one today, in another generation or two, it'll be the same question (reminds me of the President of Iran questioning the holocaust).

zarathustra wrote:
Ok, it's my turn to be confused now.  Are you now saying that the rescue workers rushing in isn't a miracle?  Based on your previous statement:

Quote:
when you see someone saved by an EMT, you call daily life, I call a miracle that we were given the ability to learn how to do such a thing and a miracle that it could be done at that moment for that person to live.

I was under the impression you were using the rescue workers' actions as an example of a miracle.  Please clarify.

This is the whole point I've been trying to make from the get go.  Let me attempt it again...

When an EMT or the like goes to do their job, that's not a miracle.  When you saw them rushing in, that isn't a miracle.  All of those actions are heroic in nature but that is part of who they are as people that gets them there.

People possessing the ability to learn how to do such things is the miracle.  If we exclude God from the whole equation and speak only from a secular point of view, over the course of the evolution of the human mind, at no given point in time did humans ever have to gain the ability to learn.  Most animals on this planet live strictly by instinct.  Animals can learn simple actions or from some reactions learn what to avoid, such as teaching a dog to sit or how you see animals avoid some berries over others.  But humans are different in that our learning went into the complex, into levels that this planet has never seen before.  I would regard that as a miracle in that it did not have to happen but it did.  What we've gained from that ability is no miracle as it is the natural course of this "original gift." 

In our back and forth, one thing that I'm really wondering about is why you refuse to label something as a "miracle?"  Is it because of the notion that it is tied to God?  You won't use the term because of either fear that it might damage the notion that God doesn't exist to you or, more realisticly, because it doesn't fit in a God-less world?  If God does not exist then neither can a miracle?

I'm glad that there are some people who don't believe everything is a miracle.

If everyone believed that everything around them was a miracle of God, there would be no science and learning about how things work would be heresy.

We're on our way back to that point in America anyway.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1230
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak wrote: I thought

razorphreak wrote:

I thought I already settled this. 

Think harder.

razorphreak wrote:

Yes, those things happening are miracles that they occur.  My regard to things that happen on this planet are miracles because they are acts of God.  It's not right for me to say that only the beautiful are miracles and the destructive are not when both are part of God's creation.

So, to reiterate the question I asked before:  Is there anything you don't consider a miracle?  Do you consider it an act of god that the Twin Towers collapsed entirely?  bin laden apparently thought so.

razorphreak wrote:

As to why no more nature-breaking things...why does there have to be?  We have the bible, the accounts from those who were there, and accounts that support the events of the time period.  Why does there have to be more?

If we don't need them now, why did we ever need them?  If you think commonplace examples suffice today (photosynthesis, the ability to learn CPR, and apparently also plague and tornadoes), why wouldn't they have sufficed before?  If god decided to turn off the magic machine after the bible went to press, there must have been a good reason for doing so.  Please state it.

razorphreak wrote:
  If there was one today, in another generation or two, it'll be the same question

True, and it will be a perfectly valid question.

razorphreak wrote:
 (reminds me of the President of Iran questioning the holocaust).

There must be a little too much mercury in  your salmon.  We have clear, empirical evidence that the Holocaust occurred.  We have as much evidence that jesus went waltzing on the waves as we do that mohammed flew to heaven on his horse. 

razorphreak wrote:

When an EMT or the like goes to do their job, that's not a miracle.  When you saw them rushing in, that isn't a miracle.  All of those actions are heroic in nature but that is part of who they are as people that gets them there.

People possessing the ability to learn how to do such things is the miracle.

Okay.  Is the ability of the attackers to learn how to take over planes with boxcutters and fly them into buildings also a miracle?

razorphreak wrote:
  If we exclude God from the whole equation and speak only from a secular point of view, over the course of the evolution of the human mind, at no given point in time did humans ever have to gain the ability to learn.  Most animals on this planet live strictly by instinct.  Animals can learn simple actions or from some reactions learn what to avoid, such as teaching a dog to sit or how you see animals avoid some berries over others.  But humans are different in that our learning went into the complex, into levels that this planet has never seen before.  I would regard that as a miracle in that it did not have to happen but it did.  What we've gained from that ability is no miracle as it is the natural course of this "original gift."

You seem to be saying that human learning is a miracle in itself, distinct from lower animals' ability to learn.  Not surprisingly, I disagree.  The ability to learn is an evolutionarily advantageous trait.  Furthermore, computers have the ability to learn (and consequently outperform humans in some fields), so it is quite facetious to treat learning as some "original gift" or miracle.

I fear addressing this in the detail it demands would take the discussion off course.  What we are really trying to determine is why god took the magik trix out of his routine.  Rather than address this, you simply watered down the definition of miracle, in order to say that miracles still happen.

razorphreak wrote:
 

In our back and forth, one thing that I'm really wondering about is why you refuse to label something as a "miracle?"  Is it because of the notion that it is tied to God?  You won't use the term because of either fear that it might damage the notion that God doesn't exist to you or, more realisticly, because it doesn't fit in a God-less world?  If God does not exist then neither can a miracle?

In our back and forth, one thing that I'm really wondering about is why you refuse to answer the obvious question.  Why no more nature-breaking miracles?  Why the downgrade to miracles of the "daily life" sort? You won't answer because of either fear that it might damage the notion that god exists, or more realistically, because god doesn't fit into a world where everything has a natural explanation?  If there are no (nature-breaking) miracles, do we have a need for god?

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:  You dare

Luminon wrote:

 

 You dare to question the strange, alien minds? I mean a policy of our governments. It just isn't an idea of a good citizen, to be aware of unregistered vehicles in our air territory.

Where you live in Europe its probably the Russians doing illegal over flights or NATO.



Luminon wrote:

Wow, that Criss' trick is really good! Simple, but with great idea. He chose a theme of the trick well, and did a lot for the effect. Got to show this to my mom. I've never heard of him before, so I thought it's some publically unknown guy, illusionists usually warns people, that it's an illusion, before they, for example, move through the Great wall of China.
I thought, when walking on fire is so easy, that walking on water must be too, when I can walk on earth and David

Criss Angel is one of the better illusionists from Las Vegas. He has a TV show that has been on A&E TV for several years called Mind Freak. Check amazon for availablity. Or visit his web site here:

http://www.crissangel.com/mindfreak

You can't always believe what you see. He makes people disappear in downtown Las Vegas on the concrete. He levitates and walks between high rise buildings. He has even levitated above the Luxor's blinding spot light on the top of the pyramid. That doesn't make him real, he is an illustionist. 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
zarathustra wrote:So, to

zarathustra wrote:
So, to reiterate the question I asked before:  Is there anything you don't consider a miracle?  Do you consider it an act of god that the Twin Towers collapsed entirely?  bin laden apparently thought so.

There is a lot I don't consider a miracle.  I don't think it was any kind of miracle that I survived my motorcycle accident (I was fortunate to have good doctors).  I don't think it was a miracle that the towers came crashing down (engineering can only go so far against a 767).  I don't think it was a miracle that guys took over a plane with box cutters (that's using fear to accomplish your intent).I don't think it was a miracle that my path brought me here to debate you on this very site (RRS getting media attention over something out of context).  It's no miracle that my truck turns on, my house has power, or I have water to drink.

Bin Laden thought so because his world is wrapped rather tightly.  I know many theist groups in the United States that are the same way and refuse to listen to both sides.  So it's natural that until you open your mind, you'll see "miracles" when you want to, not for trying to value them as they are.

zarathustra wrote:
razorphreak wrote:
  If there was one today, in another generation or two, it'll be the same question

True, and it will be a perfectly valid question.

razorphreak wrote:
 (reminds me of the President of Iran questioning the holocaust).

There must be a little too much mercury in  your salmon.  We have clear, empirical evidence that the Holocaust occurred.  We have as much evidence that jesus went waltzing on the waves as we do that mohammed flew to heaven on his horse.

Actually the salmon I grilled up yesterday was really freakin good.  Olive oil, garlic, rosemary, all over an open flame, mmmmm mmmmmm.

You state that there is "clear, empirical evidence" yet this guy refused to accept it.  Why?  Not more than a few decades ago this occurred yet Ahmadinejad said it was a myth.  Why do I see parallels all of a sudden?  And how would it make it a "valid question" when the evidence makes it a foolish one?

My point here is no matter the evidence, you'll have people who will question both the event and the evidence and will never accept it.  You have to be a pretty open minded person if you are to have a dialect with him to show him the errors of his ways...

zarathustra wrote:
If we don't need them now, why did we ever need them?  If you think commonplace examples suffice today (photosynthesis, the ability to learn CPR, and apparently also plague and tornadoes), why wouldn't they have sufficed before?  If god decided to turn off the magic machine after the bible went to press, there must have been a good reason for doing so.  Please state it.

zarathustra wrote:
In our back and forth, one thing that I'm really wondering about is why you refuse to answer the obvious question.  Why no more nature-breaking miracles?  Why the downgrade to miracles of the "daily life" sort? You won't answer because of either fear that it might damage the notion that god exists, or more realistically, because god doesn't fit into a world where everything has a natural explanation?  If there are no (nature-breaking) miracles, do we have a need for god?

Interesting how you side-stepped answering me even though I've answered you.  There was no "downgrade."  There was no looking at daily life events as "miracles." 

As to why there are no more nature breaking, how am I supposed to know that?  Then again, because I haven't witnessed them cannot exclude them from existing neither.

As to if God turned off the "magic machine," I can't say he did.  But why we don't see what we've read from the bible, simply time and place.  It was necessary to prove Jesus was who was foretold.  It was necessary to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah because after many warnings, the people did not listen and were not capable of change.  Just like with the holocaust, Jesus came and went and the events are in print by those who witnessed it.  There is no need to reproduce the holocaust so why would we need the miracles that proved who Jesus was again?

Your last question, no miracles means no need for God?  I really gotta know how do you come up with these questions?  You didn't have my mercury filled salmon so what gives?  I ask because the need for God is the need for guidance, the need for structure, and the need for salvation.  To which I'm sure you don't agree and I don't expect you to neither however I don't want to go nuts over this question.

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3661
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Hey razorphreak, you have

Hey razorphreak, forgive me for stating the obvious but you have been the target of some very frustrated replies.  As I see it the most likely explanation for this disgruntled mood is the common perception among your opponents that even your average theists and atheist would easily agree as to what conceptually constitutes a miracle.  Regardless of differing theological viewpoints most persons can agree upon the meaning of terms based upon common usage.

A.) The sun rising in the east and setting in the west would not constitute a miracle.

B.) Someone falling to the hard ground from the top of the Empire State building and yet suffering no        physical damage would be a miracle.

Although your definition of the miraculous works for you, it is nevertheless out of step with the most accepted and conventional understanding of that term.  Although I assume you accept the existence of supernatural events from the Bible you apparently also tend to lean toward metaphorical and even poetic meanings.  Your extremely broad use of the term puts you at odds with the status quo of language, hence an impasse with your opponents arises and subsequently becomes a source of frustration.

 

http://theatheistconservative.com/

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:Hey

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
Hey razorphreak, forgive me for stating the obvious but you have been the target of some very frustrated replies.  As I see it the most likely explanation for this disgruntled mood is the common perception among your opponents that even your average theists and atheist would easily agree as to what conceptually constitutes a miracle.  Regardless of differing theological viewpoints most persons can agree upon the meaning of terms based upon common usage.

A.) The sun rising in the east and setting in the west would not constitute a miracle.

B.) Someone falling to the hard ground from the top of the Empire State building and yet suffering no        physical damage would be a miracle.

I don't understand your point...if this thread has been in vain, then let's just call it a day.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
Although your definition of the miraculous works for you, it is nevertheless out of step with the most accepted and conventional understanding of that term.  Although I assume you accept the existence of supernatural events from the Bible you apparently also tend to lean toward metaphorical and even poetic meanings.  Your extremely broad use of the term puts you at odds with the status quo of language, hence an impasse with your opponents arises and subsequently becomes a source of frustration.

Shame too.  I think my use of "miracle" is probably more progressive than most discussing the term and perhaps the "frustration" comes from not understanding what in the hell?  Ah, I'll just bask in the hopeful light that anyone is entertaining me at this point...

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3661
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak wrote: I don't

razorphreak wrote:

 

I don't understand your point...if this thread has been in vain, then let's just call it a day.

 

Perhaps you've underestimated us, as many of the atheists on this forum are quite tenacious.  If you would like to see an example of their determination in the face of theistic confusion then hop over to the section of this forum called "trollville" and examine the thread begun by a bizarre panentheist who calls himself Paisley and whose style of reasoning is quite similar to yours.  It is over 35 pages and a thousand posts long.

Yes, your nebulous and all-inclusive definition of the term "miracle" certainly is more progressive and highly unproductive as well.... but I suspect that is your preference.

http://theatheistconservative.com/

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
Perhaps you've underestimated us, as many of the atheists on this forum are quite tenacious.  If you would like to see an example of their determination in the face of theistic confusion then hop over to the section of this forum called "trollville" and examine the thread begun by a bizarre panentheist who calls himself Paisley and whose style of reasoning is quite similar to yours.  It is over 35 pages and a thousand posts long.

Yes, your nebulous and all-inclusive definition of the term "miracle" certainly is more progressive and highly unproductive as well.... but I suspect that is your preference.

Yes, I'm familiar with how people are labeled a "troll"...So now I'm a troll?  Ouch...

I learned through several hundred posts that I cannot nor should not make any assumption here on this site else be dismissed under various labels, the nicest of which are typically fallacies (the irony here being that the dismissals usually are non-responses without actual reason, just the scholarly one).

I've seen the tenacity as you call it from many on this site.  The tenacity goes hand in hand with pre-judgment and the "just another theist" attitude.  It's not easy to come here and attempt a debate with others who have no clue who I am as an individual nor have any understanding of my faith yet seem to know everything about me and will pass me off as "unproductive" as you just did.  I was actually joking about being more progressive but your response tells me no matter what I may have said about miracles at any given time was in vain since there was never any interest in attempting either understanding, compromise, or acceptance.

And that's OK.  I don't lose any sleep over it just as I'm sure you don't either.  I guess this thread has indeed run its course.

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1230
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak wrote:There is a

razorphreak wrote:
There is a lot I don't consider a miracle....


It would have been helpful if you had laid down your hard and fast definition of a miracle -- if in fact you have one.  When you consider the ability of people to learn to be EMTs a miracle (along with photosynthesis, plagues and tornadoes), but not the ability of doctors to recuperate you from an accident -- it is anyone's guess what you consider a miracle.

At any rate, it should have been obvious from the outset that the OP was talking about miracles of the sort that operate outside the bounds of the natural laws.

razorphreak wrote:


Bin Laden thought so because his world is wrapped rather tightly.


Unlike yours, of course.

razorphreak wrote:
I know many theist groups in the United States that are the same way and refuse to listen to both sides.

I know at least one theist who may go through the motions of listening to both sides, but is already committed to his preconceived beliefs, and will go through whatever machinations necessary to stand by them.

razorphreak wrote:


You state that there is "clear, empirical evidence" yet this guy refused to accept it.  Why?  Not more than a few decades ago this occurred yet Ahmadinejad said it was a myth.  Why do I see parallels all of a sudden?  And how would it make it a "valid question" when the evidence makes it a foolish one?


When I speak of clear, empirical evidence in regard to the Holocaust, I speak of mass graves, photos of people being rounded up at gunpoint, the remains of concentration camps, and holdings in Swiss banks of gold and jewelry, confiscated from the victims.  If Ahmadinejad says the Holocaust is a myth, he is free to, but he needs to provide a better explanation than the Holocaust for this clear, empirical evidence.  The evidence itself is not a myth.

If you mean to tell me that you have clear, empirical evidence on par with that of the Holocaust that jesus went waltzing across the waves, or fed a multitude or raised people from the dead, now would be the time to quit pissing around and produce said evidence.

razorphreak wrote:


My point here is no matter the evidence, you'll have people who will question both the event and the evidence and will never accept it.


I'm not one of those people.  If jesus wants to jump out of the sky and perform one of his amazing tricks under controlled conditions, I will certainly accept it.

razorphreak wrote:


As to why there are no more nature breaking, how am I supposed to know that?


So at long last, we see that you don't know why there are no more nature-breaking miracles -- which was, in effect, what was asked in the OP.  If you can't answer that, you have nothing useful to contribute to the discussion.  Your participation in this thread has sufficed as nothing more than a waste of time.

razorphreak wrote:
Just like with the holocaust, Jesus came and went and the events are in print by those who witnessed it.  There is no need to reproduce the holocaust so why would we need the miracles that proved who Jesus was again?

For one thing, we have more than just "print" that the holocaust occurred.  Second of all:  Atrocious as it was, the holocaust did not entail the suspension of any natural laws.  No "miracles" necessary.  Even if your boy Ahmadinejad denies that it occurred, he certainly can't deny that it could occur. 

A smart kid like you should know the same does not apply to jesus' magical routine.  If jesus' miracles involve the suspension of nature's laws, it is not merely doubtful that they did occur, it is doubtful that they could occur.  In such a case, reproduction of said miracles would be warranted for credibility.  



razorphreak wrote:
Your last question, no miracles means no need for God?  I really gotta know how do you come up with these questions?  You didn't have my mercury filled salmon so what gives?  I ask because the need for God is the need for guidance, the need for structure, and the need for salvation.  To which I'm sure you don't agree and I don't expect you to neither however I don't want to go nuts over this question.

I was simply projecting, to correspond to your baseless assumptions:

Quote:
In our back and forth, one thing that I'm really wondering about is why you refuse to label something as a "miracle?"  Is it because of the notion that it is tied to God?  You won't use the term because of either fear that it might damage the notion that God doesn't exist to you or, more realisticly, because it doesn't fit in a God-less world?  If God does not exist then neither can a miracle?

 

 

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3661
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak

razorphreak wrote:

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
Perhaps you've underestimated us, as many of the atheists on this forum are quite tenacious.  If you would like to see an example of their determination in the face of theistic confusion then hop over to the section of this forum called "trollville" and examine the thread begun by a bizarre panentheist who calls himself Paisley and whose style of reasoning is quite similar to yours.  It is over 35 pages and a thousand posts long.

Yes, your nebulous and all-inclusive definition of the term "miracle" certainly is more progressive and highly unproductive as well.... but I suspect that is your preference.

Yes, I'm familiar with how people are labeled a "troll"...So now I'm a troll?  Ouch...

I learned through several hundred posts that I cannot nor should not make any assumption here on this site else be dismissed under various labels, the nicest of which are typically fallacies (the irony here being that the dismissals usually are non-responses without actual reason, just the scholarly one).

I've seen the tenacity as you call it from many on this site.  The tenacity goes hand in hand with pre-judgment and the "just another theist" attitude.  It's not easy to come here and attempt a debate with others who have no clue who I am as an individual nor have any understanding of my faith yet seem to know everything about me and will pass me off as "unproductive" as you just did.  I was actually joking about being more progressive but your response tells me no matter what I may have said about miracles at any given time was in vain since there was never any interest in attempting either understanding, compromise, or acceptance.

And that's OK.  I don't lose any sleep over it just as I'm sure you don't either.  I guess this thread has indeed run its course.

Actually I don't consider you to be a troll at all.  I consider you to be a person who for some inexplicable reason simply cannot get on board with this discussion due to your very warped and distorted concepts regarding miracle status.  You seem to live in your own separate universe where left is right and up is down and definitions of words distort beyond all recognition. 

As far as prejudging you for having "just another theist" attitude, well spend some time here and you will see that we encounter theists of every conceivable category.  Until I came here I had never even heard of panentheism.  Pre-judge ?  ...why would we, as this place is a veritable zoo of theistic diversity.

http://theatheistconservative.com/

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.

"When a man loves cats, I am his friend and comrade, without further introduction." Mark Twain.


HisWillness
atheistRational VIP!
HisWillness's picture
Posts: 4100
Joined: 2008-02-21
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak wrote:But that

razorphreak wrote:
But that process [=life] never had to start.  That's the point I'm trying to make.  Even if you don't accept the supernatural had anything to do with those "processes," they exist and they make life possible makes it a miracle.

It's impossible to make the claim that life never "had" to start. Perhaps it did. Nobody knows that. Perhaps the same circumstances always produce life (or at least the beginnings of life). Perhaps self-organization is a natural phenomenon. We haven't answered these questions yet. You can call it a miracle if you like, but that doesn't mean something supernatural was involved.

razorphreak wrote:
HisWillness wrote:
What you've written there looks, to me, like literal gibberish. Since God apparently created evil and sin, what would be the problem with evil and sin from the perspective of its creator? Why, in the process of creating, would God create something he, himself, didn't want? It's totally nonsensical.

Well that depends on who you talk to.  Here on Earth, what is good and what is evil are both subjective.  No two people can agree that invading Iraq was the right thing; some call it good, some call it evil.  They are simply words that describe what we perceive.  Since they are both human in nature, not supernatural, it's difficult to simply say "God create it."

But in the God version of things, God created everything ... didn't He? So saying "God created it" is redundant. God created everything, including suffering and evil.

razorphreak wrote:
We are talking about what miracles are, especially from the theistic point of view.  So saying it's "arguing ignorance" is a rather odd thing to say.

We're arguing about something we can't demonstrate, and about which we can't know anything. That's arguing ignorance. If you define "miracle" as you seem to, that being a particularly strange circumstance, then neither of us have a strong explanation for its cause. I simply don't know, but you claim to know, and give it the name "God". While that's fine as a kind of place-holder explanation (everything we don't know is handled by God) it's not the kind of explanation that can be taken very seriously. It can't be tested, it can't be examined - it can't even be right, because there would have to be an assertion there. "God did it" involves a supernatural creature who may or may not exist, performing an action we can't identify. It's a spiraling vortex of ignorance!

Saint Will: no gyration without funkstification.
fabulae! nil satis firmi video quam ob rem accipere hunc mi expediat metum. - Terence


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
zath, prozac,OK this is

zarath, prozac,

OK this is going nowhere.  The questions I've been asked is how do I define a miracle and what is NOT a miracle.  Even though I do feel like you guys have been sincere (for the most part) in your replies to me, honestly, from the onset, all I've been after is trying to get an agreement on what the term "miracle" is, including the discussion I've been having with HisWillness.  Even if you consider what I've been saying "warped and distorted," that has been my goal to just come to an agreement here.  If that is not possible, then no matter any other question, I don't want to waste any more of your time.

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
HisWillness wrote:It's

HisWillness wrote:
It's impossible to make the claim that life never "had" to start. Perhaps it did. Nobody knows that. Perhaps the same circumstances always produce life (or at least the beginnings of life). Perhaps self-organization is a natural phenomenon. We haven't answered these questions yet. You can call it a miracle if you like, but that doesn't mean something supernatural was involved.

Well that's kinda why I even started up on this thread to begin with.  It's not about what may or may not have been influencing the clicking of the start button, my argument here is all about the definition of the term "miracle" itself.  Believing in the supernatural or not has been irrelevant in the goal I've been after.  If you simply believe that "miracle" is a term that should not exist in any discussion because it is not capable of being defined or justified, just say so.

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire


HisWillness
atheistRational VIP!
HisWillness's picture
Posts: 4100
Joined: 2008-02-21
User is offlineOffline
razorphreak wrote:Believing

razorphreak wrote:
Believing in the supernatural or not has been irrelevant in the goal I've been after.  If you simply believe that "miracle" is a term that should not exist in any discussion because it is not capable of being defined or justified, just say so.

The term already exists, it's just a matter of it being extremely confusing outside of describing something highly unusual or improbable. I can handle "it's a miracle it didn't rain" as a kind of colloquial expression of how good it is that it didn't rain. To say "the Virgin Mary appeared on the side of a building and it's a miracle" or "the man's cancer was cured miraculously" still describe something unusual and improbable, but have now taken on a supernatural tone.

You can't deny that the word "miracle" makes at least a bit of a hat-tip in the direction of traditional religious magic. Curses and miracles in the magical sense are supernatural if they perform actions without a natural precedent. Healing a severely fractured bone in five minutes would be a miracle, and not just in the sense that it would be unusual. That would be supernatural.

Saint Will: no gyration without funkstification.
fabulae! nil satis firmi video quam ob rem accipere hunc mi expediat metum. - Terence


razorphreak
Theist
razorphreak's picture
Posts: 901
Joined: 2007-02-05
User is offlineOffline
HisWillness wrote:The term

HisWillness wrote:
The term already exists, it's just a matter of it being extremely confusing outside of describing something highly unusual or improbable. I can handle "it's a miracle it didn't rain" as a kind of colloquial expression of how good it is that it didn't rain. To say "the Virgin Mary appeared on the side of a building and it's a miracle" or "the man's cancer was cured miraculously" still describe something unusual and improbable, but have now taken on a supernatural tone.

You can't deny that the word "miracle" makes at least a bit of a hat-tip in the direction of traditional religious magic. Curses and miracles in the magical sense are supernatural if they perform actions without a natural precedent. Healing a severely fractured bone in five minutes would be a miracle, and not just in the sense that it would be unusual. That would be supernatural.

No I can't deny that "miracle" usually reverts back to the supernatural.  I'm not trying to remove that.  What I am trying to do however is see if anyone agrees that "miracle" can be attributed to events or actions and not always be about God, for the sake of compromise.  If we agree that the ability that humans have to learn is a miracle because we neither know why it happened nor how but are happy that it did, I can say it was a miracle from God and you can say it was a miracle that evolution provided us with such a, dare I say, gift. 

And reverting all the way back to the original post would show that miracles do indeed occur on this planet, whether or not you want to relate them to God or not.

What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason. - Voltaire