• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
Sheldon: "I don't believe in miracles"

Thesis: Miracles Exist. Proof:
If miracle is impossible, then it is impossible miracle. But latter is definition of a miracle.

ItSo: "That's a tautology".

No. I disagree. No tautology.

ItSo: "Therefore it IS a tautology."

No. Please explain. No tautology.
If miracle is impossible, then it is impossible miracle. No logical error.

ItSo: "If miracles are impossible, they don't happen."

Do not modify text of my proof. It is corrupting it. If I would add a^3 to the Pythagorean theorem a^2+b^2=c^2, it will corrupt it.

F1fan: "How would you test whether miracles happen?"

Physics does not know what is Effect Placebo and what is UFO.
 
Last edited:

F1fan

Veteran Member
Sheldon: "I don't believe in miracles"

Thesis: Miracles Exist. Proof:
If miracle is impossible, then it is impossible miracle. But latter is definition of a miracle.
If miracles happen then they happen arbitrarily and without intent.

I suggest miracles exist as mental phenomenon, as when there is a random close call and someone survives an incident by chance. Of course the religious will immediately fall back on their religious assumptions, and ignore all the tragedies that could have used divine intervention. Confirmation bias.

How would you test whether miracles happen? Drop babies off a building and see if God intervenes to save them? I have a prediction.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Last edited:

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
No tautology. If miracle is impossible, then it is impossible miracle.

Your comment is a typical tautology, a redundancy: "a phrase or expression in which the same thing is said twice in different words."

No logical error.

No, but also, no information.

You are making a semantic error, however, by failing to recognize what the word impossible means. It appears that you think something impossible can occur. That would be the opposite of a tautology, which is always correct because it is formally correct: A = A(reworded). When you use the word impossible to mean possible, it's a violation of noncontradiction: A = not-A.

I disagree. It is miracle.

Your conditional premise is that miracles are impossible, so you are contradicting yourself claiming they exist. You're ignoring the meaning of the word impossible when you treat it as an accidental characteristic of miracles, like unwitnessed or ancient or annual or rare. These words, when appearing before and modifying the word miracle, affirm their existence or possibility. The adjective you chose does the opposite.

Blaspheme!

Only to believers. The unbeliever's world is free of all of that - blasphemy, sin, salvation, hell, sacrilege, unholy, impiety, Satan and evil, etc.. The skeptic is a critical thinker, and doesn't admit faith-based beliefs into his mental map of reality. As result, none of that populates or haunts his theater of consciousness. He leaves that kind of worrying to the theist.

You might like this from atheist and anti-theist firebrand Pat Condell:

"It must be quite galling for religious people to see atheists like me going about their business without a shred of guilt or self-loathing, and not in the least inclined to pray or to do penance of any kind, and not in the slightest bit worried about any form of eternal punishment. I have to admit if I was religious I'd probably think to myself: "How come I've got all this weight on my shoulders while these bums are getting a free ride?"
 
Last edited:

Sheldon

Veteran Member
Sheldon: "I don't believe in miracles"

Thesis: Miracles Exist. Proof:
If miracle is impossible, then it is impossible miracle. But latter is definition of a miracle.

ItSo: "That's a tautology".

No. I disagree. No tautology.

ItSo: "Therefore it IS a tautology."

No. Please explain. No tautology.
If miracle is impossible, then it is impossible miracle. No logical error.

ItSo: "If miracles are impossible, they don't happen."

Do not modify text of my proof. It is corrupting it. If I would add a^3 to the Pythagorean theorem a^2+b^2=c^2, it will corrupt it.

F1fan: "How would you test whether miracles happen?"

Physics does not know what is Effect Placebo and what is UFO.
:rolleyes: gibberish...again
 

Sheldon

Veteran Member
If miracles are impossible, they don't happen.

I can't say whether they are possible, only that they are defined in such a way as to suggest an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy. The claim itself appears to be irrational.

Miracle
noun
  1. an extraordinary and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore attributed to a divine agency.
So that's an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy, since it's asserting something is valid because it hasn't been disproved. It also is claiming no natural or scientific laws explain something, when what it means is we don't currently have such an explanation. It is course an appeal to mystery.
 
Top