1. 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!

Featured As long unexplained miracles happen, there will always be believers

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by KenS, Apr 9, 2018.

  1. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    24,115
    Ratings:
    +7,981
    Everyone has their own definition, I guess. In strict terms (going by dictionary) it's just events that can't be explained by natural causes. Gods, spirits, ancestors, etc role in events and experiences we can't explain are basically our beliefs, morals, culture, etc influences as to interpret how we see miracles and even how we define it. Like god and blessing, it's a cultural oriented word. The Buddha gives blessings. Romans have gods so do other Pagans. Its very individualized.
     
  2. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    24,115
    Ratings:
    +7,981
    If going by the dictionary, I can't. I can put together pieces and go off previous experiences just as any other experience. I see religion no different in that matter.

    We make conclusions on our experiences even though they have no natural causes. For example, when someone loves you, it's an abstract feeling. If your loved one said I love you to you, you would feel different than if that loved one said it to a stranger; that stranger wouldn't share your feelings.

    Still, we gather conclusions based on past experiences and our relationships with, say god, person, or event and conclude we experienced love. Yet, that stranger didn't experience it. If it's a fact, we should experience the same thing physically even though we interpret it different. Another example, if I hit you and I hit my loved one, you guys may interpret my actions differently but you guys will still feel pain regardless.

    I see miracles the same. You may not interpret the same miracle and feel its caused by natural accurances, but based on my experiences and relationship tot hat said event, even though we have the same information (the pain), the word (like god, and blessing) are defined differently based on our interpretation rather than the dictionary.

    In other words, words like miracle, god, blessing, love, etc are defined by the people who experience it; since, even though we feel the same "pain" we don't define it the same because of the above.

    The guy I'm talking to is using the dictionary definition to describe a word applied to things that are totally not in the dictionary.

    Try defining god by looking int he dictionary. Whose god? Christian? Pagan? Hindu? Pantheist?

    and so forth.​
     
    #102 Unveiled Artist, Apr 11, 2018
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2018
  3. KenS

    KenS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    8,049
    Ratings:
    +2,145
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    That depends... Jesus said it and He said He didn't say anything He didn't hear the Father say... so.... :D
     
  4. Milton Platt

    Milton Platt Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2015
    Messages:
    6,822
    Ratings:
    +2,585
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I do not believe the doctors viewed the cause as supernatural. I would like to see the medical chart that claimed that. the supernatural claim is yours, not theirs.

    You are essentially arguing from personal incredulity. You do not know how it happened and instead of accepting that, you insert a god in the gap where you lack knowledge.

    Doctors do not always see what they expect to see. That is not an indication of a god at work. It is an indication of the variability of the human body to heal itself, and the inability of a doctor to see every foreseeable outcome in advance.
    First, you need to present evidence that the subsidence of the inflammation and the regeneration of the nerves is impossible to naturally occur. You won't be able to do this, because this is known to happen every day. Then you must demonstrate the existence of your god and show that it can actually do the thing you claimed it did. Then you must eliminate the possibility that it did not happen because of one of the other gods that have been postulated around the globe. You have your work cut out for you.

    People heal spontaneously all the time. In this case, it took the aid of doctors and medicine. If not for their intervention, the pastor could have lost more than his voice.
     
  5. KenS

    KenS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    8,049
    Ratings:
    +2,145
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    Yes... I knew eventually we would hit "if I don't see it with my own eyes, forget it" answer. Quite normal, for sure.

    Of course, everything is "spontaneous healing" because.... well... because there is no God. ?????

    Even when my friend Cynthia Robinson, 40 years ago (approx), had doctors try to bridge her spine three times with what capacity they had back then and at the last failure said, "No babies and don't pick up anyting over 5 lbs" and then after a "spontaneous healing" which the John Hopkins doctors said "It can only be a miracle"... it's basically made up and you have to see the report yourself because after all.... there are no miracles. 2 babies later and pushing a lawn mower, she will of courrse disagree with you.

    Man... there sure are a lot of spontaneous healings that happen after prayer... go figure.

    I think I'll stay with the position that there are miracles.
     
  6. Axe Elf

    Axe Elf Prophet

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2018
    Messages:
    2,395
    Ratings:
    +1,616
    Religion:
    zen Xian
    Not this one particularly, but as a former state spelling champion and a published author, I do have a passion for words and language in general, so it does bother me to see them used incorrectly, and I am enough of a philanthropist to want to share my knowledge with those like yourself so obviously in need of it.

    Apparently not TOO scared, since I see you produced another manifest of errors for me to address today.

    Sorry to disappoint you on the ranting--that's not my style--but I will take the time to walk you out of the minefield of errors that you have made your home in this thread.

    Well, if you see anyone being rude, be sure to report them to the site moderators. They should be able to resolve the issue.

    And when you wonder, I will be there to help you turn your curiosity into knowledge.

    Not a chance. So long as you persist in your error(s), I will persist in correcting you.

    ERROR!

    Nope, those words, and many others, are defined by a dictionary of the words used in OUR culture and language. Their meaning is not up for debate, nor are they a matter of personal preference.

    If you get it, then what's all this, then?

    ERROR!

    Referencing your demonstrated disregard for, if not ignorance of, the definition of the word "miracle" is not an insult, it is an objective description of the circumstances of our conversation. For comparison, consider the following:

    “Thou clay-brained guts, thou knotty-pated fool, thou whoreson obscene greasy tallow-catch!”

    Now THAT'S an insult--crafted by one of the masters, William Shakespeare (Henry IV Part 1, Act 2, Scene 4). Compare and contrast to discover the difference between my descriptions of your errors and actual insults.

    You're welcome.

    Got to have facts before I can attack them. So far all I can do is correct your errors.

    ERROR!

    I am not attacking you. I am correcting what you say because it is in error.

    We can go deeper if you like, but first I have to help you understand the meaning of the word miracle. Until you get that under your belt, I'm afraid any attempt at a deeper understanding would be doomed to failure.

    Nope. Fortunately, that is irrelevant to our discussion.

    ERROR!

    Tell me something you have experienced that you know, for sure, does not have a natural cause. Life--nature--by definition--is natural--so anything that has to do with "living" or "waking up in the morning" is automatically disqualified.

    ERROR!

    If you say that you do not know the natural laws that govern your life, then it is not an insult to say that you are ignorant of them--it is a description of your not-knowing. For comparison, consider the following:

    “Thou leathern-jerkin, crystal-button, knot-pated, agatering, puke-stocking, caddis-garter, smooth-tongue, Spanish pouch!”

    Now THAT'S an insult--again, crafted by one of the masters, William Shakespeare (Henry IV Part 1, Act 2, Scene 4). Compare and contrast to discover the difference between my recognition of your ignorance and actual insults.

    ERROR!

    It is not our disagreement that make you ignorant. It is your stated ignorance of the natural laws that govern your life that makes you ignorant. I can't "cut it" unless you allow yourself to be informed; that is the only cure for ignorance.

    I do.

    ERROR!

    Repeating your own defense of using the word "miracle" to describe events that can be explained by natural laws (that YOU DON"T KNOW what the explanation is, and therefore it's a miracle) is not an insult, it is reflecting your own words back to you. For comparison, consider the following:

    “You starvelling, you eel-skin, you dried neat’s-tongue, you bull’s-pizzle, you stock-fish!”

    Now THAT'S an insult--again, crafted by one of the masters, William Shakespeare (Henry IV Part 1, Act 2, Scene 4). Compare and contrast to discover the difference between my reflection of your own avowed ignorance and actual insults.

    For emphasis.

    At this point, I'm beginning to wonder what lengths ARE necessary to help you understand your error(s). Apparently the emphasis was neither necessary nor sufficient to insure your understanding.

    (Whatever it takes, it's going to take more than 12,000 characters, so your lesson continues below...)
     
  7. Axe Elf

    Axe Elf Prophet

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2018
    Messages:
    2,395
    Ratings:
    +1,616
    Religion:
    zen Xian
    (...continued from above)

    ERROR!

    It is not necessary for you to know or understand the natural explanation for an event; the simple fact that there IS one disqualifies an event from being miraculous. And when you're talking about completely normal and natural things like "waking up in the morning" as a miracle, then it's pretty hard to feign ignorance of the natural laws underlying your survival of the night.

    Well, if you can't learn to use it correctly, then avoiding its use entirely would be a good alternative.


    ERROR!

    Stating that I am trying to educate you is not an insult, it is a statement of my intent. For comparison, consider the following:

    “O for breath to utter what is like thee!-you tailor’s-yard, you sheath, you bow-case, you vile standing tuck!”

    Now THAT'S an insult--again, crafted by one of the masters, William Shakespeare (Henry IV Part 1, Act 2, Scene 4). Compare and contrast to discover the difference between my statement of the intent to educate you and actual insults.

    Are you SURE you are not someone who insults? Up to this point, you haven't demonstrated much understanding of what an insult even IS.

    And parenthetically, "no comment" IS a comment.

    I'm sorry. I certainly did not intend to confuse you further. I was responding to three separate phrases of your one single comment, so I thought that by matching the color of each response to each target phrase that I would be able to avoid confusion, but I guess it backfired.

    My bad.

    I thought maybe using some techniques of emphasis would help drive home the points I was making, but you have proven to be immune to everything I have tried--so I'm not sure the necessary correction can be affected either with OR without techniques of emphasis. Neither method has worked thus far.

    ERROR!

    When you say that you don't know the natural laws that govern your existence, you are calling yourself ignorant of them. If you fall into water, should we not call you wet?

    Well I don't see the point in teaching you something you already know; teaching you something you don't know would be the only sensible thing to do. Otherwise we're both just wasting our time.

    So here we are, talking.

    If you are saying that would be a better way for ME to phrase my argument, then I'm not sure that you're correct. Why would I say that we have the same definition but yours is incorrect? That makes no sense at all, other than being a roundabout way of saying that MY definition is also incorrect. But if you think that would be a better way for me to approach your education, let's pretend that I said that, just for the sake of experimentation.

    Did it work? Do you understand your error now? Or was it not really a better way after all...?

    I have been addressing you, about your statements, and the knowledge level you have reported for yourself. I'm not even questioning it; when you said you are ignorant of the natural laws governing your life, I took you at your word.

    You are correct, there were no insults there, just me addressing the information at hand; i.e., your attempt to weasel your way out of reality with a bunch of hand-waving and misdirection while pretending that your position was rationally defensible.

    ERROR!

    That was me educating you as to the meaning of the word "supernatural" when you erroneously claimed that it was different from not being explained by natural laws--not being explained by natural laws is the very definition of "supernatural"! Providing you with information is not an insult. For comparison, consider the following:

    “That trunk of humours, that bolting-hutch of beastliness, that swollen parcel of dropsies, that huge bombard of sack, that stuffed cloak-bag of guts, that roasted Manningtree ox with pudding in his belly, that reverend vice, that grey Iniquity, that father ruffian, that vanity in years?”

    Now THAT'S an insult--again, crafted by one of the masters, William Shakespeare (Henry IV Part 1, Act 2, Scene 4). Compare and contrast to discover the difference between my helping you understand the definition of a word and actual insults.

    Done.
    Can't.
    Done.
     
  8. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    24,115
    Ratings:
    +7,981

    Come back to me when you tone down your posts.

    It is hard and very fustrating to find your points in your tone.

    Now I have to work. I have no time and patience to address your rude posts.

    Period.
     
    #108 Unveiled Artist, Apr 12, 2018
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2018
  9. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    24,115
    Ratings:
    +7,981

    Come back to me when you tone down your posts.

    It is hard and very fustrating to find your points in your tone.

    Now I have to work. I have no time and patience to address your rude posts.

    Period.
     
  10. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Riboflavin
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    55,384
    Ratings:
    +13,940
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    Take a step back: it's you making claims about what the Bible said about what Jesus said about what God said. You're still the only one making claims to me.
     
  11. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Riboflavin
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    55,384
    Ratings:
    +13,940
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    And do you know all "natural causes" and all the things that can be explained by them?

    "Experiences we can't explain" are starting points for inquiry, not things we just slap explanations on: "I don't know why this happened- let's try to figure it out," not "I don't know why this happened, so God must be why it happened."
     
  12. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    24,115
    Ratings:
    +7,981
    Its the strict definition. My opinions werent included.

    Who knows. I dont believe in god, so I acknowledge others wont think the same as me. They arent me. But they are my experiences not claims of fact. The only universal definitio is how the dictionary explains miracles. Its a cultural defined word; so, its hard to debate whats a real miracle or not. Each culture and religion have their own criteria.
     
  13. Woberts

    Woberts The Perfumed Seneschal

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2018
    Messages:
    2,788
    Ratings:
    +1,884
    Religion:
    Terminus Est.
    This is off topic, but what kind of books do you write?
     
  14. KenS

    KenS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    8,049
    Ratings:
    +2,145
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    Not really. If I make the claim, and the Gospel makes the claim, you now have the witness of two people :)
     
  15. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Riboflavin
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    55,384
    Ratings:
    +13,940
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    No; I have hearsay.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  16. Milton Platt

    Milton Platt Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2015
    Messages:
    6,822
    Ratings:
    +2,585
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I didn't say I had to see it with my own eyes...that is a straw man argument of your own making. I said there needs to be evidence to support the claim of supernatural healing.

    We have no evidence so far that any healing that has occurred has not been the result of the body's own ability to heal and/or the use of modern medicine.

    As I said, doctors are not infallible, so the fact that your friend Cynthia recovered from whatever issue she had does not indicate something supernatural, but merely something unusual or rare.

    I have no idea whether the supernatural exists, much less that it can interact with reality. Those that claim this is so have a burden of proof to support the claim.
    The two claims you have mentioned have not been substantiated with such evidence. You have provided only heresay.
     
  17. KenS

    KenS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    8,049
    Ratings:
    +2,145
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    1) In reference to the OP - my statement was that as long as these things happen, there will always be believers. Your point doesn't change that

    2) To say that a group of doctors ALL made the mistake and then relegate it to that position would be erroneous

    3) A miracle is something unusual and rare.. it is supernatural.

    4) In that the doctors stated as such, then no more "proof to support the claim" is necessary.
     
  18. Milton Platt

    Milton Platt Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2015
    Messages:
    6,822
    Ratings:
    +2,585
    Religion:
    Atheist

    1. How large a group? A handfull, I would guess? My guess is if the used the word miracle they were simply saying they have no idea why it happened and that it was a very rare occurrance. That is different fron saying it was supernatural in nature.

    Consensus medicine is the norm. Please refer me to a medical paper which shows the supernatural at work. The word miracle is used very loosely be most everyone today. A coworker told me awhile back that she left for work late, and by some miracle she caught every traffic light green and made it on time anyway. Are you going to tell me that god in his infinite wisdom was controlling the traffic lights?
    So simply having someone declare something a miracle is of no value. In what way is a medical doctor trained to test for the actions of the supernatural?

    2. So every rare occurrance is a miracle then? Winning the lottery, for instance? What about remmission of cancer in lab rats? Is this done by god?
    When is something rare enough to be god guided instead of just a rare event? What odds are necessary?Otherwise, you have no way to tell them apart, right? A meteor large enough to hit the earth and do damage is rare....is god hurling them at us?

    In your Bible a miracle was something that defied the natural laws as we know them, such as rising from the dead, walking on water, living inside a large fish, etc. It seems to me you are cheapening the product.
     
    #118 Milton Platt, Apr 12, 2018
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2018
  19. KenS

    KenS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    8,049
    Ratings:
    +2,145
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    We are talking about doctors... not "most everyone".

    At John Hopkins and the hospital the original OP (Baylor College of Medicine)stated 13, it would be large enough.

    You are now changing from apples to oranges and therefore this is irrelevant. Again... we are taliking "doctors" not "simply having someone declare something a miracle".

    This doesn't have any logic. Remission after treatment? Are we talking lottery? All of these are strawman statement.s

    If you want odds (as it seems like you are pulling every stop possible:

    One mathematician’s estimate of those impossible odds is “one chance in a trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion.”³

    What are the Odds? - Y-Jesus.com

    Could that be a miracle?

    LOL... And where in the Bible did it define "miracle"? Or is this your personal version?

    Seems like it also included tax money, healings, recovery of sight and something as simple as knowing where to fish at. Sometimes the miraculous is so supernatural, it seems natural.

    A dream could be supernatural though you may think it is natural
     
    #119 KenS, Apr 12, 2018
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2018
  20. Axe Elf

    Axe Elf Prophet

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2018
    Messages:
    2,395
    Ratings:
    +1,616
    Religion:
    zen Xian
    I don't. I wrote a lot of short stories when I was a kid, and the first one was published at the age of 12 in a national magazine for teens (Young World, the oldest of the "Highlights" franchise). Two others were subsequently published in a Kansas teacher's magazine, but nothing since high school.
     
Loading...