Miracles are evidence there is no God(s)

[firedragon]

Many religions worships there own God(s) and deny the existence of other Gods. However, miracles happen to people of many different faiths. From this we can conclude that either:

1. People of your faith are telling the truth and everyone else is mislead or lying about miracles
2. Multiple intervening Gods exist
3. The God(s) of your faith performs miracles for non-believers too, or
4. There is a natural explanation for all miracles

With more education, technological advances, communication, etc. I think number four is becoming more and more likely.

So your thesis is that since different people had varying ideas and/or theories about the killing of John F Kennedy, he didnt exist? Or since you might bring in an argument without understanding this analogy, different people have varying perspectives about some figure in history, he doesnt exist.

Any thing that has different concepts about it doesn't exist??

Im sorry but arguments for atheism are drowning these days. With all the education, technological advances, communication etc, it keeps drowning further.

If miracles indeed happen in every religion and theology as you say, either all of them are bogus, some of them are bogus, or all of them are true. Two of these options means there is something other than the natural world out there. It doesnt prove God doesnt exist. It just proves somethings out there. If all of the miracles are bogus, it proves people are bogus. Doesnt prove anything about God.

People having different beliefs either prove they are all bogus, or some of them are bogus, but not that all of them are absolutely correct. Worst case scenario, if all of them are bogus, it still does not prove anything about God.

The God, could still exist.

This is a false argument.

 

[firedragon]

Only if those exclusivist religions have the belief that miracles can only happen through their religion.

Which "exclusivist religion" claims that miracles could happen "Only through THEIR RELIGION"?

 

[sun rise]

Many religions worships there own God(s) and deny the existence of other Gods. However, miracles happen to people of many different faiths. From this we can conclude that either:

1. People of your faith are telling the truth and everyone else is mislead or lying about miracles
2. Multiple intervening Gods exist
3. The God(s) of your faith performs miracles for non-believers too, or
4. There is a natural explanation for all miracles

With more education, technological advances, communication, etc. I think number four is becoming more and more likely.

You left out the truth aka Blind Men and the Elephant illustrating that all religions have a partial truth of the Divine.

 

[sun rise]

What is a miracle

My definition is the operation of an unknown law of the universe by those who have access to the inner planes of existence.

But to me the true miracle would be a world where peace, justice, harmony and understanding reign supreme.

 

[sun rise]

Which "exclusivist religion" claims that miracles could happen "Only through THEIR RELIGION"?

This strikes me as answering your question:

So in response to your question I would say that there are no real miracles that are inconsistent with the Christian God and there are Real miracles that are only consistent with the Christian God (the resurrection of Jesus for example)

 

[Audie]

My definition is the operation of an unknown law of the universe by those who have access to the inner planes of existence.

But to me the true miracle would be a world where peace, justice, harmony and understanding reign supreme.

Inner planes of existence. Just shifts the q.

Ps i dont want peace. I want trouble. Always.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Many religions worships there own God(s) and deny the existence of other Gods. However, miracles happen to people of many different faiths. From this we can conclude that either:

1. People of your faith are telling the truth and everyone else is mislead or lying about miracles
2. Multiple intervening Gods exist
3. The God(s) of your faith performs miracles for non-believers too, or
4. There is a natural explanation for all miracles

With more education, technological advances, communication, etc. I think number four is becoming more and more likely.

There are no gods in my religion. None. How do you explain that one?

 

[firedragon]

This strikes me as answering your question:

I asked about "religion", not "God".

The sentence was about religion. The religion is exclusive, and it says "only through this religion miracles can happen". So I want to know which religion it was.

This is a very unsophisticated question. Hope you understand. Anyway, let the proponent answer.

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
Fine, but this has the disadvantage of being a subjective unevidenced opinion, and looks a lot like a begging the question fallacy.

It is my opinion formed through consideration of the real world facts on miracles and the explanations of those claiming insight into the deeper nature of the universe.

This is all outside the realm of science and physical proof at this time and I accept that.

That's what I said, just a subjective opinion, repeating it with extra unevidenced claims that it is based on facts, doesn't change that, obviously. I didn't mention science? However since that claim is also unevidenced I can only point out that a lack of scientific evidence is not a compelling reason to believe something, since one fact we can reliably accept, is that all non existent things are beyond the scope of science.

If you want to demonstrate something beyond subjective claims, then by all means pick the most compelling evidence for a miracle you think there is. However if it is just an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy at the end, citing something is a miracle because there is no contrary evidence, then I'd not find that compelling obviously, as it would be irrational.

 

[leroy]

I'd go with 2 (and possibly occasionally 1).

Just so I'm clear: I don't think the claims are credible enough to accept as true; I just think that all the other miracle claims I've ever seen are less credible than this one.

I also think that if you can't demonstrate that your favourite miracle claim isn't at least as credible as the "milk miracle" - i.e. a claim we can probably both agree isn't well-supported enough to be believed - then I won't see any need to take your claim seriously.

Sure:

In the case of the resurrection I think there are good reason to conclude that it was not a lie nor a hallucination, nor a mistake, being a true miracle the best alternative.

If you have something analogues with the milk example I would be obligated to accept such miracle or to reject he resurrection in order to be intellectually consistent.

 

[robocop (actually)]

Many religions worships there own God(s) and deny the existence of other Gods. However, miracles happen to people of many different faiths. From this we can conclude that either:

1. People of your faith are telling the truth and everyone else is mislead or lying about miracles
2. Multiple intervening Gods exist
3. The God(s) of your faith performs miracles for non-believers too, or
4. There is a natural explanation for all miracles

With more education, technological advances, communication, etc. I think number four is becoming more and more likely.

I'll go for choice 3, basically.

 

[George-ananda]

That's what I said, just a subjective opinion, repeating it with extra unevidenced claims that it is based on facts, doesn't change that, obviously.

I am using the dictionary definition of the word 'evidence': the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Hence, I do not consider any of my miracle beliefs to be unevidenced.

However since that claim is also unevidenced I can only point out that a lack of scientific evidence is not a compelling reason to believe something, since one fact we can reliably accept, is that all non existent things are beyond the scope of science.

What the twisting convolution there. I don't think any one considers a lack of scientific evidence a compelling reason to believe something. A compelling reason to believe a miracle can come following fair consideration of the evidence and argumentation from all sides.

If you want to demonstrate something beyond subjective claims, then by all means pick the most compelling evidence for a miracle you think there is. However if it is just an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy at the end, citing something is a miracle because there is no contrary evidence, then I'd not find that compelling obviously, as it would be irrational.

I would only argue that paranormal things occur beyond reasonable doubt from an analysis of the evidence from all sides. Yes, that is subjective but a subjective opinion I would argue for after fair consideration of all the evidence.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Sure:

In the case of the resurrection I think there are good reason to conclude that it was not a lie nor a hallucination, nor a mistake, being a true miracle the best alternative.

I'm unwilling to accept your assertion that there are good reasons to think it happened as a substitute for actual good reasons to think it actually happened.

If you have something analogues with the milk example I would be obligated to accept such miracle or to reject he resurrection in order to be intellectually consistent.

I would say that the milk miracle is analogous with the Resurrection. The main difference is that the milk miracle has much stronger evidence supporting its claim... partly because of the fog of time and partly because the quality of the evidence is better.

For instance, for the milk miracle, we have multiple non-Hindu sources documenting the testimony from independent observers of the "miracle." For the resurrection, we have only really one Christian account.

We can actually see video of Ganesha statues all over the world drinking milk. We have nothing approaching this level of evidence for the Resurrection.

 

[Sheldon]

In the case of the resurrection I think there are good reason to conclude that it was not a lie nor a hallucination, nor a mistake, being a true miracle the best alternative.

I think I know the answer, but can you demonstrate any objective evidence to support this "reason"?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I'll go for choice 3, basically.

What are the theological implications of this?

I mean, you're a Mormon, right? If God is suspending the laws of physics to strengthen the faith of someone of some other religion, why would it ever make sense for your church to send missionaries to try and convert that person away from their religion?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

• People of your faith are telling the truth and everyone else is mislead or lying about miracles

• Multiple intervening Gods exist

• The God(s) of your faith performs miracles for non-believers too, or

• There is a natural explanation for all miracles

You forgot the option that is the answer to the OP.

There is only one God that Loves all creation and a miracle is possible with each and every one of us.

This is also the apex of knowledge, that both science and faith can obtain to. That we have One God.

Regards Tony

 

[Sheldon]

↑
That's what I said, just a subjective opinion, repeating it with extra unevidenced claims that it is based on facts, doesn't change that, obviously.

I am using the dictionary definition of the word 'evidence': the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Hence, I do not consider any of my miracle beliefs to be unevidenced.

Groovy, and I can read dictionaries, but again all you are doing is offering an unevidenced subjective opinion that there is evidence, whatever you consider that to be, you still have not demonstrated any evidence, only made another unevidenced claim it exists.

What the twisting convolution there. I don't think any one considers a lack of scientific evidence a compelling reason to believe something.

Indeed, though I wouldn't want to speak for others, but strange then that you think stating your miracle is beyond scientific scope is relevant? Especially since I never mentioned science, and since that would be true of any non existent thing.

A compelling reason to believe a miracle can come following fair consideration of the evidence and argumentation from all sides.

I shall have to start counting the number of times you make unevidenced claims alluding to evidence, as this may be some sort of record.

I would only argue that paranormal things occur beyond reasonable doubt from an analysis of the evidence from all sides. Yes, that is subjective but a subjective opinion I would argue for after fair consideration of all the evidence.

All what evidence?

 

[Sheldon]

There is only one God that Loves all creation and a miracle is possible with each and every one of us.

We don't need rational arguments if we are prepared to accept this kind of unevidenced argument from assertion fallacy.

This is also the apex of knowledge, that both science and faith can obtain to. That we have One God.

I don't believe you...

 

[George-ananda]

Groovy, and I can read dictionaries, but again all you are doing is offering an unevidenced subjective opinion that there is evidence, whatever you consider that to be, you still have not demonstrated any evidence, only made another unevidenced claim it exists.



Indeed, though I wouldn't want to speak for others, but strange then that you think stating your miracle is beyond scientific scope is relevant? Especially since I never mentioned science, and since that would be true of any non existent thing.



I shall have to start counting the number of times you make unevidenced claims alluding to evidence, as this may be some sort of record.



All what evidence?

Even eyewitness evidence is evidence worthy of consideration. A sufficient quantity, quality and consistency of just eyewitness evidence can have me believing an event almost certainly occurred.

Do you distinguish a difference between the words 'evidence' and 'proof'?

 

[robocop (actually)]

What are the theological implications of this?

I mean, you're a Mormon, right? If God is suspending the laws of physics to strengthen the faith of someone of some other religion, why would it ever make sense for your church to send missionaries to try and convert that person away from their religion?

People have the Holy Ghost with them when they have a broken heart and a contrite spirit. That enables miracles.