Faith and "miracles" - read the comments section!

[SemperFiDawg]

Putting Bart Ehrman's definitions aside, I will offer my own definition: a miracle is any very rare occurrence that greatly exceeds the laws of chance.

Again, no different than Ehrman’s. You put forth a definition that games the context to the point it guarantees the result you want.

I reject your definition outright but you threw it out there and built your entire argument on it so maybe you should defend it first. Why should I or anyone else accept your exclusionary and arbitrary definition of the term ‘miracle.’

 

[oldfella1962]

Again, no different than Ehrman’s. You put forth a definition that games the context to the point it guarantees the result you want.

I reject your definition outright but you threw it out there and built your entire argument on it so maybe you should defend it first. Why should I or anyone else accept your exclusionary and arbitrary definition of the term ‘miracle.’

You don't have to. IMHO I'm not setting a very high bar for what constitutes a miracle. If the bar is too low a miracle would be meaningless. I just think that "miracle" should be way down the list when figuring out possible explanations for any rare or unexpected event. I'm not gaming it to get the result I want. I will accept any result that accurate & thorough examination reveals. So far, every modern miracle has been debunked, and stories about long ago miracles hold even less credibility because there is no possible way to gather enough data to begin to study it.

Miracles might be possible, but if anything considered a miracle can be explained and thus proven not to be a miracle, it's not a miracle. I've experienced things I cannot explain and not one person has given me an explanation for it that makes sense, but since it can't be replicated nor collaborated buy others, I can't in good conscious call it a miracle since there's nothing that I would consider blatantly supernatural about it.

But I certainly shouldn't be expected to lower my personal bar of belief if anybody claims something is a miracle. We can both believe that X event happened - there is tangible proof of X that be both agree is legit & accurate - but we might have to "agree to disagree" on how & why X happened, in other words the causation for X to occur.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

You don't have to. IMHO I'm not setting a very high bar for what constitutes a miracle. If the bar is too low a miracle would be meaningless. I just think that "miracle" should be way down the list when figuring out possible explanations for any rare or unexpected event. I'm not gaming it to get the result I want. I will accept any result that accurate & thorough examination reveals. So far, every modern miracle has been debunked, and stories about long ago miracles hold even less credibility because there is no possible way to gather enough data to begin to study it.

Miracles might be possible, but if anything considered a miracle can be explained and thus proven not to be a miracle, it's not a miracle. I've experienced things I cannot explain and not one person has given me an explanation for it that makes sense, but since it can't be replicated nor collaborated buy others, I can't in good conscious call it a miracle since there's nothing that I would consider blatantly supernatural about it.

But I certainly shouldn't be expected to lower my personal bar of belief if anybody claims something is a miracle. We can both believe that X event happened - there is tangible proof of X that be both agree is legit & accurate - but we might have to "agree to disagree" on how & why X happened, in other words the causation for X to occur.

Definitions for miracle in the context of the discussion from various notable sources
Merriam-Webster

an extraordinary event manifesting divine intervention in human affairs

Brittanica

an unusual or wonderful event that is believed to be caused by the power of God

Cainbridge

an unusual and mysterious event that is thought to have been caused by a godbecause it does not follow the usual laws of nature

Collins

A miracle is a wonderful and surprising event that is believed to be caused by God.

Oxford

an act or event that does not follow the laws of nature and is believed to be caused by God

You will note that not one of them places quantifications such as
"very rare", "greatly exceeds the laws of chance", and "accepted by a panel of unbiased experts in the areas of expertise required to research the areas affected by and involved in the claimed miracle "you are redefining the definition. An "objective" person would look your definition that you used to frame your argument and ask, "Why?" or "To what end?", and "Why does this individual feel the need to alter the definition of the key concept he is attacking to defend his argument?" If I have to change the very definitions of terms to win my argument, that's a tacit acknowledgement on my behalf that I know my argument if baseless. Morally "objective" people know this regardless of whether they be atheists or believers. Just thought I would point this out as I don't engage in conversations with intellectually dishonest people other than to point out their sleight-of-hands publicly. You built a straw man based on your false narrative which was based on false and unproven presumptions and then burned him down. What an accomplishment. Bravo.
Have a nice day and God Bless.

 

[bullethead]

So what then can we accept as a miracle?
Up until sicknesses, germs, medicines and practices were recognized and understood people accepted someone recovering from an illness (because they left it in God's hands) as being a miracles regularly. Still do today.
Really to be "thought" and "believed" something is caused by a God is a pretty broad definition of a miracle.

What is something that happened which can be attributed to a God without question?

 

[oldfella1962]

Definitions for miracle in the context of the discussion from various notable sources
Merriam-Webster

Brittanica

Cainbridge

Collins

Oxford


You will note that not one of them places quantifications such as
"very rare", "greatly exceeds the laws of chance", and "accepted by a panel of unbiased experts in the areas of expertise required to research the areas affected by and involved in the claimed miracle "you are redefining the definition. An "objective" person would look your definition that you used to frame your argument and ask, "Why?" or "To what end?", and "Why does this individual feel the need to alter the definition of the key concept he is attacking to defend his argument?" If I have to change the very definitions of terms to win my argument, that's a tacit acknowledgement on my behalf that I know my argument if baseless. Morally "objective" people know this regardless of whether they be atheists or believers. Just thought I would point this out as I don't engage in conversations with intellectually dishonest people other than to point out their sleight-of-hands publicly. You built a straw man based on your false narrative which was based on false and unproven presumptions and then burned him down. What an accomplishment. Bravo.
Have a nice day and God Bless.

Yes, those are official definitions! Regardless, I am not trying to win an argument or make a straw man or whatever. So going off of the definitions you provided, nothing really changes. Granted they don't get into burdens of proof, just give definitions, which is fine. All I did is expand on my thoughts on miracles.
Bottom line the one thing common to all the dictionary definitions is
SUPERNATURAL/DIVINE/GOD which is, from my worldview, a deal breaker. So by any standard I don't believe in miracles.
I'm not saying an actual miracle in which I believe might not occur in the future, but so far none have. I'm just not seeing how I was intellectually dishonest.

 

[Spotlite]

You don't have to. IMHO I'm not setting a very high bar for what constitutes a miracle. If the bar is too low a miracle would be meaningless. I just think that "miracle" should be way down the list when figuring out possible explanations for any rare or unexpected event. I'm not gaming it to get the result I want. I will accept any result that accurate & thorough examination reveals. So far, every modern miracle has been debunked, and stories about long ago miracles hold even less credibility because there is no possible way to gather enough data to begin to study it.

Miracles might be possible, but if anything considered a miracle can be explained and thus proven not to be a miracle, it's not a miracle. I've experienced things I cannot explain and not one person has given me an explanation for it that makes sense, but since it can't be replicated nor collaborated buy others, I can't in good conscious call it a miracle since there's nothing that I would consider blatantly supernatural about it.

But I certainly shouldn't be expected to lower my personal bar of belief if anybody claims something is a miracle. We can both believe that X event happened - there is tangible proof of X that be both agree is legit & accurate - but we might have to "agree to disagree" on how & why X happened, in other words the causation for X to occur.

I’d agree - no one should lower their “bar” to accept anything as truth.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

So what then can we accept as a miracle?

Well first you would have to find an unbiased person. That would exclude the both of us......and probably everyone we know, and everyone they know, and on and on and on. Truth be told we, in all probability, couldn't even agree on the "an extraordinary event" aspect. We have opposite starting points. That's just the way it is. I view every breath as an extraordinary event and I can defend it pretty well. You in all probability don't view it as such and can defend it pretty well. I think in the end it comes down to, as always, beliefs. You have yours based on your experience and I have mine based on mine. The truly sad part to me is that I know there is a God, and think it's horrible that I'm incapable of showing him to you.

 

[WaltL1]

Well first you would have to find an unbiased person. That would exclude the both of us......and probably everyone we know, and everyone they know, and on and on and on. Truth be told we, in all probability, couldn't even agree on the "an extraordinary event" aspect. We have opposite starting points. That's just the way it is. I view every breath as an extraordinary event and I can defend it pretty well. You in all probability don't view it as such and can defend it pretty well. I think in the end it comes down to, as always, beliefs. You have yours based on your experience and I have mine based on mine. The truly sad part to me is that I know there is a God, and think it's horrible that I'm incapable of showing him to you.

Thats ^ a pretty good post SFD.
Basically what defines a "miracle" changes from person to person.
Comment -

and think it's horrible that I'm incapable of showing him to you.

If there is a God, I would think thats ^ the way he wants it for whatever reason.

 

[Ruger#3]

Short of the heavens parting and angels descending we’re not likely to agree on the definition.

 

[bullethead]

Short of the heavens parting and angels descending we’re not likely to agree on the definition.

I wouldn't even need that. I would accept much less of a Cecil B DeMill production where after a mass prayer to whatever God of choice amputees worldwide would all start to regrow limbs. Let Drs and Scientists monitor their progress, scan and test as warranted. Let the scientific and medical community concur that there is no natural explanation.
That would do it for me.

On the other hand, what happened to the Bills player is an impressive combination of having all the right medical personell in place to perform the right procedures on a human who is young and in top physical condition. Time, skill, procedure, youth, healthy all played important roles. A miracle would have been that he had expired and hours after no brain or organ functions he revives and pops up as if nothing at all happened to him and he is on the field this week.
I absolutely thought it was a nice sight to see the teams, players and people across the world come together and pray that day for Hamlin and all the times afterwards. But I also thought that with all of the diversity between individuals were they all praying to the same God?

 

[SemperFiDawg]

Thats ^ a pretty good post SFD.
Basically what defines a "miracle" changes from person to person.
Comment -

If there is a God, I would think thats ^ the way he wants it for whatever reason.

Thanks Walt. I'd like to think I've come a little ways humility wise, since my first days down here in the AAA forum throwing out fire and brimstone with an air of condescension.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

I wouldn't even need that. I would accept much less of a Cecil B DeMill production where after a mass prayer to whatever God of choice amputees worldwide would all start to regrow limbs.

There's a thread up stairs that I started and I wish you would take the time to drop in and read though and and post if you feel the need. It's about evidence of our belief.

Reading it there's one common theme and that is regardless of what believers base their beliefs on it's very personal and was exactly what they needed at the moment to make it personal. A miracle such as you speak of, while miraculous and evidence of God...maybe, wouldn't be personal to you. It would just be evidence of God, not his personal interest in you. That's a huge difference. What good is a God who shows no interest in you personally. May as well be the IRS for all the good it does you.

 

[bullethead]

What good is a God who shows no interest in you personally. May as well be the IRS for all the good it does you.

That has been a steady point of mine in here for all of my years participating.
I said it before and Ill say it again:
If there is a God or Gods I do not know them. They are welcomed to introduce themselves whenever they'd like.

I will take the time to read your suggested thread. I will refrain from making any negative comments due to the forum in which it is located in.

 

[WaltL1]

Short of the heavens parting and angels descending we’re not likely to agree on the definition.

Even if we were to agree on the definition then the debate would start as to who/what is responsible for it

 

[bullethead]

There's a thread up stairs that I started and I wish you would take the time to drop in and read though and and post if you feel the need. It's about evidence of our belief.

Reading it there's one common theme and that is regardless of what believers base their beliefs on it's very personal and was exactly what they needed at the moment to make it personal. A miracle such as you speak of, while miraculous and evidence of God...maybe, wouldn't be personal to you. It would just be evidence of God, not his personal interest in you. That's a huge difference. What good is a God who shows no interest in you personally. May as well be the IRS for all the good it does you.

I do think that such a massive miracle such as amputees regrowing limbs would cause many people to seek God and start them to have a personal interest in him whether or not God decides to reciprocate is another discussion.

 

[WaltL1]

There's a thread up stairs that I started and I wish you would take the time to drop in and read though and and post if you feel the need. It's about evidence of our belief.

Reading it there's one common theme and that is regardless of what believers base their beliefs on it's very personal and was exactly what they needed at the moment to make it personal. A miracle such as you speak of, while miraculous and evidence of God...maybe, wouldn't be personal to you. It would just be evidence of God, not his personal interest in you. That's a huge difference. What good is a God who shows no interest in you personally. May as well be the IRS for all the good it does you.

Are you talking about the "evidence" thread?
Much like "miracles" Ive learned I have to expand my view of what the definition of "evidence" is. I always viewed it in sort of a clinical way but have learned in here "evidence" means different things to different people.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

Are you talking about the "evidence" thread?
Much like "miracles" Ive learned I have to expand my view of what the definition of "evidence" is. I always viewed it in sort of a clinical way but have learned in here "evidence" means different things to different people.

Yes. That one.

 

[WaltL1]

Yes. That one.

Yeah, Ive been reading along in that thread. Its pretty interesting.

 

[bullethead]

I just went through the evidence thread.
I will say that evidence is unique to the individual and varies in magnitude greatly.
I can also say that people all over the world have similar experiences and that evidence (to them) is the result of another God, Gods or Belief System.
I cannot see where one is more truthful than the other or how one God stands out more than another given the testimonials above compared to testimonials around the world.

Edited to add:
I didnt want to insult anyone up there who participated in sharing their very personal experiences with my questions and comments.

 

[Spotlite]

I just went through the evidence thread.
I will say that evidence is unique to the individual and varies in magnitude greatly.
I can also say that people all over the world have similar experiences and that evidence (to them) is the result of another God, Gods or Belief System.
I cannot see where one is more truthful than the other or how one God stands out more than another given the testimonials above compared to testimonials around the world.

Edited to add:
I didnt want to insult anyone up there who participated in sharing their very personal experiences with my questions and comments.

I think some questions from your point of view would be welcomed there.