Can't prove the supernatural God

[SteveII]

Good question. I touched on this in the post above to Redbeard. 


You asked for an example. I have spoken before about my brother-in-laws brain tumor as a teenager. Was having seizures. Scans found tumor. He was being prepped for brain surgery and they scanned to get the latest mapping for the operation. No tumor. The doctor has no explanation and the family and friends believe it was a miracle (to give further context, my father-in-law was a minister in a local church so there was a lot of people involved and a lot of people who cared). Since my worldview contains the supernatural, the NT explains the context of what we can expect if we pray for healing, and there seems to be no natural causes, I believe I am justified in agreeing with them. Can I say 100%? No. 

Thank you for the example.  I share some of Mister Agenda's reservations, but I have a different question along the lines we were discussing before.  How does this relate to the factors which you suggested we should turn to for assessment of the likelihood of a miracle, namely context and, for lack of a better term, cueing (saying "You are healed!" and the person suddenly being healed).  The NT is context for how prayer can heal, but it's a very distant context and there appears to be no such cueing in your brother-in-law's case.  Wouldn't that reduce your assessment of the prospect of it being a miracle correspondingly?  I'm tempted to ask why, if it's good for the goose, is it not good for the gander, if you catch my drift?  Why isn't poor support from context not evidence against the assessment of a miracle?

Excellent point! When discussing Jesus' miracles, the context, that strengthen the claim, might include:

1. Timing (cueing as you put it)
2. Illustrating a particular point. Example Mat 9 Jesus told a man his sins were forgiven. When the religious leaders grumbled that this was blasphemy, he asked what was easier to say that your sins are forgiven or to tell him to get up an walk. 
3. Reinforce teachings with some authority. Example feeding 5000, Matt 9:35
4. So that people might believe (specifically stated). Example Lazarus (John 11)
5. Reward for faith. 
6. Theologically significant. example virgin birth, baptism, tearing of the veil in the temple, resurrection.

Now, you ask about non-Jesus miracles. I don't think the above list applies to miracle today so we need to switch to why God might intervene with a miracle. I think that God, with his foreknowledge of what we will freely do, has already factored in our prayers in deciding what the best intervention (if any) is for us and the terribly complex "butterfly effect" any intervention might bring to the rest of the future and will do what is best in the long run. In this perspective, timing or "cueing" is meaningless because the goal has nothing to do with the goal. In fact, invoking it should be a red flag.

To further explain that thought, I think the Bible teaches us to ask in faith that God can grant our petition but always with the attitude of "not my will, but your will be done" (Lord's Prayer). Even with the right attitude, God does not promise to answer our every request. The only promise given is illustrated in Romans 8:28 "And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God..."

You are entirely correct that these factors reduce my assessment of the prospect of it being a miracle. That is why I said that today, miracle claims are overstated and I don't use them to argue the existence of miracles specifically or God in general. But in general, I have reason to believe they happen and should be asked for with the right attitude understanding that the answer could very well be "no".