RE: Why Richard Dawkins should debate Christians
April 23, 2013 at 6:23 pm
(This post was last modified: April 23, 2013 at 6:28 pm by A_Nony_Mouse.)
(April 19, 2013 at 8:01 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: 1. A miracle, in the Biblical sense is by definition a violation of natural law, it’s a supernatural event; so when you say that science (which deals only with natural laws) has demonstrated that virgins don’t give birth, men don’t turn water into whine, men don’t walk on water, donkeys don’t talk, and axe heads don’t float you’re really only proving the Bible’s point. Those events were evidence of God’s power because they violated natural law. It appears that it is actually you who is trying to compare apples and oranges, or namely the natural and the supernatural.
But magic remains magic even if you give it the fancier name of miracle. They are still tricks even if you call them supernatural. Apollonius of Tyana did magic as did Simon Magus. Once you admit magic you can't pick and choose. And as almost all the magics worked by Jesus are the same kinds worked on god TV I do not see why you are impressed. Again why do magicians hate amputees?
We are back to your belief in what was written by unknown persons who cannot be distinguished from compulsive liars for claiming common tricks require the intervention of a god.
Speaking of miracles, the miracles of Fatima appear in no contemporary newspaper and when questioned years later no resident recalled any such event. This is odd as when the story appears three years later in a publication by a priest there were many reporters present and thousands of people came miles around.
Who says miracles still don't occur in the old fashioned way?
