Miracles and Anti-supernaturalism

[BettyG]

BettyG: Jesus forgives those who repent and are committed to not sinning again. Salvation is a process. You have to continue in a state of grace.

Ryantology: It is virtually impossible to not sin, as God's law has made sins out of behaviors which are natural and normal (and entirely arbitrary in many cases). Making such a commitment is dishonest because fulfilling it is beyond anybody's ability.

That is why the Sacrament of Reconciliation was instituted by Jesus. Jesus knows we will continue to sin because the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.

BettyG: I started this thread. I get to define miracles.

Ryantology: Wait, what? Starting a thread doesn't give you the right to change the definition of words.

Any discussion should define terms so we are talking about the same thing. Our definitions disagree. My definition is the one we are discussing.

BettyG: I am defining miracles as special acts of God in the world and time.

Ryantology: Describe what makes an act 'special' in this context.

Miracles usually occur through prayer to God or asking a holy person's intercession to God.

BettyG: Since miracles are special acts of God, they can only exist where there is a God who can perform such acts.

Ryantology: So far, so good.

OK

BettyG: If one does not believe in God, then they cannot say miracles, as I define them, are impossible.

Ryantology: The validity of your definition relies upon the existence of your god. If we do not believe in your god, your definition is meaningless to us.

At least we understand our differences.

BettyG: metaphysical - of or relating to the transcendent or to a reality beyond what is perceptible to the senses. It deals with some important questions, such as:
What is the meaning of Life?
What is my purpose?
What is God?
What is reality?
Why am I here?
Why does anything exist instead of nothing?
How did I get here?
Who and what am I?
What will happen when I die?

Ryantology: Metaphysics does not require us to answer any of these questions in the ways you do.

This definition of metaphysics was in response to someone who thought it meant fantasy.

BettyG: I hear a circular argument: If miracles are impossible, the report of any miraculous event must be false, and therefore, miracles are impossible.

Ryantology: That is a strawman argument, because the 'therefore' part of that argument is meaningless and redundant, and none of us use it. No valid argument about the possibility of something starts with an assumption of its possibility. It is on that point, by the way, where your argument fails: you assume the existence of God from the start.

The correct form of our position would be "If an event cannot be demonstrated to have happened in spite of all possible physical laws, it cannot be confirmed as supernatural (natural events are given precedence in this argument because no event has ever satisfied the criteria necessary to confirm an event as certainly not natural; the reverse is not true). Miracles must be supernatural in origin, so if an event is not supernatural, it cannot be a miracle." We could expand this further to "If God cannot be demonstrated to exist, then no event can be confirmed as a miracle."

Our definitions disagree. That the event happened begs the question of how it could occur when it is beyond human power to cause it. My point is that if you eliminate the assumption that the one reporting the miracle is a lying insane person, (hence circular reasoning) then you have to acknowledge that there is a power greater than yourself that caused it. I'm applying the law of causality, I.e., everything has a cause except the uncaused cause being who caused the chain of events known as creation to begin.

I can predict that you will respond with one of the tenets of the religion of Scientism: All truth can be explained by science; if not currently explained, it has faith that all will be explained some time in the future. This is why I was defining metaphysical. Science is limited to explaining the physical realm. One must use reason and logic to explore metaphysical issues. Scientism requires faith. I do not have faith in Scientism to explain God or why He causes miracles. I have come to the conclusion that the cause of events that happen as a result of prayer are caused by God.

Ryantology: The only circular argument being posited is yours, which requires non-believers to accept the existence of your god. As you cannot demonstrate that your God is real, everything which follows your initial assumption of his existence is invalid.

See one of my previous posts where I give a critique of David Hume's position on miracles where I said Hume's "argument equates quantity of evidence and probability. It says, in effect, that we should always believe what is most probable) in the sense of "enjoying the highest odds". But this is silly. On the these grounds a dice player should not believe the dice show three sides on the first roll, since the odds against it are 1,635,013,559,600 to 1. What Hume seems to overlook is that wise people base their beliefs on facts, not simply on odds. Sometimes the "odds' against an event are high (based on past observations), but the evidence for the event is otherwise very good. (based on current observation or reliable testimony.) Hume's argument confuses quantity of evidence with the quality of evidence. Evidence should be weighed, not added."

I agree that the odds of miraculous healings and Jesus' Resurrection are beyond statistical probability. However, that is not the method I use to evaluate acts of God, which is my definition of a miracle.