Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
August 9, 2013 at 12:18 am (This post was last modified: August 9, 2013 at 12:24 am by Whateverist.)
(June 9, 2013 at 10:34 pm)BettyG Wrote:
For those who do not believe in miracles, I proppse the following for discussion:
from Josh McDowell's book New Evidence that Demands a Verdict, p. 359-360
J.W.N. Sullivan says, "that since the publication of Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity and Planck's endeavors with "black-body radiation," scientists are faced with "the vicissitudes of so-called natural law in an uncharted and unobstructed universe."
James Moore says that "today scientists will admit that no one knows enough about 'natural law' to say that any event is necessarily a violation of it. They agree that an individual's non-statistical sample of time and space is hardly sufficient ground on which to base immutable generalizations concerning the nature of the entire universe. Today, what we commonly term 'natural law' is in fact only our inductive and statistical descriptions of natural phenomena."
John Montgomery denotes that he anti-supernatural position is both "philosophically and scientifically irresponsible." First of all, philosophically: "because no one below the status of god could know the universe so well as to eliminate miracles a priori." Secondly, scientifically: "because in th age of Einsteinian physics (so different from the world of Newtonian absolutes in which Hume formulated his classic anti-miraculous argument) the universe has opened up to all possibilities, 'any attempt to state a "universal law of causation" must prove futile and only careful consideration of the empirical testimony for a miraculous event can determine whether in fact it has or has not occurred."
"But can the modern man accept a "miracle" such as the resurrection? The answer is a surprising one: The resurrection has to be accepted by us just because we are modern men, men living in the Einstein relativistic age. For us, unlike the Newtonian epoch, the universe is not longer a tight safe predictable playing field in which we know all the rules. Since Einstein no modern has had the right to rule out the possibility of events because of prior knowledge of "natural." The only way we can know whether an event can occur is to see whether in fact it has occurred. The problem of "miracles", then. must be solved in the realm of historical investigation, not in the realm of philosophical speculation."
Vincent Taylor warns against too great a dogmatism with regard to the miraculous: "It is far too late today to dismiss the question by saying that "miracles are impossible":; that stage of the discussion is definitely past. Science takes a much humbler and truer view of natural law that was characteristic of former times; we now know that eh "laws of Nature" are convenient summaries of existing knowledge. Nature is not a "closed system," and miracles are not "intrusions" in to an "established order." In the last fifty years we have been staggered too often by discoveries which at one time were pronounced impossible. ... This change of thought does not, of course, accredit the miraculous; but it does mean that, given the right conditions, miracles are not impossible; no scientific or philosophic dogma stand in the way.
I can concede some points but not others. But please some definitions first. May I suggest:
Definition: a miracle is an event caused by God. [I could use "gods" instead of God, but since you are Catholic as well as the original poster, lets go with that.]
Definition: a 'supernatural event' is one not brought about through natural means. [I really have a hard time making sense of this as a category, but I'll let it go for now.]
Okay, I hear you arguing that we as humans have learned so much that we should now realize that our best scientific theories are very likely incomplete. With great knowledge should come the recognition of how much we still do not know. Granted.
In recognition of our immense ignorance you think we should be in no hurry to rule out supernatural causes and hence miracles. But how do you know that God works in supernatural ways? For all any of us know, if there is a God, perhaps he works in purely natural ways, albeit in ways consistent with a perfected and complete natural law. Perhaps a completely adequate natural law is synonymous with God's law? In the interest of humility in the face of our epistemic position, can we really assume that God acts in ways divorced from natural law? Would He want to? Need to? Be able to? We just don't know.
Lets imagine the Christian God really does exist and really did bring the universe and everything in it into existence. Can we know that He did so in a completely spurious and magical way? How can we rule out the possibility that He brought it about in a completely craftsman like way working within the limits of what the materials would allow? I know that seems to diminish God, but again how can we rule it out? We should know enough to admit we don't know. Suffice it to say, if He exists, he works in ways mysterious to ourselves but perhaps not mysterious to him. Perhaps He understands how he does what he does and exercises not magic but skill. Who knows?
We are simply in no position to know whether God works within the natural laws of the universe or not. That doesn't mean He doesn't perform miracles. If He does anything at all, by definition, it's a miracle. But I can't see how we will ever be able to conclude that any particular action was performed through the agency of God and not as a result of natural causes and effects to which we are not yet privy.
For that matter, if natural law were truly mutable and there existed a class of beings capable of 'supernatural' agency, we cannot rule out the possibility that God is not the only supernatural agent. Perhaps some events thought to be miracles were actually brought about by the agency of the devil, some cherubs, Mary, some saints or an angel .. and that doesn't even begin to exhaust the possible sources of supernatural agents if we move beyond the Christian pantheon.
If something happens only in the "spiritual" World, it cannot be seen, heard, or known in the physical world.
If something from the "spiritual" wold interacts with the physical world, science can discover the disturbance or the effect on the physical world from this. Thus theoretically science should always be able discover the presence of "miracles."
(August 9, 2013 at 6:36 am)Brakeman Wrote: If something happens only in the "spiritual" World, it cannot be seen, heard, or known in the physical world.
If something from the "spiritual" wold interacts with the physical world, science can discover the disturbance or the effect on the physical world from this. Thus theoretically science should always be able discover the presence of "miracles."
Playing defense for a moment, the typical theistic response to this claim is that the being causing the miracle simply caused nature to behave in such a way that its will is done, so the effect, while actually miraculous, seems natural. To which the reply should be that anybody claiming that a seemingly natural occurrence has a supernatural cause while also admitting that this cause cannot be demonstrated, has no basis at all for saying so, and is acting irrationally.
Hopefully, my saying this will cut off any theists hoping to use it here, so we can all save time.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
(August 8, 2013 at 12:40 pm)ronedee Wrote: I believe in God's [plan]: Beit 4 Jesuits surviving an Atom bomb, or millions dying in a tsunami. Nothing matters when you trust in God.
And I know for a fact that you don't believe this, at least to the degree you claim. I'll let Hugh Laurie here illustrate.
"You can have all the faith you want in spirits, and the afterlife, and heaven and hell, but when it comes to this world, don't be an idiot. Cause you can tell me you put your faith in God to put you through the day, but when it comes time to cross the road, I know you look both ways."
Thanks, Hugh! Say hi to Stephen Fry for me, ok?
"No problem, glad to be here. See you later!"
What a nice chap!
Anyway, regardless of whether you believe what you wrote or not, it has to be one of the sickest things I've read in a long time - and I read some pretty sick things, let me tell you. Take for instance the 9/11 attacks. Were you as appalled as the rest of us by the sheer atrocity of what happened and what led up to it, not to mention its aftermath, or did you celebrate yet another manifestation of God's plan?
This is not an assault, though you will perceive it as such; I genuinely want to know.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
August 9, 2013 at 8:07 am (This post was last modified: August 9, 2013 at 8:14 am by ITChick.)
I would like to share a story about a miracle that I experienced today.
I was standing outside work complaining that I forgot to charge my phone last night and that it was almost dead. As I walked through reception the reception lady stopped me and told me that I had a parcel. The parcel contained a phone charger!
True story.
Now I'm aware that some of you might be sceptical about this story. You might think that I made it up. But I ask you this: how am I posting this if it's not true?
Others might think that I only received the charger because I ordered it earlier this week. You would be correct in thinking that is why I receive it, but I ask you this: Why did I receive it exactly when I needed it the most?
As I'm a pastafarian this is proof to me that the Flying Spaghetti Monster does indeed exist. All praise His Noodliness!!!!
(Yes, that really is how Christians sound to me when they talk about miracles. I didn't even believe it when I was a Christian)
Edit: And wtf is up with the formatting? I call miracle.
(August 9, 2013 at 8:07 am)ITChick Wrote: I would like to share a story about a miracle that I experienced today.
I was standing outside work complaining that I forgot to charge my phone last night and that it was almost dead. As I walked through reception the reception lady stopped me and told me that I had a parcel. The parcel contained a phone charger!
True story.
Now I'm aware that some of you might be sceptical about this story. You might think that I made it up. But I ask you this: how am I posting this if it's not true?
Others might think that I only received the charger because I ordered it earlier this week. You would be correct in thinking that is why I receive it, but I ask you this: Why did I receive it exactly when I needed it the most?
As I'm a pastafarian this is proof to me that the Flying Spaghetti Monster does indeed exist. All praise His Noodliness!!!!
(Yes, that really is how Christians sound to me when they talk about miracles. I didn't even believe it when I was a Christian)
Edit: And wtf is up with the formatting? I call miracle.
Of course it's a miracle. As an ordained minister in The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (pbup), I see them all the time.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
(August 8, 2013 at 11:18 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Where do ass-raped altar boys fit into this plan or your god's?
Pfft! Typical skeptic, questioning the miraculous!
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
![[Image: ordination.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=www.acbeddoe.com%2Fphotos%2Fatheism%2Fordination.jpg)
![[Image: 10314461_875206779161622_3907189760171701548_n.jpg]](https://scontent-a-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/t1.0-9/10314461_875206779161622_3907189760171701548_n.jpg)
