Are Miracles Possible?

[Abdul Alhazred]

I'm still lacking a definite definition of 'miracle' as used here.

1) Does it mean Divine intervention, as I have always understood the word?

2) Does it mean something not explained by science and ignored or denied by the scientific community?

3) Does it mean something truly amazing, such as the birth of a baby?

Without a precise definition, the question means nothing.

 

[The idea]

I'm still lacking a definite definition of 'miracle' as used here.

1) Does it mean Divine intervention, as I have always understood the word?

No, someone might assume that an event occurred as a result of divine intervention, but the assumption is based on the character of the event and not on any independent evidence of actual divine intervention.

2) Does it mean something not explained by science and ignored or denied by the scientific community?

No, we cannot classify an event as a miracle merely because it is not explained by science.

3) Does it mean something truly amazing, such as the birth of a baby?

No.

Here is an attempt to ask "Is it true that some miracle has occurred or will occur?":
Is the totality of events such that the simplest description of it includes a reference to some specific events?

Here's a simple mathematical construction that might help clarify the idea:
Suppose for any whole number n from 1 to 999, if n is not equal to either 407 or 831, then f=(1000 - n)
and
f(407)=226 and f(831)=539

The values 407 and 831 are "miracle points" in the domain of f.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Originally posted by The idea
Here's a simple mathematical construction that might help clarify the idea:
Suppose for any whole number n from 1 to 999, if n is not equal to either 407 or 831, then f=(1000 - n)
and
f(407)=226 and f(831)=539

The values 407 and 831 are "miracle points" in the domain of f.

If you are saying (correct me if this isn't what you are saying) that they are miracle points because they violate the functional rule that applies to all the other numbers, I'm not sure what this has to do with miracles.

If the analogy here is that the function represents the rules by which the universe operates, and 407 and 831 represent miracles because they don't follow those rules, it seems we just have an incomplete set of rules.

Might a better representation of a miracle be:

Suppose for any whole number from 1 to 999, f=(1000-n). There are no standard exceptions, for any standard exception would be a rule itself. So, normally f(407)=593. The miracle would kick in only if the function should apply to 407, but one day, for no reason, the function was run, and out popped 226. If a rule could not be discovered to account for it, then there's your miracle.

Was that even close to what you were getting at?

edited to correct abysmally stupid math error

 

[The idea]

If the analogy here is that the function represents the rules by which the universe operates [...]

I think it is simpler than you imagine. Imagine a universe whose total history consists of a sequence of 999 moments of time. The state of the universe at any given moment is identified by means of a single number. The miracle then (unfortunately) applies to the entire state of the universe at a given moment. You could make a better analogy if you could make a miracle spatially localized.

[...] it seems we just have an incomplete set of rules.

If the actual laws of nature describe what actually is, then there can be no "violation." However, what if the simplest description of the actual laws of nature has to make reference to some particular, exceptional events? Then a student of the universe has to throw some ad hoc information into the laws. No conceivable event is then theoretically shocking. If we know that there are some weird events that don't fit into the general pattern, then we simply have to observe them and formulate the laws to allow for them.

 

[The idea]

You will notice that a miracle would have to linger through time for it to have a real benefit. For example, if jar of copper pennies turns into a jar of gold pennies for a few minutes and then turns back into (and remains as) a jar of copper pennies, you won't be able to profit from it. Ideally, it would turn into gold and remain as gold not only long enough for you to spend it, but also permanently so that the purchaser doesn't get cheated.

 

[The idea]

Maybe I could have phrased that better. If a local miracle is reversed by a subsequent miracle, then the original local miracle would be indistinguishable from a hallucination or mass hallucination.

 

[Ruby]

Can every historical event be replicated? If some historical events cannot be replicated, then does that leave open the possibility that some miracles have occurred in history?

Hi,

I voted that miracles don't happen, period. I don't believe they are possible at all. I think there are perfectly logical explanations for the things that people ascribe the miraculous to........especially what Christians constantly think are miracles.

I don't believe in the miracles of the bible. The fact is, if those miracles happened back then, they should still happen with Christians today...but they don't.

Sorry to answer this question using only Christianity as an example. I just deconverted from it last year.....and the topic of Christians and Christianity is always on my tongue.

I never saw or experienced the miraculous as a Christian....but what I did see were people who "psyched" themselves up to believe something was miraculous or who relied on being emotional and demonstrative during "Praise and Worship" in hopes of causing something amazing or miraculous to happen. It was all very sad and pititful....and very annoying!!!

 

[Ruby]

Miracles can only exist in our imagination...


If something does happen... It's not a miracle..

I like your point of view!!!!

 

[BillyJoe]

Tricky,

When discussing philosophy, I am an atheist. But I regularly say things like "Damn, that's three red lights in a row. I must have offended the traffic gods." It's intended to humorously comment on the sometimes unfair nature of the universe and attribute it to a capricious deity. Don't even tell me you've never run afoul of the traffic gods.

OKay, you won the argument
But now I know why they call you tricky.

BillyJoe

 

[The idea]

I voted that miracles don't happen, period. I don't believe they are possible at all.

The statement that they're not possible seems stronger than the statement that they don't happen. So the word "period" at the end of your first sentence seems premature.

I think there are perfectly logical explanations for the things that people ascribe the miraculous to [...]

Maybe in all situations where people concluded that a miracle occurred, the conclusion was unwarranted. However, what is illogical about the idea of a miracle? Is there a reason that you didn't write, "I think there are completely nonmiraculous explanations for things..."?

I don't believe in the miracles of the bible. The fact is, if those miracles happened back then, they should still happen with Christians today...but they don't.

It doesn't sound like a fact. It sounds like an argument (with some unstated assumptions).

Sorry to answer this question using only Christianity as an example. I just deconverted from it last year.....and the topic of Christians and Christianity is always on my tongue.

It doesn't matter how few or how many religions are mentioned in your argument, provided that the argument is valid.

X: no miracle will occur, no miracle is now occurring and no miracle has occurred.

Y: there has never been a miracle anywhere, but that there will be a miracle in the year 2034.

Would you claim that if Y is correct then Christians wouldn't be making bogus miracle claims? Does that allow you to conclude that Y is incorrect, leaving you with X by process of elimination?

 

[Abdul Alhazred]

Every time I hear a new born baby cry, or touch a leaf, or see the sky, then I know why I DON'T believe!

 

[BillyJoe]

The very Idea.....someone is trying to dissect our live and passionate Ruby with a scalpel blade.

 

[El Greco]

If several "believers" on this board reform, then I will believe in miracles and become a believer myself. Then of course, it will be me who will have to reform, but my reform will make other skeptics become believers.

Hmmm.... I don't think I'm getting anywhere with this...

 

[The idea]

If several "believers" on this board reform, then I will believe in miracles and become a believer myself. Then of course, it will be me who will have to reform, but my reform will make other skeptics become believers.

Hmmm.... I don't think I'm getting anywhere with this...

For you to reform means what? That you would switch to believing in miracles? How would that be a "reform" (i.e. improvement)?

Those who believe in miracles and those who believe that there are no miracles could both be characterized as "believers." If you don't have a basis for reaching a conclusion and you want to reform, then you should recognize that you do not have a basis for reaching a conclusion.

 

[The idea]

Every time I hear a new born baby cry, or touch a leaf, or see the sky, then I know why I DON'T believe!

Every time I hear a new born baby cry, or touch a leaf, or see the sky, I know that no clear question has been asked.

 

[Ruby]

Re: Re: Are Miracles Possible?

Originally posted by The idea
The statement that they're not possible seems stronger than the statement that they don't happen. So the word "period" at the end of your first sentence seems premature.

This is just the language that I speak in....sometimes it is redundant or a bit mixed up. Are you so desperate for a debate that you will criticize my poor wording and redundancy to get one?

Maybe in all situations where people concluded that a miracle occurred, the conclusion was unwarranted. However, what is illogical about the idea of a miracle? Is there a reason that you didn't write, "I think there are completely nonmiraculous explanations for things..."?

That was not the sentence that came to mind at the time. I do happen to agree with the sentence you used above.

It doesn't sound like a fact. It sounds like an argument (with some unstated assumptions).

Well, if you can prove to me that some of the biblical miracles happen today, I will retract my statement.

It doesn't matter how few or how many religions are mentioned in your argument, provided that the argument is valid.
X: no miracle will occur, no miracle is now occurring and no miracle has occurred.
Y: there has never been a miracle anywhere, but that there will be a miracle in the year 2034.
Would you claim that if Y is correct then Christians wouldn't be making bogus miracle claims? Does that allow you to conclude that Y is incorrect, leaving you with X by process of elimination?

I don't understand what you are saying...sorry! It is late, I am tired, and my mind isn't working. It probably won't be working tomorrow or the next day when it comes to such a question as the above.

 

[BillyJoe]

Well Ruby may put things a little loosely at times but guess what I understand exactly what she is talking about but that last quote above I can't make head or tail of either.

 

[Ruby]

The very Idea.....someone is trying to dissect our live and passionate Ruby with a scalpel blade.

I totally forgot to say "thank you" for your concern. I was really only commenting on the poll..not preparing for a debate or a dissection!

 

[Ruby]

Originally posted by BillyJoe "Well Ruby may put things a little loosely at times but guess what I understand exactly what she is talking about but that last quote above I can't make head or tail of either.

Are you talking about this quote posted to me by The Idea

"It doesn't matter how few or how many religions are mentioned in your argument, provided that the argument is valid.
X: no miracle will occur, no miracle is now occurring and no miracle has occurred.
Y: there has never been a miracle anywhere, but that there will be a miracle in the year 2034.
Would you claim that if Y is correct then Christians wouldn't be making bogus miracle claims? Does that allow you to conclude that Y is incorrect, leaving you with X by process of elimination? "

I am so relieved to hear that at least one other person is clueless about what the above quote means. I am generally slow to grasp certain concepts, and deep questions, due to having Fibromyalgia and a few other medical problems that effect memory, concentration, and some other cognitive abilities.

It also did not help that I was responding to his post in the middle of the night while I was in severe Fibro pain waiting for my pain meds to kick in so I could get back to bed.

Now I'm not so sure it was just "Fibro fog" or sleepiness or even lack of intelligence that prevented my brain from wrapping itself around his statement (and question) to cognitively understand it, and make a response. It might be that his whole statement was flawed and muddled since you don't understand it either.

On the other hand, it could be that it was meant for people with an IQ above 200......which is not common. Since my IQ is only 141, that would exclude me.

I used to be sharp as a tack. I even ran my own forum (back in my Christian days) and I was an avid and expert debater. You'd never know that now. In fact, I think I was a better debater, though still a bit rough, when I first Started posting on here back in March of 2003. I've rapidly gone downhill.

Anyhow, I digress. Perhaps there will be someone who, for whatever reason, can decipher, the Idea's" quote about X and Y, or maybe The Idea can explain it more clearly himself!

 

[BillyJoe]

Re: Re: Are Miracles Possible?

The idea.....


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WALL OF PROTECTION WALL OF PROTECTION WALL
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


.....and RUBY

X: no miracle will occur, no miracle is now occurring and no miracle has occurred.

Translation.....
Position X: No miracles have never occurred in the past and no miracles will never occur in the future

Comment.....
All we know is that there is no evidence that a miracle has ever occurred in the past. But we are in no position to make any pronouncements about what may or may not happen in the future.

Y: there has never been a miracle anywhere, but that there will be a miracle in the year 2034.

Translation......
Position Y: No miracles have ever occurred in the past but miracles will occur sometime in the future.

Comment.....
I am interpreting "the year 2034" to mean "sometime in the future" because I think that is his meaning (?)
Well, Position Y agrees with Position X that there is no evidence that no miracles have ever occurred in the past. But disagrees about what will happen in the future. Position X says that miracles will not occur inthe future and the Position Y says that a miracle will occur in the future. But they are both wrong because we are in no position to make any pronouncements about what may or may not happen in the future.

Would you claim that if Y is correct then Christians wouldn't be making bogus miracle claims?

Firstly, Christians are making claims about miracles already having occurred in the past so, yes, they are making bogus miracle claims. Secondly, why should any credit accrue to them for making unsubstantiated (and unsubstantiateable) claims about the future that just happen to come true (if they do).

Does that allow you to conclude that Y is incorrect, leaving you with X by process of elimination?

False dichotomy
There are more than two choices here and I have indicated the existence of a third choice above.....

Position Z: There is no evidence that a miracle has ever occurred in the past and we are in no position to make any pronouncements about whether or not miracles will occur in the future.

Hope this helps
BillyJoe