Explain miracles

[angelinthemorning]

I believe in God. Would like to know how skeptics define a miracle.

 

[evildave]

Something happens.

People project their preconceptions and expectations onto it.

Instant "miracle".

You know, I got a picture of Elvis on a tortilla, once. Miraculously, it tasted just like the other ones.

 

[SortingItAllOut]

I believe in God. Would like to know how skeptics define a miracle.

Hello angelinthemorning!

www.dictionary.com has this definition:

"An event that appears inexplicable by the laws of nature and so is held to be supernatural in origin or an act of God."

I'm certain there are a number of other definitions, but this one will do for my discussion.

The key word in that definition is "appears" because the laws of nature are not strictly static. As humankind learns and discovers and tests and observes, these laws are developed and modified. Some of what appeared to be inexplicable a short hundred years ago is today common.

From the Bible, the "bottomless baskets" of fish and bread would be an example of a miraculous event. Unlike the "clown car" trick that a circus might perform, where a dozen or more clowns file out of a small car, the "loaves and fishes" story in the Bible claims that god multiplied the food to feed an incredible number of people. Could this have been faked? Perhaps. Perhaps it never happened. But that would be an example of a miracle - creating food where it didn't exist.

Of course, the "miraculousness" (not sure that is a word) of the event, if determined to be possible without "divine intervention" would quickly fade.

I myself am not sure that anything is really miraculous. Does the lack of an explanation in the present necessitate that an event is miraculous? I wouldn't think so.

Have a nice day and welcome to the forum!
Sort

 

[The Fool]

Miracles are what Gods use to get people to sign up to thier religion.Whenever your god had special messages for people he would perform "miracles". This was a way of saying "this is your god speaking, who else could do that eh?" Sort of like Gods ID card. So it obviously had to be something that impressed people. "The miracle of the healing of the sunburn" would not have been very usefull, "the healing of the cripple" is better, "raising from the dead" now THAT has got to be impressive. Just about any self respecting god performs miracles. Its what gods do.....anyway, its what some men say that they have done and thats proof enough for quite a lot of people to sign up.....

 

[Bozotheda]

I believe in God. Would like to know how skeptics define a miracle.

Basically any event that transgresses the laws of physics and has a beneficial outcome.

 

[The Fool]

Re: Re: Explain miracles

Basically any event that transgresses the laws of physics and has a beneficial outcome.

I agree with you about the physics stuff but do miracles have to have a beneficial outcome?....Is poxing a whole pile of heathens beneficial.........Hmmmmm actually, you're right, after all, they're only heathens.

 

[Crossbow]

I believe in God. Would like to know how skeptics define a miracle.

To: angelinthemorning

Hello!

"Angel in the Morning" has long been one of my favorite songs so I think it is great that you are using it as a handle.

And as to your question, I am sorry, but this skeptic cannot help you.

To explain, essentially the dictionary defines Miracles as an event provided by a deity (or deities). They are not the product of man, nature, or by combination of the two.

Well, since I do not think that the universe contains a deity (or deities) and that everything that happens is consistent with basic physical laws, I conclude that there are no such things as Miracles.

Now then, occasionally events occur that are extremely rare, misunderstood, or unusual but I do not think that these sort of stipulations makes these events a god induced Miracle.

 

[Tricky]

Re: Re: Explain miracles

Bozotheda' definition of a miracle:

Basically any event that transgresses the laws of physics and has a beneficial outcome.

This is the definition that should be used for a miracle, however in common usage, it often describes an event that has a very low probabability, such as recovering from a usually fatal disease or winning the lottery. I feel that this usage is incorrect, but people will persist in claiming "miracle" cures.

An even worse usage of the word occurs when believers engage in pareidolia, an example of which is seeing the face of Jesus in a tortilla. This is nothing more than pattern recognition, and is not miraculous in any sense of the word, yet people often shell out bucks to see such things as the shroud of Turin.

I think that for this discussion we would be best to confine ourselves to the definition proposed by Bozotheda.

 

[RandFan]

Hi Angel,

I'm supposed to be leaving but had to answer your post.

I bought a California lottery ticket today. The odds are something like 40+ million to one. Now if I win I will feel like it is a miracle As I should since it's about as likely that I'll get to date Faith Hill and Shania Twain (It could happen). It wouldn't be though. Just statistics. Most things that are seen as miracles are expected by those who understand statistics. I expect that someone will win the lottery sometime in the near future. If 10 million people fall out of a plane without parachutes a number of them will survive the fall. No miracle, just statistics.

 

[Guest]

I've always liked David Hume's take on miracles.

Also, why is a man recovering from the brink of death a miracle, but a perfectly healthy man dying for no discernable reason not one?

 

[Guest]

I've always liked David Hume's take on miracles.

Also, why is a man recovering from the brink of death a miracle, but a perfectly healthy man dying for no discernable reason not one?

 

[Victor Danilchenko]

Nialscorva,

Welcome to the party -- and nice opening! Yes, old Hume had said a lot of stuff that's useful and meaningful even today. His take on miracles is certainly a nice tweak to supernaturalists' noses.

 

[FireGarden]

I believe in God. Would like to know how skeptics define a miracle.

Hi Angel in the morning, welcome to the forum.
Brown originally posted this quote in some other thread. I've left Brown's comments since I think they sum it up.

Thomas Paine, in "The Age of Reason," had this to say about miracles. He considered them to be incompatible with true religion:


_________________________________________
Since, then, appearances are so capable of deceiving, and things not real have a strong resemblance to things that are, nothing can be more inconsistent than to suppose that the Almighty would make use of means such as are called miracles, that would subject the person who performed them to the suspicion of being an impostor, and the person who related them to be suspected of lying, and the doctrine intended to be supported thereby to be suspected as a fabulous invention.

Of all the modes of evidence that ever were invented to obtain belief to any system or opinion to which the name of religion has been given, that of miracle, however successful the imposition may have been, is the most inconsistent. For, in the first place, whenever recourse is had to show, for the purpose of procuring that belief, (for a miracle, under any idea of the word, is a show), it implies a lameness or weakness in the doctrine that is preached. And, in the second place, it is degrading the Almighty into the character of a showman, playing tricks to amuse and make the people stare and wonder. It is also the most equivocal sort of evidence that can be set up; for the belief is not to depend upon the thing called a miracle, but upon the credit of the reporter who says that he saw it; and, therefore, the thing, were it true, would have no better chance of being believed than if it were a lie.

Suppose I were to say, that when I sat down to write this book, a hand presented itself in the air, took up the pen, and wrote every word that is herein written; would anybody believe me? Certainly they would not. Would they believe me a whit the more if the thing had been a fact? Certainly they would not. Since, then, a real miracle, were it to happen, would be subject to the same fate as the falsehood, the inconsistency becomes the greater of supposing the Almighty would make use of means that would not answer the purpose for which they were intended, even if they were real.

If we are to suppose a miracle to be something so entirely out of the course of what is called nature, that she must go out of that course to accomplish it, and we see an account given of such miracle by the person who said he saw it, it raises a question in the mind very easily decided, which is, is it more probable that nature should go out of her course, or that a man should tell a lie? We have never seen, in our time, nature go out of her course; but we have good reason to believe that millions of lies have been told in the same time; it is therefore, at least millions to one, that the reporter of a miracle tells a lie.

...
...

In every point of view in which those things called miracles can be placed and considered, the reality of them is improbable and their existence unnecessary. They would not, as before observed, answer any useful purpose, even if they were true; for it is more difficult to obtain belief to a miracle, than to a principle evidently moral without any miracle. Moral principle speaks universally for itself. Miracle could be but a thing of the moment, and seen but by a few; after this it requires a transfer of faith from God to man to believe a miracle upon man's report. Instead, therefore, of admitting the recitals of miracles as evidence of any system of religion being true, they ought to be considered as symptoms of its being fabulous. It is necessary to the full and upright character of truth that it rejects the crutch, and it is consistent with the character of fable to seek the aid that truth rejects.
__________________________________________________

When I first read this argument, I did not perceive its full depth. But I came to believe that Paine made several valid points. Belief in miracles does not correspond to faith in a deity. Rather, it corresponds to faith in people. And yet people are so easily deceived, and so prone not to tell the truth, that it calls the validity of all claimed miracles into question.

And when all is said and done, what is the point of a miracle, anyway? Even if it actually takes place, what is the point of faith healing?

 

[Pahansiri]

Angelinthemorning asks.

I believe in God. Would like to know how skeptics define a miracle.

Greetings Angelinthemorning, please know what I say is just my thoughts and I mean no disrespect.

How would I define a miracle? An event that is the result of like all things causes and conditions being correct or what they were.

It is very true that sometimes unexplained things do happen, unexpected events do occur. But our inability to explain such things does not prove the existence of a god or gods. Really it only proves that our knowledge is as yet incomplete. Before the development of modern medicine, back when people didn?t know what was the cause of sickness people believed that god or the gods sent diseases as a punishment. OK, some still do today. Now we know what causes such things and when we get sick, we take medicine or the right actions to help or cure it. In time when our knowledge of the world is more complete, we will be able to understand what causes unexplained phenomena, just as we can now understand what causes disease.

I don't discount anything that I cannot prove either way but I also do not grasp to a simple answer or one I may personally want to be true. You may very well be right about God, it matters not at all to me, and it can have no effect on how I must live my life, what I must do to improve my actions and mind.

A friend of mine told me after the 9-11 events in NYC that Jesus saved people and performed people and Buddha didn?t. I first explained Buddha was not in that business

I asked him if the people at and above the crash site and the people on all planes there and at the other sites, were not good Christians and worth saving? No one on either plane lived nor did anyone at or above either impact site live. Were they not good? Did they not pray hard enough?

The reason people lived was the causes and conditions were right for them to live.

Just what I believe.

 

[gentlehorse]

angelinthemorning:
I believe in God. Would like to know how skeptics define a miracle.

Hi, angel.

I believe in God as well, which is to say that many of the good folks here consider me to be delusional and given to wishful thinking. Apparently, nothing I've been able to say thus far has provided them cause to reconsider their positions and so, in their eyes, by belief has no more validity than a belief in invisible unicorns or Santa. This is fine with me as I didn't come here to convert anyone anyway, but rather to exchange ideas and possibly learn a thing or two. With this in mind, I'd say that my time here has been well spent.

The folks here will usually answer your questions to the best of their abilities. They will not generally take your feelings into consideration in doing so, though some are more diplomatic than others. A few, however, are downright rude, dismissive, arrogant, condescending, cynical, and hostile. If you stick around long enough, you're sure to meet all kinds. If nothing else, this forum provides access to a wonderful cross-section of intelligent, thoughtful people coming from a wide variety of backgrounds.

If I were to try to define "miracle" I'd probably go with part of Bozotheda's definition:

Basically any event that transgresses the laws of physics...

I've never seen one, other than the one I see every morning when I open my eyes and start a new day. That's right. I consider the untire universe to be a miracle and my ability to perceive a small fraction of it a gift beyond words. But what would you expect from a delusional old rat like me?

 

[Bentspoon]

Miracles

I see miracles all the time - not by the conventional definition of the word but, emotionally, equivalent to any miracle referred to in religious history.

Each heart transplant is a miracle
the first hand transplant was a major miracle
Man landing on the moon was a miracle
the Hubbel telescope is a miracle
an airliner is a miracle
the space shuttle is a miracle

I think you get the idea. I stand in awe of these achievements. I fail to understand why people will flock to a greasy smear on the side of the building but when Grandma lives another 15 years in the family due to a heart transplant ................

well, that's just boring science isn't it.

Miracles and magical things are happening everywhere around us but people see anything connected to man's technology as mundane or not worthy of praise. Worse than that, technology gets a bad rap. When anything good comes from technology - God must have had a hand in it.

My mother-in-law used to swoon at the "miracles" of Lourdes. I said, "yeah sure but when push comes to shove you will "worship at the halls of technology" and solicit the help of the "wizards of science"". Her husband's heart attck and her cancer proved me out. Of course she wanted to go to the hospital and Lourdes never came up ............. but she truly believes in the miracles there.

I think not

Anyway, I know it will raise a few eyebrows but when it comes to miracles I will take technology's over religion's anytime. Technology is doing wondrous things. Religious miracles pale by example.

In fact, the only miracles that truly exist are those that technology has given us.

And if it really came down to brass tacks, where the environment is failing and the sky is falling ........... I will take refuge with the technologists as opposed to those that would invoke a deity for a miracle. Those that would pray for salvation.

Those that "believe" in religious miracles will be right there beside me too because they do know who really butters their bread.

Man's achievements deserve more reverence

Bentspoon

 

[angelinthemorning]

Hello Thank you all so much for the responses to my question.Thanks also for the welcome.

 

[SortingItAllOut]

Re: Miracles

I see miracles all the time - not by the conventional definition of the word but, emotionally, equivalent to any miracle referred to in religious history.

Each heart transplant is a miracle
the first hand transplant was a major miracle
Man landing on the moon was a miracle
the Hubbel telescope is a miracle
an airliner is a miracle
the space shuttle is a miracle

I think you get the idea. I stand in awe of these achievements. I fail to understand why people will flock to a greasy smear on the side of the building but when Grandma lives another 15 years in the family due to a heart transplant ................

well, that's just boring science isn't it.

Hello Bentspoon!
It is true that man has made amazing strides over the years, specifically in the areas of medicine and transportation. Our ingenuity is quite a wonderful thing. Man sees a problem, a hurdle, an annoyance, a genetic defect, a physical or mental handicap and then tries to understand them and develop the solution.

A reason that I question why some believe that "god's hand" is in the development of these new technologies is that the development often isn't a quick thing. Man generally doesn't just wake up one day and have a solution in his head. Often man errs and has to try multiple paths to find the correct one. Couple this with the idea that god has decided to reveal now the solution to a problem that has plagued mankind for decades, centuries, perhaps thousands of years. Why is that?

In fact, the only miracles that truly exist are those that technology has given us.
Bentspoon

Sometimes things happen that people categorize as miracles. Sometimes technology has nothing to do with these "miracles." Sometimes, for example, the human body heals without a technological breakthrough. Is this "miraculous"? Who knows? The only thing I know is that some things we cannot currently explain. This doesn't in my opinion mean that a deity had his or hand in this event.

Have a nice evening!
Sort

 

[evildave]

This sort of feeds into the "Crediting God for all good things" topic.

Why aren't there any "bad" miracles?

As a matter of fact, there are a lot of things named "miracles" that are negative for someone.

Plenty of battles where both sides were the same religion (give or take), yet something happened that benefitted one side, and it was claimed to be a *miracle*, even though to the other side it was a disaster.

Naturally "god" is always on your side if you're going to go slaughter people across an artificially drawn boundary.

 

[Tricky]

Why aren't there any "bad" miracles?

As a matter of fact, there are a lot of things named "miracles" that are negative for someone.

Plenty of battles where both sides were the same religion (give or take), yet something happened that benefitted one side, and it was claimed to be a *miracle*, even though to the other side it was a disaster.

Naturally "god" is always on your side if you're going to go slaughter people across an artificially drawn boundary.

Absolutely right, evil one. For example, about a year ago a handful of fearless people armed only with box-cutters were able to strike fear into the hearts of every American. If that's not a miracle, I don't know what is.