|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,419 Year: 3,676/9,624 Month: 547/974 Week: 160/276 Day: 34/23 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The "science" of Miracles | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
Jar writes: Yes, I understand that is your assertion. But again, you show no evidence that it was a miracle or a supernatural event. Well we are discussing something that has never happened and will never happen, maybe that's why there's no evidence to produce?
You have repeated several times that there is no known way to test the supernatural. Well if natural causes have been ruled out, what is left? A miracle is where science says - 'that's impossible'.
A Miracle is defined as a supernatural event, something impossible in the natural world. Yes
If something happens in the natural world then it is not impossible. And that's your non sequitur. It's the cause of the miraculous event that is impossible not the event itself. Blood and wine are everyday materials. They don't change naturally from one to the other. For that we require an supernatural intervention. If you wish it to be clearer, if the Empire State Building was turned into an over-ripe banana by a priest saying a magic word, it would be a miracle would it not? If Trump uttered a truth that would be a miracle. If you car never needed gas again despite travelling thousands of miles etc etc. There are an infinite absurd situation that if they happened would be called miraculous.
That refutes the second part of the definition. It's simply your assertion that a miracle can not happen in the natural world, and it's an absurd position because for us to notice them they MUST occur in the natural world. By this insistence you're just saying miracles are impossible and wishing the word away
Reality trumps even definitions. What reality? The idea of a miracle is a total fantasy, but it's definition stands. If you want to say that miracles don't exist, fine, I agree. But you can't argue that the concept of a miracle doesn't.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Tangle writes: Well if natural causes have been ruled out, what is left? But there is no way to rule out ALL natural causes, only those natural causes we know.
Tangle writes: A miracle is where science says - 'that's impossible'. Only piss poor science would say that; reasonable sciences says "That is impossible given today's knowledge and technology."
Tangle writes:
LoL It's the cause of the miraculous event that is impossible not the event itself. Blood and wine are everyday materials. They don't change naturally from one to the other. For that we require an supernatural intervention. Too funny. We do not know anyway that could happen. But we also don't know of anyway to detect supernatural intervention. If it happened all we can say is that it did happen.
Tangle writes: If you wish it to be clearer, if the Empire State Building was turned into an over-ripe banana by a priest saying a magic word, it would be a miracle would it not? If Trump uttered a truth that would be a miracle. If you car never needed gas again despite travelling thousands of miles etc etc. There are an infinite absurd situation that if they happened would be called miraculous. YOU might call them miracles. That does not mean they are miracles or even evidence of miracles.
Tangle writes: But you can't argue that the concept of a miracle doesn't. But I have not made that argument and in fact have said several times that people can and do label things as a miracle. Labels do exist.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
So if the Empire State Building was turned into a banana by a preacher uttering a magic word that would not be a miracle. Ok, there's nothing left to be said.
Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Tangle writes: So if the Empire State Building was turned into a banana by a preacher uttering a magic word that would not be a miracle. It would not be evidence of a miracle. It would be evidence that it happened.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
Faith writes: I have faith. No more is needed or wanted, for faith between me and my God is plentiful provender.
This is completely baffling to me. Baffling to you? What about me, who just finished saying, "my beliefs make little sense even to me." But I'll try to answer your questions.
Faith in what? My strongest faith is that there is purpose to the universe.
What does your faith do for you? Does it give you some kind of strength or hope or promise for the future? What does my faith do for me? Is there something it is supposed to do for me? My faith isn't a resource I draw upon. It just is. It's part of who I am.
What's the point of it? See previous paragraph.
Does your God have any grounding in any kind of reality,... By "grounding in any kind of reality" are you asking if I have any evidence for my God? No, I don't.
...or even any kind of religion? My beliefs have probably been strongly influenced by my social/cultural milieu, especially Unitarianism, but my beliefs are so uncommon and so ill defined that I don't think they could be said to be grounded in "any kind of religion." --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
Jar writes:
And the word we use when the something that has happened has broken all natural laws iswait for ita miracle. It would be evidence that it happened. G'night.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Tangle writes: And the word we use when the something that has happened has broken all natural laws iswait for ita miracle. And yes, I agree, you might use that label. I might even use that label. But it is still nothing but a label and not evidence of anything other than our ignorance.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
You and Jar are on a merry-go-round, what you're both saying is very repetitive, but I just wanted you guys to know that I personally am fascinated. I'm just looking for a place to grab on but will remain silent until then.
I've been in repetitive discussions myself, and one thing I've always found difficult is making sure that I'm always saying the same thing. Every time the context makes even just a slight adjustment, if you say what you just said before in the same way then the changed context changes the meaning. It's a bitch, at least for me. I don't know if you guys think this is a real issue, but I do think I have detected changes in position that weren't really changes, but only appeared to be changes because of coming at something from a slightly different angle without making the necessary adjustments in language. An aside: participants who cut-n-paste text from old posts to answer arguments raised in new discussions are a pet peeve of mine. The contexts are never the same, the old text is almost never appropriate. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Tangle writes:
So is turning on a flashlight. It's the supposition that's wrong.
They're all impossible in the way they're supposed to have been done. Tangle writes:
If it happens in a reproducible and testable manner, it isn't impossible.
ringo writes:
It would be an impossible fact. If wine turned into blood in a reproducible and testable manner, it would not be a miracle. It would be a fact. Tangle writes:
If it happens in a reproducible and testable manner, it isn't impossible. It would be an impossible process. You can't just declare that something is "impossible". If it happens, it's not impossible. Your definitions are just not adequate.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
That's the point I'm trying to make to Tangle. There are things that used to be labeled "impossible", such as turning on a flashlight, that are commonplace today. It was the declaration of "impossible" that was wrong. There are a lot of things we don't know for sure...including what is and is not possible. On the other hand, there are supposed miracles such as the Flood which are still impossible by everything we know and everything we ever hope to know. It's so unlikely that you'll ever be able to carry a worldwide flood around on your keychain that we can be pretty confident in calling it impossible. If it's that impossible, we can be pretty confident that it didn't happen. (It's also impossible for something that big to happen without leaving evidence, you it's impossible piled on top of impossible.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Tangle writes:
A miracle is defined as inexplicable, not impossible.
That's the only definition of a miracle. If something is possible, it can't be a miracle.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
Percy writes: You and Jar are on a merry-go-round, what you're both saying is very repetitive, but I just wanted you guys to know that I personally am fascinated. I'm just looking for a place to grab on but will remain silent until then. I normally give up when things get this repetitive. All that's necessary to resolve this is an admission that a miracle is a paradox. It's definition means that the impossible has happened. And as both ringo and Jar are very fond of saying, if the impossible happens, it wasn't impossible. So you either stick with the definition and accept that it has a meaning which requires a supernatural intervention in the natural world - the seperation of causation and materials (my position) or you insist that anything that happens in our world regardless of cause is possible and therefore non-miraculous no matter how impossible the event seems (their position). In their position a miracle can not exist - not in any way we could know about it anyway. It's a philosophical position and deeply suspect as a result. My position at least allows for the possibility of miraculous interventions - even though I believe them to be preposterous. It's a pragmatic position. It also keeps the word in the dictionary for which I can only apologise. Best I can do.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 433 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Tangle writes:
You can also apologize for misrepresenting the dictionary. Neither Merriam-Webster nor dictionary.com nor thefreedictionary.com uses the word "impossible". It also keeps the word in the dictionary for which I can only apologise. Everybody's dictionary includes the word "miracle", along with the words "fiction" and "fairy tale". You're just using it wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Sorry to be so persistent but I'm having a problem understanding where you could get that kind of faith for starters, how it would even come into your head. Surely you wouldn't just invent it? How could you actually have faith in something your own mind came up with?
By "grounded in any kind of reality" I think I was trying to get at whether you recognize any objective sources in your environment for the idea. But I'm not sure that even quite says what I intend. I'd have to say I had NO faith before I became a Christian, except in the very early stages I had some kind of belief in the reality of supernatural things, because of some "uncanny" experiences and the stories friends told me, which is what started me on the quest to learn about religions in the first place. But belief isn't faith -- faith implies some kind of trust but the supernatural isn't exactly trustworthy, most of my experiences were scary. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
I'll try to answer your questions, but don't forget, my beliefs don't make sense even to me.
Faith writes: Sorry to be so persistent but I'm having a problem understanding where you could get that kind of faith for starters, how it would even come into your head. Where does any inspiration come from?
Surely you wouldn't just invent it? Consciously? No.
How could you actually have faith in something your own mind came up with? I never sought faith, never gave it any conscious thought. Wherever I've ended up spiritually is not the result of any effort or research or investigation or questioning or anything like that. Given that I haven't developed my faith through any process of conscious thought, the implied path to it sounds kind of Eastern. Clear your mind of all thought, and what's left is what you truly believe.
But belief isn't faith... I wouldn't be so sure. Any dictionary defines each in terms of the other.
...faith implies some kind of trust... Yes, I guess so.
...but the supernatural isn't exactly trustworthy,... But you say that only God is supernatural, so surely you don't mean this. You must be referring to that kind of supernatural that has a definition peculiar to yourself, where it isn't really supernatural but is actually part of the natural. I think your beliefs are much like mine in that they make little sense, except yours insist they make sense and have evidence, so you believe your beliefs are rational and can be proved. A sound basis to this belief would make success your destiny, but failure has been your fate among the so-called (by you) pagans and atheists. This should be instructive. --Percy
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024