WT writes:
I agree this is the goal but Gil has not done this, he has an assumption (God/miracles don't exist) then he proceeds to conclude this assumption under the disguise that he would admit a miracle happened if it could be "objectively and independantly confirmed/verified". This is a smokescreen.
No, it is not a smokescreen. Science automatically assumes that every phenomenon has a scientific explanation whether it can be currently explained or that we need to wait 100, 1000, or 10,000 years before our understanding of the natural world is advance enough.
Gil will always conclude faithful to his worldview, which I don't have a problem with if he would only admit it. The problem is this phony front of objective enquiry masking the worldview which is constantly concluding the assumption.
What phony front? Being objective is being objective, period.
To explain what I mean, let us look at the definition of "miracle".
According to
webster online, miracle is:
1 : an extraordinary event manifesting divine intervention in human affairs
2 : an extremely outstanding or unusual event, thing, or accomplishment
3 Christian Science : a divinely natural phenomenon experienced humanly as the fulfillment of spiritual law
I'm going to assume that you are leaning toward the first one.
The problem comes when trying to tell what is a miracle and what is not is how do we know if it is divinely inspired or it is just something that our current scientific knowledge can't comprehend yet?
Just think of how many things people thought were miracles 5 hundred years ago that we don't even pay attention to today.
99% of miracles are not; for arguments sake I will agree.
I don't agree to this, because there's no way to know. Although this is probably common sense, I never rely on common sense when debating with someone else.
But the remaining 1% PROVE miracles do exist. This 1% is where Gil and company depart from their so called scientific enquiry and stick their head in the proverbial sand.
How do you constitute "PROVE"? Are you using the method of elimination? Are you using some kind of divine-measuring device? What do you mean by "prove miracles"?
Objectively speaking, you can't assume that something is a miracle if it can't be explained by our current scientific theories and knowledges.
Gotta go fast. Back for more later. Need to eat dinner.
The Laminator