Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 08-21-2005, 11:14 PM

This is being transfered to Science and Skepticism.

whichphilosophy · 08-21-2005, 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Christians often accuse skeptics of being predisposed against the existence of miracles. Skeptics are in fact predisposed against occurrences of miracles because there is no evidence that any have ever occurred, but any skeptic would love for miracles to be available to help us with our many burdens. If I thought that there was only a 10% chance that miracles exist, I would go out of my way to prove that they do exist. I am defining miracles as events that are beyond the abilities of humans, and made possible by an extra-terrestrial being for the express purpose of benefiting humans.

Matthew 14:14 says “And Jesus went forth, and saw a great multitude, and was moved with compassion toward them, and he healed their sick.�? We need compassion today just as much as people did back then. Today, since there is no evidence that God is compassionate in tangible ways (his allowance of the recent tsunami in Asia is most certainly not an example of compassion), it is reasonable to assume that he never was compassionate in tangible ways.

Life is a miracle no matter which we we look at it Are events a chain reaction from the first change in the physical universe that led us to where we are now. The loose term prime cause is one concept that something caused it, under the laws of cause and effect. Conciousness/life or whatever vsr unexplained change of events in eternal energy it doesn't matter.

Johnny Skeptic · 08-22-2005, 08:37 AM

My main argument is that no skeptic would be opposed to "any" being, a claimed God or otherwise, who was willing to help us with our many problems. If Jesus healed people, regardless of who he was, healing people is a good thing, and no skeptic would object to it. My topic question should have read 'Are skeptics really opposed to any being coming to earth and healing every sick person in the world?' The obvious answer would be no.

Huon · 08-22-2005, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

My main argument is that no skeptic would be opposed to "any" being, a claimed God or otherwise, who was willing to help us with our many problems. If Jesus healed people, regardless of who he was, healing people is a good thing, and no skeptic would object to it. My topic question should have read 'Are skeptics really opposed to any being coming to earth and healing every sick person in the world?' The obvious answer would be no.

'Are skeptics really able to oppose to any being coming to earth and healing every sick person in the world?' The obvious answer is no. But let us wait till they come...

anthrosciguy · 08-22-2005, 12:19 PM

Look at what counts as a "miracle" for many rightwing Christians. My daughter-in-law is a fundie (on the verge of compeltely accepting creationism just as she uncritically accepted Saddam's "vast underground cities" where he was hiding his WMDs) and she went to one of those big prayer days sponsored by radical rightwing Chrstians. It rained lightly during the last part of the event and then the sun came out and there was a rainbow. Guess what -- it was a "miracle". Not an expected and beautiful natural happening repeated during and after rains all the time (esp. in the Pacific NW USA) but a "miracle".

Huon · 08-23-2005, 09:36 AM

anthrosciguy :

Perhaps, for her as for many people, there are "first-class miracles" and "low-level miracles". Religious miracles are first-class, especially when Christ is involved. Rainbows could belong to the class of low-level miracles.

I can say "it's a miracle !" when something pleasant happens unexpectedly to me, for instance, when i eat a very good fruit.

llanitedave · 08-23-2005, 10:33 AM

Apparently, "miracle" is one of those truly meaningless words that everyone recognizes, but nobody really defines. It's an sound pattern that has emotional impact, but no real context.

anthrosciguy · 08-23-2005, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

anthrosciguy :

Perhaps, for her as for many people, there are "first-class miracles" and "low-level miracles". Religious miracles are first-class, especially when Christ is involved. Rainbows could belong to the class of low-level miracles.

I can say "it's a miracle !" when something pleasant happens unexpectedly to me, for instance, when i eat a very good fruit.

I know what you're saying, and should've made this clear in my post, but you can tell -- at least with people you know -- what they're saying in some form of context, which a short anecdote like mine doesn't get across. There is certainly the "the birth of our baby was a miracle" just as "every butterfly is a miracle". But these "it's a miracle" events aren't presented as if by an hands-on god, as they are when the phrase "our lord and savior Jesus Christ" appear in front, in back, and all around the "miracle", as they were around the "miracle" rainbow. Meanwhile our granddaughter is depressed about going to hell because of whatever she's done at 7 years of age, and her mother wonders how on earth her child could be worrying about hell, even though her room is a virtual shrine to Jesus -- the walls are covered with pictures, and 90% are you know who -- I really can't see a regular child doing that on their own.

08-22-2005, 08:37 AM	#33
Johnny Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 19,796	Are skeptics really opposed to miracles? My main argument is that no skeptic would be opposed to "any" being, a claimed God or otherwise, who was willing to help us with our many problems. If Jesus healed people, regardless of who he was, healing people is a good thing, and no skeptic would object to it. My topic question should have read 'Are skeptics really opposed to any being coming to earth and healing every sick person in the world?' The obvious answer would be no.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-21-2005, 11:14 PM	#31
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	This is being transfered to Science and Skepticism.

08-22-2005, 12:19 PM	#35
anthrosciguy Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: the west Posts: 3,295	Look at what counts as a "miracle" for many rightwing Christians. My daughter-in-law is a fundie (on the verge of compeltely accepting creationism just as she uncritically accepted Saddam's "vast underground cities" where he was hiding his WMDs) and she went to one of those big prayer days sponsored by radical rightwing Chrstians. It rained lightly during the last part of the event and then the sun came out and there was a rainbow. Guess what -- it was a "miracle". Not an expected and beautiful natural happening repeated during and after rains all the time (esp. in the Pacific NW USA) but a "miracle".

08-23-2005, 09:36 AM	#36
Huon Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Bordeaux France Posts: 2,796	anthrosciguy : Perhaps, for her as for many people, there are "first-class miracles" and "low-level miracles". Religious miracles are first-class, especially when Christ is involved. Rainbows could belong to the class of low-level miracles. I can say "it's a miracle !" when something pleasant happens unexpectedly to me, for instance, when i eat a very good fruit.

08-23-2005, 10:33 AM	#37
llanitedave Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Amargosa Valley, NV Posts: 2,486	Apparently, "miracle" is one of those truly meaningless words that everyone recognizes, but nobody really defines. It's an sound pattern that has emotional impact, but no real context.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.