oriecat

I think you're right.

The dictionary at www.m-w.com defines miracle as:
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

So most of us think automatically of #1 when we hear miracle, but #2 could also fit and so in this case, perhaps it is a miracle of definition 2.

Family Man

Actually, I and I think most people think of #2 first. And it clearly applies to the Smart case.

However, lots and lots of people think about it so loosely that #1 and #2 become conflated in their minds. Smart wasn't hurt so it must be divine intervention.

And we don't know if she was physically harmed. We only know that she wasn't killed -- unlikely, but it hardly requires divine intervention.

notMichaelJackson

Christians would respond that God had nothing to do with her kidnapping. People "who did not know the true God" kidnapped her, and He allowed them to do so because of their free will. God performed a miracle by allowing her to return safely, however, despite the police making mistakes.

copernicus

I think that everyone here is familiar with the lame excuses that people accord their imaginary deities. Religion wouldn't last long if it didn't throw shields up against logic and reason. It isn't easy to explain how an all-powerful, all-loving, all-knowing supernatural being tolerates evil, but self-deception is the mother of invention. The Elizabeth Smart case is particularly poignant because it shows how religious belief can be used by pedophiles to manipulate and victimize children. The irony of religious faith is that it makes people so susceptible to corrupt and evil behavior.

Lobstrosity

If God had to respect the free will of the kidnapper then how did God "allow" her to return safely? Doesn't that mean that if the kidnapper had wanted to kill her, God would have had to let him? So basically, she only lived because the kidnapper wanted her to live...God had nothing to do with it. How then is that a miracle?

copernicus

But that is the whole point of the "free will" argument, Lobstrosity. On the face of it, reality behaves the way atheists expect it to behave--as if no human-like supernatural intelligence was manipulating it to protect us. Theists have to explain why our observations are consistent with what atheism predicts. So God wants to help us. He really does. But he can't. He is compelled to watch the Elizabeth Smarts get kidnapped and worse--just like the rest of us.

What could explain God's seemingly disinterested behavior? We may be powerless to prevent evil, but our deities (by definition) are not. Hence, God must have a "noninterference" policy of some sort in place. People must be left alone to choose between good and evil behavior. The rewards and punishments occur after death--where they cannot be verified by the living. In fact, nothing at all can be concluded from our observation of reality. The ability of humans to observe and reason cannot be used to gather counterevidence against the God Hypothesis.

The "free will" explanation for God's nonintervention breaks down quickly to non-theists. The Bible is full of stories of God's interventions. What's up with that? Don't ask unless you are prepared for some pretty convoluted explanations. Arguing with a theist can be like trying to convince a paranoid that nobody is out to get him. Rational observations can all be made consistent with the mental aberration. And there is always the old fallback that the lack of evidence is no proof that people are not out to get you.

Lobstrosity

I totally agree, Copernicus. What pisses me off most about the free will defense is the hypocrisy with which it is applied by theists. Whenever something bad happens it's not God, it's "evil" humans using their free will. Whenever something good happens, it's never "good" humans using their free will, it's always God effecting a miracle. If you want to invoke the free will defense, then don't be a hypocrit about it! If you mandate that God needs to let us do our thing, then mandate it whole-heartedly. Recognize that we humans are responsible for both the goods and the the evils that befall us.

CALDONIA

It's bad enough when Christians blame bad things on humans' free will and "credit" God with good things. But what is most disgusting is when both free will and "miracles" are said to occur in the same event. For example, God was given thanks by many for "saving" lives in the WTC attack. So, does God intervene on behalf of some and not on behalf of others? Couldn't He have caused the airliners to miss the towers?

You can't have it both ways. Either give God credit for all good things and BLAME him for all bad things, or stop wasting your time with church and prayer and all those other useless rituals practiced by weak-minded and gullible individuals.

copernicus

The human mind is not really rational or consistent. Everything hinges on analogy with experience. So we build elaborate mental models to explain reality. The very natural tendency to anthropomorphize reality is what really explains religion. Our gods are human, and we can understand external events--weather, earthquakes, illness--in terms of human agents. So we thank our supernatural agents for the good things that happen, and we blame them for the bad things.

Lobstrosity and Caldonia point out the irrationality of a god that lets evil happen and still takes credit for the good that happens. God does get to have it both ways, unlike the humans that he is modeled on. But the "free will" issue only exists as an excuse to explain why bad things happen when there is a god that could have prevented them. If we went the full noninterventionist route--say into deism--then God becomes totally irrelevant. There is no longer a point to paying homage to a god that never seems to care or deliver. Hence, God has to intervene sometimes, and he has to answer some prayers. There has to be a hook to sustain the belief. Otherwise, it would simply dissipate.

Remember that religion is a mental virus. It invades the mind, and it sets up its defenses. It spreads to other hosts. And like a true virus, it sometimes weakens and kills the host.

AbbyNormal

Miracle? No. Fortunate event? Yes.

What would be a miracle is if she was killed by the kidnappers yet found alive.

Just my 3 cents (adjusted for inflation)

Regards,
AbbyNormal