Travo5

This post may seem elementary, but I will proceed nevertheless.

If we were to accept the claims of miracles in the Gospels wouldn't we also be obligated to accept the miracle claims of other religions? Also, wouldn't we be forced to accept the existance of UFO's, Bigfoot, and other dubious claims?

If I recall correctly, it was Hume who made a compelling argument against miracles. I would be grateful if someone could summarize it for me. My knowledge and understanding in this area is somewhat shady so I would appreciate a hand.

Regards,
Travis

P.S. If the moderators see it fit to place this post elsewhere, then that is okay with me. Sorry for the possible inconvenience.

CX

Interesting questions indeed, but probably better off in MRD...off you go.

Vibr8gKiwi

This question points out one of the major flaws of faith itself. If faith is a valid, then you should have to accept all claims that claim to require faith. Alternatively, if you discount one faith claim (for whatever reason), then you have no basis to accept any faith claim "on faith."

In my opinion, theists don't actually believe faith is a good way to find truth (after all, faith is belief without evidence and everyone knows that's stupid). They just believe what they believe and "faith" is an excuse to not think too hard about it.

[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: Vibr8gKiwi ]</p>

Jamie_L

Technically, I think Christianity (and possibly other religions) assume that faith grants you a connection to God, and through that connection, God lets you know which crazy claims are true and which crazy claims are false.

But this basically boils down to "this is true because I think it is, but that is false because I think it is."

Or even better: "Whatever my pastor/priest/cult-leader says is true is true. Everything else is false."

Jamie

lpetrich

<a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/index.shtml" target="_blank">Richard Carrier</a> has written interesting things about miracles, such as:

Why I Don't Buy the Resurrection
Kooks and Quacks of the Roman Empire: A Look into the World of the Gospels
Review of "In Defense of Miracles"

And how he had once been a born-again Taoist:

From Taoist to Infidel

And about an alternative set of 10 Commandments:

The Real Ten Commandments

Bible Humper

Heh, I remember reading about how one of early christianity's critics accused Jesus of being "just another magnus(sorcerer)". The christian theologian agreed and said that the miracles weren't anything uniquely incredible, but that the words of Jesus were the real magic.

Apparently, the middle east looked something like Middle Earth in those days, with monsters and magic all over the place. Most christians these days don't believe that those other sorcerers were real, but still believe in Jesus/Mithras!

Radcliffe Emerson

Damn, it's too bad a Balrog didn't happen along then.

abe smith

David Hume dealt w/ miracles very succinctly; don't ask for a precis. Read his brief & clear essay = *On Miracles*. Look it up on the Web.

cydonia

I guess that if you're an honest, well meaning person, if you decide to accept something on faith that has no evidence, then you kind of owe it to yourself to accept all the other miracles and superstitions of other people, if you want to stay consistent and have any integrity.

But then again, sometimes God just "speaks to people". I also hear that if you read the bible with an open mind, god will guide you and your bible reading experience will be wonderful and you will have no sense of reading contradicory material.

[ August 28, 2002: Message edited by: cydonia ]</p>