Miracles

[pancreasman]

The view would be close to panentheistic. Pantheistic is actually close to an atheist view.

Yes, I agree.

[shunyadragon]

No Shuny, you are just making up a definition of natural. You faith does not teach that God is natural in any sense of the word.

The reality is God cannot be defined from the Baha'i perspective. I use natural simply from my perspective as God's attributes are reflected in Creation and all we know objectively is a natural nature, not a supernatural nature.

[seer]

I think we're arguing about the distinction between a pantheistic or panentheistic view of God against a more transcendent notion. There ARE some Biblical precedents for at least a panentheistic view of God. This blurs the distinction between natural and supernatural so as to make them practically meaningless. You may not agree with such a position but it is a legitimate one with a long history.

Creation Ex Deo....

http://maverickphilosopher.blogspot....or-ex-deo.html

[NormATive]

What is normative is not evidence against miracles, since by definition miracles are not normative.

That's correct. Evidence against miracles is not normal because miracles aren't normal. You being the proponent of said miracles would need to prove them. Which, of course, you can't.

NORM

[Enjolras]

The following is a lecture given by Dr. Craig Keener on the topic of supposed modern day miracles. I am interested in the skeptical response to these reports. If you do not believe that supernatural healing by God is involved here, what exactly do you think is going on? Please watch the video before commenting:

Interesting video. Here are a few thoughts and questions of my own about the subject.

There are many claims of the miraculous by Muslims too. Are we to believe those are real? Here's a whole website devoted to them: http://www.miraclesofislam.com/

Here a 5 hour video of 69 Islamic miracles one apparently cannot deny:

We have many cognitive biases which lead us to false conclusions:


Even if we take for granted that prayer works, how do you know your

[NormATive]

If prayers and miracles are real, why not send church congregations to children's hospitals to clear them all out? We have lots of unverifiable anecdotes about healing, but I don't recall hearing about a single hospital closing down because Christians prayed and then there were no more sick people.

Excellen point, Enjolras.

I know of at least a dozen people who were all devout Christians, including my mother, who died after a long, painful and frustrating bout of cancer. Dozens, and in some cases, hundreds if not thousands of people were praying for each of them to be cured. Yet, they all died - some with incredible suffering and pain.

At the end of it all, at the funeral, all these "faithful" can only offer the hollow platitude that "she's / he's in a better place," or, even worse; her / his suffering served a "greater purpose." Such BS.

Religious philosophy only makes sense when you purge it of superstition.

NORM

[shunyadragon]

I suspect Shuny is simply denying the natural/supernatural dichotomy, which is a reasonable position.

correct.

[shunyadragon]

How do you know that they are natural? You own Faith calls them miracles by name. And how is this: The prison changed into a palace, the jail itself became a Garden of Eden not a miracle?

Well . . . if you read carefully the references you cited these circumstances described here and the other references to the miraculous described in this and 'most' other miraculous references described in Baha'i writings describe what would be natural events and circumstances of events from the perspective of everyone else outside the events themselves, and as recorded in history.

Some 'apparently miraculous' events witnessed by others outside the faith like the circumstances around the execution of the Bab are not recorded in the Baha'i writings themselves as miracles. Baha'is are urged not expound on these events as proof or evidence of miracles that would justify the validity of the Baha'i Faith no matter how well documented they may be. Other references in the Baha'i writings are clear, and warn of the illusive nature of miraculous claims of any events or circumstances, because of the fallibility of human nature.

The prison Baha'u'llah referred to is transformed from the darkest and foulest of prisons into the Mansion of Bahji where Baha'u'llah was allowed to live in his latter years, and the Gardens of Eden are the Gardens of Bahji. No floating ferns in the air.

[seer]

No floating ferns in the air.

Except that actually happened, and there is no natural explanation.

[seer]

correct.

Except, nature would not be strictly natural. The universe is the way it is, and we are the way we are, as a direct result of God's action. Non-intelligent nature did not create, an intelligent God did.

[seer]

That's correct. Evidence against miracles is not normal because miracles aren't normal. You being the proponent of said miracles would need to prove them. Which, of course, you can't.

NORM

I have zero need to prove anything. I know for certain what I have experienced in the past, your acceptance or non-acceptance is completely irrelevant Norm...

[MaxVel]

Enjolras -

1. Miracle claims by Muslims (or whoever) need to be investigated and evaluated on a case by case basis, just as all such claims should be, before we decide that the claim might well be a miracle. But lets say that Muslims (or whoever) have some miracle claims as well attested as any Christian claim. So what? That's not incompatible with Christianity being true, in fact the opposite.

2. Exposing some frauds doesn't show that all are frauds, any more than finding some forged banknotes means that all banknotes are forged.

3. We can multiply lists of possible reasons why we could be wrong about something, but that does nothing to disprove any particular claim unless it can be shown that the error in reasoning applies in that particular case. Such a broad general skepticism also undermines things like the credibility of scientific research, so it 'proves' too much.

4. We have to look at the whole package of evidence in evaluating a worldview. Miracle claims would be only a part of that. There are lots of other reasons to doubt the credibility of Mormonism, so we can reasonably reject it as being true apart from it's claims of miracles.

5. Miracles can be evidence for particular people that God is real and both knows them and cares about them.

6. Sure. And likewise, that we have some natural explanations for some miracle claims doesn't mean that all miracle claims therefore have (one day) a natural explanation.

7. God doesn't seem to operate like that. He seems to want people to be involved in solving their own problems, by and large. What would happen to all the people employed by the hospital? Would the church get swamped by people seeking miraculous healing too, church members get greedy and power-hungry - Psst! I'll pay you to put my son at the front of the queue for prayer - in short, there are a whole bunch of prosaic practical reasons why such a thing could actually be counter-productive for God's point of view. Look at how many people followed Jesus in the Bible just for a feed, or a miracle, or to see 'the show', rather than because they accepted Him as their Messiah.

[shunyadragon]

Except, nature would not be strictly natural. The universe is the way it is, and we are the way we are, as a direct result of God's action. Non-intelligent nature did not create, an intelligent God did.

We agree God Created our physical existence in one way or another. I will leave the problem of intelligence or the lack thereof to fallible human foibles. Considering the witness of history it is a very human thing to define what is supernatural, miracles, natural, unnatural or supernatural. The illusions of what is strictly natural or not would be lost even in the moment the words are spoken.

God is the Creator, not an engineer.

[shunyadragon]

I have zero need to prove anything. I know for certain what I have experienced in the past, your acceptance or non-acceptance is completely irrelevant Norm...

Though Norm is correct, proof is on the burden of the claimant. You are the one who demanded others to disprove miracles.

In reality the claim of the supernatural or miraculous is an open ended anecdotal claim without resolution.

[seer]

God is the Creator, not an engineer.

Is God intelligent? Does He will, think, intend and act? Nature, in and of herself, does none of these things. Therefore nature alone could not have the created the conditions we enjoy in this universe. It took an intelligent act of God.