Miracles

[whag]

I think one of the awesome things about this is that, while others may not be convinced by the anecdotal nature of the event, it obviously affected you, and your belief in God, and who knows how many other people's lives it touched by your family sharing this testimony.

Something also to be considered: that the event wasn't meant to be a witnessing tool. I wonder if miracles are only for the intended audience so as not to make others feel excluded or judgmental of the teller for being overconfident in the stories' persuasiveness.

I actually know what this feeling looks like as I've endured my sister telling me voluminous UFO tales. Tales she wants me to believe. She's 100% convinced she sees interstellar craft. I have experience with this subject because of family and friends who've told me their "incredible sightings" stories. Funnily, my experience with them is anecdotal, too.

[Adrift]

Something also to be considered: that the event wasn't meant to be a witnessing tool. I wonder if miracles are only for the intended audience so as not to make others feel excluded or judgmental of the teller for being overconfident in the stories' persuasiveness.

No, you don't wonder that. You don't believe in miracles.

[whag]

No, you don't wonder that. You don't believe in miracles.

If miracles exist, I wonder if they're only for the intended audience so as not to make others feel excluded or judgmental of the teller for being overconfident in the stories' persuasiveness.

[Tassman]

Is God intelligent? Does He will, think, intend and act?

There's no substantive evidence of a god existing at all.

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.

This is merely an argument from incredulity. Clearly "nature, in and of herself" does do all of these things, because they exist.

[JonathanL]

LOL!
I feel sorry for those whose worldview demands that one suspend the laws of physics and common sense in order to be "true."

You don't need to "suspend the laws of physics and common sense" in order to believe in miracles, any more than you need to "suspend" the law of gravity if you want to pick up a stone from the ground.

And what about miracles goes against common sense exactly? Or to go at it from another angle, why should we be concerned with it when common sense would, for example, have us discard any strange and counter-intuitive discovery each time we stumble upon one?

[Tassman]

You don't need to "suspend the laws of physics and common sense" in order to believe in miracles, any more than you need to "suspend" the law of gravity if you want to pick up a stone from the ground.

And what about miracles goes against common sense exactly? Or to go at it from another angle, why should we be concerned with it when common sense would, for example, have us discard any strange and counter-intuitive discovery each time we stumble upon one?

[JonathanL]

The same applies to believing in Santa Claus. One is free to believe any nonsense the imagination can conjure up.

My imagination didn't conjure up the Christian God and His abilities to perform miracles.

Did the stone float away by itself, or was it moved by a supernatural entity? If the latter I don't see how your assertion holds at all.

No, that's curiosity, that's not common sense. Common sense is what tells you to stay away from the unknown and keep inside during the night.

[seer]

There's no substantive evidence of a god existing at all.


This is merely an argument from incredulity. Clearly "nature, in and of herself" does do all of these things, because they exist.

Sorry Tass, that was for Shuny, who does believe in a Creator God.

[seer]

That's very fortunate for you because it turns out that you can't.

NORM

Of course Norm, just like I can not prove that I had a cup of tea Monday at 6AM. It doesn't make it any less true. Many of our past experiences are like that. Not provable in any empirical sense, yet just as real as anything else.

[MaxVel]

Agreed

I'm wondering why you would say that? When one considers the story of Elijah and the prophets of Baal, the lesson seems to be that only the true God can perform miraculous wonders. Why would the true God perform miracles for members of other religions, when such miracles would serve to confirm them in their delusions?

I never said that God was the one causing the miracles of other religions. See Matthew 24:24, 2 Thess 2:9

True. This was only one of many reasons I have given for considering miraculous claims with considerable skepticism.

A bunch of poor reasons doesn't make one good reason, though....

Not sure what you mean here. How would recognition of cognitive biases undermine science?

If we're going to apply a broad general skepticism before looking at the evidence, we should (being consistent) apply that to the scientific enterprise as well, and thus reject or be very skeptical of most scientific claims.

Or you can have a double standard operating against evidence for things you'd rather not be true, if you like ...

Indeed. This is the view taken by many skeptics of traditional Christianity.

Here's where confirmation bias takes place. People take miracles as positive evidence for God, but they don't take lack of miracles as counter-evidence.

How does that apply to someone who's heard the gospel for the first time, and been healed after the Christian then prays for them? (I personally know a number of people who this applies to....). Are they being irrational to think that the God they've just heard both is real and can heal them is the one who just has healed them?

Ok.



Not according to Professor Keener. According to him, God performs miracles quite frequently, and he has written 1248 pages documenting such claims. In the video, he states:

• The same range of miraculous events that occurred in the NT are happening today.
• 200 million people in 10 countries claim to have witnessed miracles.
• 1/3 of Christians worldwide claim to have witnessed divine healing.
• 1/2 of all conversions in China today are due to divine healing; some would put that figure at 90%!
• 80% of the growth in the church worldwide is due to divine healing.
• Millions of people throughout India and China have converted because of miracle healing.
• In the 3rd and 4th centuries, the leading cause of conversions was due to healings and exorcisms, and this has continued through the centuries.
• At least a dozen people Keener documents in the video have in this day been raised from the dead!

So are you disagreeing with Keener here?

Is Keener documenting cases of Christians going en masse into hospitals and praying and God healing everyone in the hospital?


Interesting that literally millions of currently living people have either experienced or witnessed miracles - and yet according to some, apparently every single one of them is wrong because 'miracles don't happen'.

Seriously? I know quite a few people in the health care profession, and every one of them would gladly find new careers if it meant their patients would be cured of their diseases.

We can change up the question, if you like. Why not have congregations pray for all the dead in the local cemetery to come back to life? Then we could still preserve the jobs of local morticians. According to Keener, God does raise the dead, even today. So why doesn't he do it where people could actually verify the truth of such claims, instead of random anecdotes about people in remote localities? Think of the conversions that would result. Keener claims that all but one member of a village in Africa converted to Christianity when the local pastor prayed for it not to rain for 4 days. Why not have churches pray for the inhabitants of Arlington Cemetery to be raised? The entire nation would be converted. If one takes Keener's claims seriously, it is difficult to see why such this would be out of bounds.

Why would God do anything 'on demand' to satisfy the whims of a skeptical person? There is already enough evidence available to support rational belief in God.

Then Keener's God seems to be going about things the wrong way. According to him, millions are converting due to miracles, but in your reasoning this would be problematic.

It would be helpful if your response actually related to the hypothetical that you raised originally - everyone in a hospital being healed more or less at once

One of Keener's points is that it was the belief in miracles and wonders that got the church going in the first place. This is widely recognized by scholars, since even Bart Ehrman has said the same thing.

Yep.

[MaxVel]

Yeah, I guess my Mom didn't try hard enough to cure herself of cancer.

What makes you think that God would make all the sick people "cue up" for cures? Couldn't It just zap them all well in an instant; in a twinkling of an eye? Or better yet; how about not letting them get ill in the first place?

The logical PoE is a dead issue. You apparently have a problem with the emotional PoE. Sorry about your Mum.

Seriously? Your answer is that sick people are there so that doctors and nurses can have employment?

That's all that you got from my response to Enjolras' hypothetical? Really?

[Enjolras]

I never said that God was the one causing the miracles of other religions. See Matthew 24:24, 2 Thess 2:9

So Satan is healing all the Muslims to confirm them in their delusions, and God is healing all the Christians. Tell me, how do you determine which miracles are from God and which are from Satan? How do you know Satan didn't raise Jesus from the dead to lead people away from the truth of Judaism?

A bunch of poor reasons doesn't make one good reason, though....

Which reasons are poor, and why do you think so? Do you believe all claims of the miraculous? If not, what reasons help you determine which ones are fake and which ones are real?

If we're going to apply a broad general skepticism before looking at the evidence, we should (being consistent) apply that to the scientific enterprise as well, and thus reject or be very skeptical of most scientific claims.

Or you can have a double standard operating against evidence for things you'd rather not be true, if you like ...

Bingo. We should be skeptical when someone makes an extraordinary claim. If I tell you I have a pet dog, that's not hard to believe. If I tell you I have a pet dragon, you might want a bit more evidence than my saying so.

I guess I'm not sure what your point is. You are saying we should not be skeptical?

How does that apply to someone who's heard the gospel for the first time, and been healed after the Christian then prays for them? (I personally know a number of people who this applies to....). Are they being irrational to think that the God they've just heard both is real and can heal them is the one who just has healed them?

I know Mormons who have had the exact same experience. Are they being irrational? What about all the Muslims who have been healed by Allah (or Satan, from your perspective)?

Let's say someone does experience something they would regard as a 'healing.' Does that mean that whoever prayed for them has correct ideas about God? Someone who has been healed might consider all the people who have not been healed after being prayed for, and wonder why that is.

Is Keener documenting cases of Christians going en masse into hospitals and praying and God healing everyone in the hospital?

No. That would be verifiable, unlike his long list of anecdotes. That's my point.

Interesting that literally millions of currently living people have either experienced or witnessed miracles - and yet according to some, apparently every single one of them is wrong because 'miracles don't happen'.

It is interesting. What's even more interesting is that they all occur in way that are very difficult to verify, much like ghost sightings or stories of alien abductions.

Why would God do anything 'on demand' to satisfy the whims of a skeptical person? There is already enough evidence available to support rational belief in God.

You want to defend the existence of millions of miracles leading non-Christians to God, yet when asked to prove such claims in a simple test, all of a sudden this is out of bounds?! There is no need to 'demand' anything of God. Simply ask him in faith, like Jesus taught in Mark 11:24: "Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours." Don't you believe Jesus will answer your prayers? He said he would. He didn't think there was anything inappropriate about asking in faith.

Again, in Matthew 7:7 Jesus says:

"Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For every one who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. Or what man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent? If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!"

If you ask, you will receive. Nothing complicated or inappropriate about it, according to Jesus.

It would be helpful if your response actually related to the hypothetical that you raised originally - everyone in a hospital being healed more or less at once

If I have not addressed your concern. let me know. It seems I have addressed the hypothetical.

Yep.

You implied that miracles aren't the best way to bring about conversions because of all the false motives associated with them:

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.

Church history shows this is not the case.

[Adrift]

The logical PoE is a dead issue. You apparently have a problem with the emotional PoE. Sorry about your Mum.



That's all that you got from my response to Enjolras' hypothetical? Really?

There's a view among some Christians that the reason for the lack of many miracles in the West is due in large part to the rampant skepticism and familiarity with Christianity. The type of familiarity that breeds contempt. The times we see Jesus not doing miracles in scripture is when they're either demanded of him by the Pharisees to test him (sort of a James Randi-million dollar challenge kind of thing), or due to the lack of faith in the environment, like when he visited Nazareth (a prophet is not welcome in his hometown). Some have argued that the reason why regions like South America, Southeast Asia, and Africa witness the miraculous in ways not often experienced in the West, has nothing to do with, say, the education level of these southern hemisphere nations, but with a general atmosphere of acceptance of the supernatural. There's an atmosphere, some may argue, of faithfulness that affects what can be accomplished.

It seems to me that this view weaves into the view that Satan, as god of this world, holds influence on what can and cannot be accomplished through prayer in an atmosphere that is not conducive to faith. Even Daniel, a prophet of God, prayed and fasted for nearly a month before his prayer was finally answered by the angel who gave him his vision, and then, only by the help of Michael the archangel holding at bay the Prince of Persia. So it may not be surprising under this view, that faithful aunt Edna who prays every day, may not see all her prayers answered in a social climate where faithfulness in general is at an all time low. This is one of the reasons Christians work so hard towards Evangelism and revival, so that the spiritual atmosphere is conducive to God's will and power being manifest.

On top of this is the fact that miracles, even in Biblical times, seem relatively rare, and also the fact that not everything we desire is what God desires for us. Christians don't always know why God doesn't answer the prayers of the faithful, but we trust that he is faithful, and that he is just, and that there is a greater purpose being fulfilled. In the meantime, Christians are to rejoice always, pray without ceasing, and give thanks in all circumstances.

[whag]

There's a view among some Christians that the reason for the lack of many miracles in the West is due in large part to the rampant skepticism and familiarity with Christianity. The type of familiarity that breeds contempt.

The familiar pedagogy of "religion through Sunday school" would seem to invite that type of contempt in some cases. The effect of that familiarity hasn't created such a "broad contempt" as you've painted, though.

The times we see Jesus not doing miracles in scripture is when they're either demanded of him by the Pharisees to test him (sort of a James Randi-million dollar challenge kind of thing), or due to the lack of faith in the environment, like when he visited Nazareth (a prophet is not welcome in his hometown). Some have argued that the reason why regions like South America, Southeast Asia, and Africa witness the miraculous in ways not often experienced in the West, has nothing to do with, say, the education level of these southern hemisphere nations, but with a general atmosphere of acceptance of the supernatural. There's an atmosphere, some may argue, of faithfulness that affects what can be accomplished.

That seems to me way off. A majority of US citizens have always accepted the supernatural, actually, with none of the perceivable supernatural movement you describe South America as experiencing. Only until very recently are we seeing declared US atheism, and still that's very rare.

t seems to me that this view weaves into the view that Satan, as god of this world, holds influence on what can and cannot be accomplished through prayer in an atmosphere that is not conducive to faith. Even Daniel, a prophet of God, prayed and fasted for nearly a month before his prayer was finally answered by the angel who gave him his vision, and then, only by the help of Michael the archangel holding at bay the Prince of Persia. So it may not be surprising under this view, that faithful aunt Edna who prays every day, may not see all her prayers answered in a social climate where faithfulness in general is at an all time low. This is one of the reasons Christians work so hard towards Evangelism and revival, so that the spiritual atmosphere is conducive to God's will and power being manifest.

Again, US faithfulness has always been high until very recently when we've seen skepticism more accepted for various reasons, mainly as a reaction to malignant expressions like fundamentalism. The point being religion has always been predominate in the US with none of the expected miracles that you say would be expected in a faith-fertile environment.

On top of this is the fact that miracles, even in Biblical times, seem relatively rare, and also the fact that not everything we desire is what God desires for us. Christians don't always know why God doesn't answer the prayers of the faithful, but we trust that he is faithful, and that he is just, and that there is a greater purpose being fulfilled. In the meantime, Christians are to rejoice always, pray without ceasing, and give thanks in all circumstances.

What you said there pretty much encapsulates what skeptics have always said about the futility of prayer and ambiguity of interpretation. I can say I prayed for a happy week, got a happy week, then credit that to an external force. It's a little more ambiguous and less exciting than you're letting on.

I just wanted to give my counterpoint here. Carry on.

[NormATive]

Of course Norm, just like I can not prove that I had a cup of tea Monday at 6AM. It doesn't make it any less true. Many of our past experiences are like that. Not provable in any empirical sense, yet just as real as anything else.

You can prove you had a cup of tea by taking a picture of it in front of a clock. But, you can't prove a miracle.

NORM