Modern Day Miracles

Originally posted by inimalist
no, I'm saying it is impossible to meet the second criteria you have for miracles.

You are saying that there must be no scientific refutation of the miracle. If science didn't refute the miracle, it wouldn't be one.

So there are no miracles.

Originally posted by Beliver
So there are no miracles.

As I pointed out in my previous analysis of your flawed logic:

You have chosen not to perceive miracles.

Originally posted by Beliver
So there are no miracles.

lol, try to stop reading what you want into what I am saying.

There are no miracles that meet your criteria, but that is your fault because the criteria are impossible to meet.

It would be like me saying "Find me a red car, but it cannot be red". You can't find that car, however, it isn't because there are no red cars, it is because my criteria for the car is flawed.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You are making a judgment. I did not say if it was good or bad, just that it is real in the mind of the delusional.

So, in your opinion a 'miracle' can be anything at all?

Originally posted by Eon Blue
So, in your opinion a 'miracle' can be anything at all?

A miracles is a product of the mind. How limited is your imagination?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
A miracles is a product of the mind. How limited is your imagination?

Please refrain from ad-hominem attacks, they are futile and you are simultaneously refusing to address my points.

If by chance you saw a shining light in the night sky that descended upon the city, with a being emerging from the light that was engulfed in a fiery radiance that healed tens upon thousands of persons with ailments, would you simply attribute it to mere imagination? Please keep in mind that when you saw this, thre were no mind-altering drugs in effect.

Originally posted by Eon Blue
Please refrain from ad-hominem attacks, they are futile and you are simultaneously refusing to address my points.

If by chance you saw a shining light in the night sky that descended upon the city, with a being emerging from the light that was engulfed in a fiery radiance that healed tens upon thousands of persons with ailments, would you simply attribute it to mere imagination? Please keep in mind that when you saw this, thre were no mind-altering drugs in effect.

Ad-hominem attacks? I never attacked anyone. I was asking a rhetorical question.

What you described would never happen, but if it did happen, then I would assume that we are being visited by a more advanced alien race.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison Ad-hominem attacks? I never attacked anyone. I was asking a rhetorical question.

By your saying "How limited is your imagination", I gathered you weren't asking a rhetorical question, but targeting me.

What you described would never happen, but if it did happen, then I would assume that we are being visited by a more advanced alien race.

I doubt it would ever happen either, but that's irrelevant. And even if it were an alien race, would you contribute it to being a mircale? What is in your definition, a mircale? Can they exist?

Originally posted by Eon Blue
By your saying "How limited is your imagination", I gathered you weren't asking a rhetorical question, but targeting me.

I was speaking in general.

Originally posted by Eon Blue
I doubt it would ever happen either, but that's irrelevant. And even if it were an alience race, would you contribute it to being a mircale? What is in your definition, a mircale? Can they exist?

No, it would not be a miracle. A miracle by definition is supernatural. Therefore, if a natural explanation can be found, then it is not a miracle.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I was speaking in general.

No, it would not be a miracle. A miracle by definition is supernatural. Therefore, if a natural explanation can be found, then it is not a miracle.

So its a miracle until it can be explained using the laws of nature, and then its not a miracle?

Originally posted by Beliver
So its a miracle until it can be explained using the laws of nature, and then its not a miracle?

No, miracles do not exist outside the mind.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No, miracles do not exist outside the mind.

So they dont exsist in the real sense, just as imagined fantasies. Then miracles depicted in the bible have been proven false by your statment.

Originally posted by Beliver
So they dont exsist in the real sense, just as imagined fantasies. Then miracles depicted in the bible have been proven false by your statment.

If you believe in something the effect is the same as if it was real. In our minds, the distinction between real and imagined is not so clear cut. For example; phobias.

Originally posted by Beliver
So they dont exsist in the real sense, just as imagined fantasies. Then miracles depicted in the bible have been proven false by your statment.

Only to people that know nothing about science, logic and evidence.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Only to people that know nothing about science, logic and evidence.

Show me the science, logic and evidence for the parting of the Red Sea by Moses, or Jesus feeding the many with little or Jesus coming back from the dead.

(Sits back and waits for the staggering weight of irrefutable evidence and facts to support your statment).

not having evidence to support something is not the same as it being proven wrong

There is no empirical evidence to the miracles in the bible, thus there is no support for them, but as they are single events in history and not controlled laboratory experiments, science has little more than that to say.

It is impossible to prove that anything in history didn't happen. All we can do is provide evidence to support what we did think happened.

Originally posted by Beliver
Show me the science, logic and evidence for the parting of the Red Sea by Moses, or Jesus feeding the many with little or Jesus coming back from the dead.

(Sits back and waits for the staggering weight of irrefutable evidence and facts to support your statment).

I never claimed to have any of those (nor as you seem to think do I believe any of them happened). I simply made the, factual, statement that you have failed to use science, logic or evidence at an point in your reasoning. If you're going to be an atheist at least try to also be a rationalist because if you don't you change nothing.

wait...what does Believer believe anyway?

Originally posted by Quark_666
wait...what does Believer believe anyway?

It's "Beliver" so, first that spelling is not important. Beyond that he has faith in his dogma and believes (or belives) that that supernatural can be positively disproved. So as far as the atheist -- theist spectrum goes he would be referred to as an irrational nutcase, but also an atheist.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I never claimed to have any of those (nor as you seem to think do I believe any of them happened). I simply made the, factual, statement that you have failed to use science, logic or evidence at an point in your reasoning. If you're going to be an atheist at least try to also be a rationalist because if you don't you change nothing.

I didn't realist that I had to follow an "ist" to have an opnion on the "fact" that at no point in time (the past or the present) has any event even remotley close to those in bible.

Therefor LOGICALLY I deduce that the events were made up or the "witness" (i use the term loosely) was experiencign an altered sense of reality ( a delusion if you will).

And I think SCIENCE is more than happy to show you that man can not feed 500 people with a couple of fish and a loaf of bread, or cause a body of water to part by sheer force of will. Unless you know differently of course.