Evidence of miracles.

[Hans Blaster]

Is that where you get your theology from?

To be more precise...

This episode is from my post-theology phase. It aired after I stopped going to church, but before I realized that I actually didn't believe in a god. As such, I was not bothered by the Clarke-like notions of gods presented in this episode.

 

[AV1611VET]

It aired after I stopped going to church,

Did you stop going to church before or after you embraced evolution?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Have you ever studied Christianity? You know, read the story of Jesus and how He died? Because that is what the story is about.

Yes, I know, I grew up with those stories.

Seems to me that if he wasn't willing to be crucified and he had God-like powers it wouldn't be possible to crucify him (unless he didn't know he had God-like powers).

 

[AV1611VET]

Seems to me that if he wasn't willing to be crucified and he had God-like powers it wouldn't be possible to crucify him (unless he didn't know he had God-like powers).

Jesus left His "God-like powers" behind, when He left Heaven to come down here.

Philippians 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

 

[Hans Blaster]

Did you stop going to church before or after you embraced evolution?

What's evolution gotta do with church?

[I first learned about evolution around the time of my first communion. I went to church for two more decades after that. It was only in the final few years of that period that I realized that there were more than just a few people on the fringe of Christianity that thought it must reject evolution. I still find that kind of religion to be weird.]

 

[AV1611VET]

I first learned about evolution around the time of my first communion.

Thank you for answering.

I'm more interested though when you EMBRACED it ... not when you learned about it.

I assume you took your first communion when you were eight years old?

If so, how old were you when you got serious about evolution?

(I'm asking for legitimate reasons, but if you don't want to answer, just tell me to get lost.)

 

[Hans Blaster]

Thank you for answering.

I'm more interested though when you EMBRACED it ... not when you learned about it.

I assume you took your first communion when you were eight years old?

If so, how old were you when you got serious about evolution?

(I'm asking for legitimate reasons, but if you don't want to answer, just tell me to get lost.)

That's about right. I learned it from Carl Sagan's "Cosmos" (and the accompanying illustrated book). I found it fascinating. I also read the Astronomy 101 text my dad got from his college textbook sale. And yes, I was about 8 or so.

 

[AV1611VET]

That's about right. I learned it from Carl Sagan's "Cosmos" (and the accompanying illustrated book). I found it fascinating. I also read the Astronomy 101 text my dad got from his college textbook sale. And yes, I was about 8 or so.

Okay, sir, thank you for honest and straightforward answers.

(This is why I enjoy conversing with you.)

 

[SkyWriting]

Yes, I know, I grew up with those stories.

Seems to me that if he wasn't willing to be crucified and he had God-like powers it wouldn't be possible to crucify him (unless he didn't know he had God-like powers).

If you read the story then you know he was willing and why. But maybe you only had a comic book of it all.

 

[SkyWriting]

You did intend to illustrate my point about your
fantasies?

I don't recall you making that point. So the dialogue is in your imagination.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

If you read the story then you know he was willing and why. But maybe you only had a comic book of it all.

I know the story of Jesus - he was willing in the story. Like I said, I grew up with this stuff - reading and being taught the bible.

But we weren't talking about that story - you began this by saying that, "For some reason you think that having people on earth with the powers of God would be a handy resource or something" - which was quite wrong, but you went on to say, "More likely, they would be crucified".

So, given the context and the preceding discussion, we were clearly not talking about Jesus. It would help if you could keep up with your own posts...

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Jesus left His "God-like powers" behind, when He left Heaven to come down here.

Philippians 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

Up to a point - unless the claims that he performed miracles were fabricated... and that quote doesn't say he lacked God-like powers.

 

[SkyWriting]

I know the story of Jesus - he was willing in the story. Like I said, I grew up with this stuff - reading and being taught the bible.

But we weren't talking about that story - you began this by saying that, "For some reason you think that having people on earth with the powers of God would be a handy resource or something" - which was quite wrong, but you went on to say, "More likely, they would be crucified".

So, given the context and the preceding discussion, we were clearly not talking about Jesus.

That can be fixed.

 

[tas8831]

You did intend to illustrate my point about your
fantasies?

Unwittingly, I am sure.

 

[tas8831]

Yes, I know, I grew up with those stories.

Seems to me that if he wasn't willing to be crucified and he had God-like powers it wouldn't be possible to crucify him (unless he didn't know he had God-like powers).

And the whole 'sacrificing myself to appease myself' thing seems all rather... absurd...

 

[tas8831]

So what you're proposing is that we should find a preponderance of anecdotal evidence... a la Michael Shermer to be somehow convincing?

Should we likewise find the evidence for bigfoot to be convincing, or alien abductions, or the Loch Ness monster, or ghosts?

The sheer number of anecdotal stories doesn't equate to evidence. And should always be taken with a hefty dose of skepticism.

Indeed.

 

[SkyWriting]

You did intend to illustrate my point about your
fantasies?

Only in your fantasies.

 

[SkyWriting]

Another thread had a curious title.

Independently REPEATABLE evidence of miracles. Which is a logical contradiction in the sense that by definition researchers cannot repeat the supernatural, otherwise it wouldn’t be supernatural.

So all that can be done is
1/ to identify evidence of the unexplained.
2/ to confirm it is inexplicable, by breaking a fundamental paradigm of science as it is known
( eg prophecy as a simple example because of time arrow, consciousness outside the brain )
3/ that there is no credible means of faking the evidence.
The only repeat possible is reassessment of evidence, not repeat the event.

But 1-3 deal only with defining something as supernatural, not a miracle which ascribes a cause.

Since God is not in the model of science , nor can science proclaim Him as a verdict, a limitation of science, not God.

So all we can do is is state
4/ it occurs in the theistic context
And
5/ the church adds other conditions too


Reality is there is a lot of such evidence.
Take miracle healings at Lourdes.
The lame walk, the blind see.

It's called "Faith Healing" and it is real. Since each cell has all the DNA needed to perform bodily miracles, then healing of a body never needs divine powers. At a very low level, faith healing is entirely common. The body reacts to whatever the mind asks it to. Just because "miraculous" healings are rare, doesn't mean the body can't perform them.

For this reason, the lame (with legs) walk, the blind (with eyes) can see again.

There is no reason for God to alter nature. God created it. It works fine. Perfect even.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It's called "Faith Healing" and it is real. Since each cell has all the DNA needed to perform bodily miracles, then healing of a body never needs divine powers. At a very low level, faith healing is entirely common. The body reacts to whatever the mind asks it to. Just because "miraculous" healings are rare, doesn't mean the body can't perform them.

You seem to imply that the cellar DNA of sick or wounded body parts responds to the requests of the mind. Is that your claim and can you support it?

 

[SkyWriting]

You seem to imply that the cellar DNA of sick or wounded body parts responds to the requests of the mind. Is that your claim and can you support it?

My claim is that if "miraculous healings" do exist, they are the result of natural processes as God had planned them.

Humans Might Regrow Limbs in Your Lifetime - Business Insider
Scientists Regrow Frogs' Lost Legs. Will Human Limbs Be Next?