How are we to explain these "miracles?"

[SkyWriting]

So has schizophrenia

Check with your doctor.

 

[stevevw]

And how exactly was a non-miraculous explanation discounted? Doctors often say that a person is beyond hope, yet they pull through despite the odds.

I dont think they came up with one. They just said there was no explanation. One week she had an aggressive cancer that was allover her lungs and had spread to her brain and other organs. The church was praying for a miracle and a few weeks later she had no cancer. It was completely gone, not a trace. So is it a coincidence that people were praying and she was healed or was it something else. I know they say the power of positive thinking can make a difference or that some cancers can regress and just about disappear. But they are normally not major cancers and there has even been misdiagnosis that was the reason why the cancer had gone because it wasn't there in the first place. But this was full blown and as cancers do they rot and eat away and deteriorate the lungs and other organs. So not only had the cancer gone it also made all the decayed organs new again.

 

[Nithavela]

I dont think they came up with one. They just said there was no explanation. One week she had an aggressive cancer that was allover her lungs and had spread to her brain and other organs. The church was praying for a miracle and a few weeks later she had no cancer. It was completely gone, not a trace. So is it a coincidence that people were praying and she was healed or was it something else. I know they say the power of positive thinking can make a difference or that some cancers can regress and just about disappear. But they are normally not major cancers and there has even been misdiagnosis that was the reason why the cancer had gone because it wasn't there in the first place. But this was full blown and as cancers do they rot and eat away and deteriorate the lungs and other organs. So not only had the cancer gone it also made all the decayed organs new again.

Those spontaneous remissions happen, and they do not correlate with the amount of prayer directed at the cancers. We are not yet aware what causes them, but the body is very much able to destroy tissue (which is why people who get an organ donation need to take meds so they body doesn't attack the organ). And these remissions, as I said, also happen to people of other faiths, or without any faith at all. And some very religious people get prayed for time and time again and they just die of cancer, anyway.

 

[stevevw]

Those spontaneous remissions happen, and they do not correlate with the amount of prayer directed at the cancers. We are not yet aware what causes them, but the body is very much able to destroy tissue (which is why people who get an organ donation need to take meds so they body doesn't attack the organ). And these remissions, as I said, also happen to people of other faiths, or without any faith at all. And some very religious people get prayed for time and time again and they just die of cancer, anyway.

But how do you explain that the organs renew themselves without any scar tissue as well. Anyway even if its in the head or the prayer triggers some chemical reaction in the body so what. If it works it works. I'm sure Kathleen Evens wasnt questioning anything.

 

[Nithavela]

Scientists should question this, though, because if they can find out what causes these things, amazing medical procedures could result from that, maybe even the cure for cancer itself.

Right?

 

[[serious]]

But how do you explain that the organs renew themselves without any scar tissue as well. Anyway even if its in the head or the prayer triggers some chemical reaction in the body so what. If it works it works. I'm sure Kathleen Evens wasnt questioning anything.

Hence why we need enough data to assess the claim. If it works, we should figure out how it works so that it can work for everyone.

 

[SkyWriting]

Hence why we need enough data to assess the claim. If it works, we should figure out how it works so that it can work for everyone.

The placebo effect doesn't work on all people, yet it works.

 

[Syd the Human]

But how do you explain that the organs renew themselves without any scar tissue as well. Anyway even if its in the head or the prayer triggers some chemical reaction in the body so what. If it works it works. I'm sure Kathleen Evens wasnt questioning anything.

I don't see why not having an explanation for something must mean that god did it.

For the underlined yes, if positive thinking works then it works. Does not really have to be prayer. But if they want to think of it as a prayer that's fine too.

I probably would question why, but I doubt I would be able to get a 100% accurate answer.

 

[Nithavela]

The placebo effect doesn't work on all people, yet it works.

Yes, but HOW does it work? Are there chemicals secreted that make it work? If yes, those could be used as a medicine of their own.

Imagine a world where every problem would have been met not with scientific investigation, but with 'Well, if it works, it's gods will, if it doesn't, it's gods will, too'. Do you really think we would have this conversation if people looked at natural electric phenomenones and said 'wow, God sure is making nifty things with those crackling lightning bits, best pray to him'.

I doubt it.

 

[stevevw]

Hence why we need enough data to assess the claim. If it works, we should figure out how it works so that it can work for everyone.

Do you believe in miracles.

 

[Heissonear]

Scientists should question this, though, because if they can find out what causes these things, amazing medical procedures could result from that, maybe even the cure for cancer itself.

Right?

.
This is silly. When matters get to the point where the natural CANNOT explain what happened you retract to natural possibilities anyway AND bring in the troops you put trust in, scientists, rather than facing Him on High. Unbelief can make grown people silly.

.

 

[Nithavela]

.
This is silly. When matters get to the point where the natural CANNOT explain what happened you retract to natural possibilities anyway AND bring in the troops you put trust in, scientists, rather than facing Him on High. Unbelief can make grown people silly.

.

I don't think we have reached a point in our development where we can say that something can't be explained by natural means. Why should I think different?

Man has always believed that this or that was unexplainable and divine, and then it was explained, anyway. Like lightning storms. Like diseases. Like the movement of the planets in the sky.

 

[[serious]]

Do you believe in miracles.

I don't rule them out, but I'm not going to assume supernatural when there is a natural explanation.

 

[SkyWriting]

Yes, but HOW does it work? Are there chemicals secreted that make it work? If yes, those could be used as a medicine of their own.

Well you better get crackin. The placebo effect is the best documented
effect in history and shows up in every drug trial. You best bottle it soon
because all the big corporations seem to have overlooked it!

 

[Nithavela]

Believe, people right now, in various institutes, are indeed 'crackin' at this. Like every good thing, it takes time, though.

 

[stevevw]

I don't rule them out, but I'm not going to assume supernatural when there is a natural explanation.

Thats true and i agree with that. People can easily mistake things for supernatural events. It doesn't just happen with religion. But at the same time you have to ask do some bring in the natural explanation to much when there maybe a divine explanation. If God is real do you think he has some presence or activity happening in our realm that is beyond our explanation. Or does everything have to be put down to the explained and a natural cause. I guess its comes down to how much faith you have. If you believe the bible and what Jesus did in rising from the dead then you are going to need faith. But if you have to put an explanation on absoluterly everything as having some naturalistic cause then what is the use of having God at all. He would end up being something that was in our heads.

 

[Heissonear]

I don't rule them out, but I'm not going to assume supernatural when there is a natural explanation.

.

Who ever said you do otherwise?

When I became open to determine if He existed I was an educated person about nature around us, and how the landscape, vegetation, mountains and the like came about over time through natural processes. I knew what was natural. It was also clear that I was not "turning to religion, doctrines, church systems, or men nor their words". It was about turning to Him, to know Him, if He was.

Who said I lost my ability to be critical when evaluating what aspects of religion presented? Since when was I going to assume something supernatural when it had natural roots or characteristics? It was all about if He was, in no uncertain way.

So I say, when He reveals Himself you will encounter Power you can clearly distinguish from Natural. I have seen one Naturalist after another struggle over this "is it possibly to distinguish Supernatural from natural" issue. I know what they do not know, and see there dilemma of uncertainty. I also see rampant doubt claim that I must have been tricked, was imagining, was hallucinating, and the list goes on.

What the Bible says about the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and Miracles are not imaginary or hallucinations; this is from what mere men perceive since they are void of the experience of meeting Him on High, and experiencing the Power of His Kingdom in our midst.

.

 

[[serious]]

.

So I say, when He reveals Himself you will encounter Power you can clearly distinguish from Natural. I have seen one Naturalist after another struggle over this "is it possibly to distinguish Supernatural from natural" issue. I know what they do not know, and see there dilemma of uncertainty. I also see rampant doubt claim that I must have been tricked, was imagining, was hallucinating, and the list goes on.

Most naturalists don't struggle with this at all. If a natural explanation exists, they go with the natural explanation. Easy Peasy.

 

[davidbilby]

.
This is silly. When matters get to the point where the natural CANNOT explain what happened you retract to natural possibilities anyway AND bring in the troops you put trust in, scientists, rather than facing Him on High. Unbelief can make grown people silly.

Here's a question. Assume for a moment that we found something that was entirely unexplainable by natural possibilities, such that we were CERTAIN that something supernatural had happened.

Why are you so sure it is your own deity that has intervened, and not Zeus, Allah, Atum, Mbombo, Kamuy, Vishvakarman, Viracocha, Pangu....and the list goes on and on and on and on and on? Are there any hallmarks of a theistic intervention that would allow us to conclusively demonstrate which of the many tens of thousands of "Gods" intervened and thus exists? Or be sure that an invisible space alien hadn't done it instead?

It's jolly convenient that when people cite the evidence for the existence of a deity (or, more accurately, misappropriate the evidence), they always make the assumption that it is their own deity, naturally, that did it.

 

[TLK Valentine]

.
This is silly. When matters get to the point where the natural CANNOT explain what happened you retract to natural possibilities anyway AND bring in the troops you put trust in, scientists, rather than facing Him on High. Unbelief can make grown people silly.

So what's the difference between something the natural CANNOT explain, and something the natural HAS NOT YET explained?