Is there a way to distinguish between "miracles" and "random chance"?

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Miracles, by definition, are unlikely occurrences. If a miracle was a common occurrence, it would not be miraculous by definition; it would be common and expected.

For example, spontaneous remission of an aggressive cancer is an unlikely event which happens infrequently. Estimates vary, but it is suggested that about 1 in 100,000 cancers go into spontaneous remission. Many of these cases are touted as "miracles from God". Other medical "miracles" also fall in the same category.

1) Is there a way to distinguish between a "miraculous healing" and "random chance"?

2) Since such medical miracles are unlikely and rare events, aren't miracles an automatic admission of the inefficacy of God's healing hand?

Put another way, if God did not exist, wouldn't it be expected that statistically unlikely events would continue to occur anyway when given a large enough population set? (see Law of Large Numbers)

Any responses welcome

 

[~Anastasia~]

Not really interested in arguing or anything, but it occurs to me to wonder ... what if those statistically rare spontaneous remissions actually are miracles themselves?

But having said that, in some circles, healing and such occurs at a much greater than 1/100,000 (or whatever) rate. This is why we regard them as miracles.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

If there is a natural explanation for something, I can't think of any good reason to credit the supernatural.

 

[-V-]

Miracles, by definition, are unlikely occurrences.

An actual Biblical "miracle", though, is more than that. It is NOT merely an "unlikely" thing. It's something that violates the laws of the physical universe.

Put another way, if God did not exist, wouldn't it be expected that statistically unlikely events would continue to occur anyway when given a large enough population set? (see Law of Large Numbers)

Imho, if God did not exist, no, unlikely events would not occur. NO events would occur, as nothing would exist.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Miracles, by definition, are unlikely occurrences. If a miracle was a common occurrence, it would not be miraculous by definition; it would be common and expected.

For example, spontaneous remission of an aggressive cancer is an unlikely event which happens infrequently. Estimates vary, but it is suggested that about 1 in 100,000 cancers go into spontaneous remission.

1) Is there a way to distinguish between a "miraculous healing" and "random chance"?

2) Since such medical miracles are unlikely and rare events, aren't miracles an automatic admission of the inefficacy of God's healing hand?

Put another way, if God did not exist, wouldn't it be expected that statistically unlikely events would continue to occur anyway when given a large enough population set? (see Law of Large Numbers)

Any responses welcome

Like -V- said, it's the not the infrequency that's at issue. A god could theoretically cause miraculous events to occur every day, and they'd still be miracles. It's the source of the event that's important.

And seemingly impossible to prove...

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

An actual Biblical "miracle", though, is more than that. It is NOT merely an "unlikely" thing. It's something that violates the laws of the physical universe.

Can you provide a modern-day example?

Or, just to clarify, are you one that believes that God only did miracles during the OT and the apostolic age?

Imho, if God did not exist, no, unlikely events would not occur. NO events would occur, as nothing would exist.

Is there a way to test this assertion?

What is your reason for believing it to be so?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Miracles, by definition, are unlikely occurrences. If a miracle was a common occurrence, it would not be miraculous by definition; it would be common and expected.

For example, spontaneous remission of an aggressive cancer is an unlikely event which happens infrequently. Estimates vary, but it is suggested that about 1 in 100,000 cancers go into spontaneous remission. Many of these cases are touted as "miracles from God". Other medical "miracles" also fall in the same category.

1) Is there a way to distinguish between a "miraculous healing" and "random chance"?

2) Since such medical miracles are unlikely and rare events, aren't miracles an automatic admission of the inefficacy of God's healing hand?

Put another way, if God did not exist, wouldn't it be expected that statistically unlikely events would continue to occur anyway when given a large enough population set? (see Law of Large Numbers)

Any responses welcome

...I was under the impression that a 'miracle' was an impossible occurrence. I mean.....there's quite a difference between praying for a case3 of pneumonia to quickly disperse from one's body versus that same body coming back to life after having been dead for 3 days (e.g. Lazarus or Jesus).

2PhiloVoid

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

...I was under the impression that a 'miracle' was an impossible occurrence. I mean.....there's quite a difference between praying for a case3 of pneumonia to quickly disperse from one's body versus that same body coming back to life after having been dead for 3 days (e.g. Lazarus or Jesus).

2PhiloVoid

"Impossible" and "unlikely" are hard to distinguish.

And most prayers I hear being prayed are prayers for unlikely outcomes rather than impossible outcomes. People ask for healing from maladies that may just resolve themselves via natural means. People take the "mountains-jump-into-the-sea" type prayers as somehow metaphorical. And, I hate to reference it, but there is a somewhat hilarious website asking why God doesn't heal amputees*.

In the case of Lazarus or Jesus, these are quite fantastical stories suggesting near-impossible occurrences. These are stories from a couple thousand years ago written by a group of people years-to-decades after the events who had the express purpose of convincing unbelievers. I do not wish to derail the thread discussing the authenticity of the Bible. I think it would be more useful if you could provide a more recent example, say, in the last 10 years or so? (Sorry if that is viewed as an unreasonable request )

*Note: I am not at all advocating this website. It's a stupid website.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

If there is a natural explanation for something, I can't think of any good reason to credit the supernatural.

And if there is NO natural explanation for something, then I still can't think of any good reason to credit the supernatural.

You can't explain to unexplained with the inexplicable.

 

[-V-]

Can you provide a modern-day example?

Whether or not I can doesn't alter the definition of "miracle".

Is there a way to test this assertion?

I suppose you could attempt to prove a universe exists while a god does not.

What is your reason for believing it to be so?

My conclusion that God created the universe is my reason for believing that there'd be no universe without God.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

"Impossible" and "unlikely" are hard to distinguish.

.....are these qualifiers 'hard' to distinguish? I've never really felt that they were.

And most prayers I hear being prayed are prayers for unlikely outcomes rather than impossible outcomes. People ask for healing from maladies that may just resolve themselves via natural means. People take the "mountains-jump-into-the-sea" type prayers as somehow metaphorical. And, I hate to reference it, but there is a somewhat hilarious website asking why God doesn't heal amputees*.

I saw that website a few years ago, but being that I'm not of the Charismatically oriented frame of mind with religious thought, I'm not really disturbed by it.

In the case of Lazarus or Jesus, these are quite fantastical stories suggesting near-impossible occurrences. These are stories from a couple thousand years ago written by a group of people years-to-decades after the events who had the express purpose of convincing unbelievers. I do not wish to derail the thread discussing the authenticity of the Bible. I think it would be more useful if you could provide a more recent example, say, in the last 10 years or so? (Sorry if that is viewed as an unreasonable request )

My point in bringing up Lazarus and Jesus wasn't to demonstrate any successes of miracles, but rather to help us hone in on what the New Testament writers would have thought constituted a miracle (whether any of it did or didn't happen back then is another issue). For instance, if they all saw a man sitting by the doorway of a public space, and the man was known to have been born lame, then from their vantage it really wouldn't have been "likely" that the guy would just get up and walk after forty years of lameness.

So, if the guy was somehow incredibly physically regenerated to a point where he could walk, I wouldn't call that an "unlikely" happening. I would call it an 'impossibility'---because those things just don't happen--without the intervention of a God.

 

[Ron Gurley]

The debate:

There is a God of spiritual will and power who creates and intervenes in the affairs of Man

...VERSUS...

RANDOM EVENTS

Miracle: DEFINED
A miracle is an event not explicable by natural or scientific laws.
Such an event may be attributed to a supernatural being (God or gods),
magic, a miracle worker, a saint or a religious leader.

REF: Miracle - Wikipedia

Miracles of Jesus: DEFINED
The miracles of Jesus are the supernatural deeds attributed to Jesus in Christian and Islamic texts.
The majority are faith healing, exorcisms, resurrection of the dead and control over nature.

REF: Miracles of Jesus - Wikipedia

Unexplained / Unexplainable / Supernatural "SIGNS"-"WONDERS"-"MIRACLES"
ARE "Proof/Authentication of God and Men of God".

John 4:48
So Jesus said to him,
“Unless you people (Jewish leaders) see signs and wonders, you simply will not believe.”

Mark 6:2
When the Sabbath came, He began to teach in the synagogue; and the many listeners were astonished, saying,
“Where did this man get these things, and
what is this wisdom given to Him, and
such miracles as these performed by His hands?

1 Corinthians 1:22 ...Which are you?
For indeed Jews ask for signs and
Greeks search for wisdom;

Acts 19:11
God was performing extraordinary miracles by the hands of Paul,

Hebrews 2:4
God also testifying with them,
both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of (God) the Holy Spirit according to His own will.

Acts 2 The Ultimate Miracle in History!
22 “Men of Israel, listen to these words:
Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God
with miracles and wonders and signs
which God performed through Him in your midst,
just as you yourselves know—
23 this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God,
you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.
24 But God raised Him up again,
putting an end to the agony of death,
since it was impossible for Him to be held in its power.

Deuteronomy 26:8
and the Lord brought us out of Egypt
with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm and
with great terror and with signs and wonders;

Daniel 4:3
“How great are His signs And how mighty are His wonders! His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom
And His dominion is from generation to generation.

 

[Ron Gurley]

If scientific emperical EVIDENCE cannot EXPLAIN an EVENT, then it is a PROVIDENTIAL MIRACLE!

 

[jayem]

Is there any irrefutable documentation that an authentic miracle has ever occurred? By irrefutable, I mean evidence other than Bible stories, myths, folklore, cultural traditions, legends, and urban myths.

 

[Ron Gurley]

Why Science Can't Accept Miracles (Even if They Really Exist)

 

[Ron Gurley]

Why Science Can't Accept Miracles (Even if They Really Exist)

http://listverse.com/2008/07/14/top-10-astonishing-miracles/

 

[Hawkins]

Is there a way to test this assertion?

What is your reason for believing it to be so?

Testing God is not allowed in Christianity. The point of Christianity is that God signed off a covenant which allows humans to be saved by faith. It seems to me that your questions always point to the same ask of if we can make God and His deeds evident. However seeking concrete evidence of God means the seeking of the death of all mankind.

That said, one of the purposes a miracle serves is to strengthen one's faith instead of causing one's death. When we experience a miracle it makes our faith stronger. That's the effect of a miracle should have on us. Instead of how you proposed here that to make it like scientifically provable such that what, making us dead?

Matthew 25:29 (NIV)
For whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them.

 

[Ron Gurley]

Are you a "man" of LITTLE spirit-led FAITH/BELIEF"?

Jesus chastened His followers that their faith was small, and it should be GROWING.

Matthew 6:30 (worry about food / clothing);

Matthew 8:26 (fear of storm when Jesus is in your boat)

Matthew 14:31 (Peter sinks when he lost faith)

Matthew 16:8 (Pharisees and Sadducees had no faith at the miracle of feeding the masses)

God GIVES spirit-led FAITH. A LITTLE start will GROW and go a long way!

Matthew 17:20 (parable of tiny mustard seeds growth into a bush)

Matthew 13:33 ( parable of leaven / yeast...a little is good for 3 bushels?)

Matthew 21:21 (metaphors: fig trees + mountains)

Galatians 5:9 ...A little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough.

Luke 16:10...“He who is faithful in (doing) a very little thing (service) is faithful also in much;...

 

[jayem]

What I would think would be a miracle is much simpler than surviving a usually fatal disease. Unexpected recoveries are well known to occur. There are so many variables involved in how any individual will respond to an illness. And in this day and age, many or most patients (in developed countries anyway) have already had some medical treatment--and often have had extensive treatment. So determining exactly what factor is responsible for a patient's recovery can be problematic. To clearly demonstrate a miracle, one needs a much simpler setting where confounding variables are minimized.

Here's an example: A pan of warm water is placed in a hermetically sealed container. Thermometers measure the water temperature and air temperature in the container. And without any human intervention or application of energy, the water in the pan gets hotter and begins to boil, while the air in the container gets colder. We know that in a closed system, heat always flows from a greater to a lesser region until the system equilibrates. And now we are seeing a reversal of this. Which is a violation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. I suppose that according to statistical thermodynamics, such a finding is not absolutely impossible. But the probability is so vanishingly small, that I would call it a miracle.

 

[Ron Gurley]

NATURALISM: defined
4. (Theology) the belief that all religious truth is based not on revelation but rather on the study of natural causes and processes
5. (Philosophy)
a. a scientific account of the world in terms of causes and natural forces that rejects all spiritual, supernatural, or teleological explanations
b. the meta-ethical thesis that moral properties are reducible to natural ones, or
that ethical judgments are derivable from nonethical ones. Compare naturalistic fallacy, descriptivism
6. action or thought caused by natural desires and instincts
7. devotion to that which is natural

If you are a "NATURALIST", please raise your hand!