Well Documented Miracles?

[musicman30mm]

Can anyone provide a source to a well documented instance of a miracle?

 

[capnator]

The bible.

Check out George Muller... he lived a miracle.
http://www.wholesomewords.org/biography/bmuller2.html

 

[JoabAnias]

Here is a good one:

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/lanciano.html

Peace.

 

[lilmissmontana]

Well ... one I can think of off hand was Jesus death and rising. It was well documented and witnessed by many. And it's easy to find in the Bible. I don't know if this helps. I do hope you find the answer to your questions.

 

[Digit]

Can anyone provide a source to a well documented instance of a miracle?

Hi musicman30mm,

What do you mean by a well documented instance of a miracle?

Have you seen the film, The Exodus Decoded?

Cheers,
Digit

 

[musicman30mm]

I watched the enire exedous documentary. It began with changing the date the exedous was supposed to happen, then specualted how it could have occured by natural causes, through a series of highly unlikely and entirely unverified events. The only sources outside of the bible it documented were extremely obscure and highly subjective interpetations of ancient heirogryphics.

If anything it proved that it was possible for the Biblical account of the exedous to occur without divine intervention.

Are there any more modern documented cases of miricals, or scientific studies done to prove instances of divine intervention?

 

[Digit]

Hi musicman30mm,

I watched the enire exedous documentary. It began with changing the date the exedous was supposed to happen

Or correcting the date we think it happened, to something that aligns better with historical records.

then specualted how it could have occured by natural causes, through a series of highly unlikely and entirely unverified events.

It wasn't specualtion, they showed how each and every miracle could have occurred via a natural phenominon, all of which have happened at least once during our history.

The only sources outside of the bible

Of course it's going to reference the Bible, it's about the Exodus... -_-

it documented were extremely obscure and highly subjective interpetations of ancient heirogryphics.

Can you give examples of these?

If anything it proved that it was possible for the Biblical account of the exedous to occur without divine intervention.

Why could God not use the very rules and systems He created to cause the plagues? It's miraculous because they all occurred within such short timeframes of each other and were prophesised by Moses beforehand.

Are there any more modern documented cases of miricals, or scientific studies done to prove instances of divine intervention?

So this question is basically, "Can you show me God in a test-tube?", again.

I would have thought you learned from last time. You wish proof of a miracle, that is documented by science, that proves the divine, and thus becomes less miraculous. It's a rigged question.

Cheers,
Digit

 

[musicman30mm]

Greetings friend,

We meet again so soon. I think you are such a skeptic, you are skeptical of rational thinking.

The movie did speculate. That's what the whole movie was, a speculation of how those events could have occured. I'm not saying it's right or wrong. It is possible those things happened the way the document claims. I quite enjoyed it, and thought it was well done. The point is, it isn't proof of a miracle. It's an explaination of how natural events could have panned out as they did in Exedous. If you call naturally occuring phenomina a miracle, it was negative 15 Farenheit in Mn last week. What about the tsunami a few years ago? Hurricane Katrina?

By this definition everything is a miracle. I thought a miracle had to be some kind of naturally impossible event that god made possible only through his intervention.

The heiroglyphics (sp?) I was referring to were throughout the documentairy. One example I can give off the top of my head were of people wearing brightly colored tunics. The Bible described the Isrealites as wearing brightly colored tunics, so it was speculated that those heirogliphics could be confirming part of the tale in the Bible. It could very well be. I'm not disputing that.

When I say source cited besides the Bible, this is because in a disciplin like archeology, which is by necessity speculative, it would be nice to have several different documents that agree on the same occurences, to help sort mythology from historical fact.

I don't think asking for a more recent and well documented instance of a miracle is a rigged question. If scientists did a controlled, measured study on healing by laying of hands, and found a priest who consistently cured the blind by laying of hands and prayer alone. I could say nothing but, That's a miracle.

The point is, I'm not looking for a debate. (Although, by nature we will both probably lock horns whenever we meet.) I am simply asking for the people who know, Christians, for direction in educating myself about miracles. I may investigate every one given to me without giving credibility to any. Perhaps I will have my foundation rocked by something you guys toss my way. I'm just interested; that is all.

The reason I want modern examples is this:

Simply quoting an ancient text that proclaims that some events that happened thousands of years ago were the work of god leaves me wondering. I think, Why believe this and not greek mythology? After all, there is no more historical backing for one than the other. The greek myths describe many historical events in great detail, and always attribute them to acts of gods. Why is the Bible more credible?

 

[JoabAnias]

Here is a good one:

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/lanciano.html

Peace.

Bump.

Have you no opinion of this yet?

Might I also suggest the scientific research behind the Shroud of Turin.

There are many other ways to go into the theories of science and the theology of religion as well. I am a fan of both and have always been able to reconcile the two.

Faith and reason are not contradictory in accuality in my view. Each has to be approached with objectivity to see it though I think.

Are you aware of Gonzaga University? They have much to contribute in this pursuit.

Peace.

 

[musicman30mm]

That is quite interesting. I'd like to read some of the actual notes on the scientific study. The fact remains, we have to take the legend at face value to believe that the heart and blood actually spontaneously transubstantiated. Otherwise it could very well just be a myth supported by a tradition of misguided monks.

 

[Digit]

Hi musicman30mm,

The reason I want modern examples is this:

Simply quoting an ancient text that proclaims that some events that happened thousands of years ago were the work of god leaves me wondering. I think, Why believe this and not greek mythology? After all, there is no more historical backing for one than the other. The greek myths describe many historical events in great detail, and always attribute them to acts of gods.

Ok.

Why is the Bible more credible?

But that wasn't your question. Your question was about well documented miracles. As you say, isn't a miracle something that is naturally impossible unless there is divine intervention. Well, maybe. It depends on what you believe a miracle to be I suppose, either way it's a rigged question in that you want proof of the divine again.

I'm only skeptical of some of the questions asked here as more often than not they come from the great book of Atheistic critiques of Chrstianity, and have no real sincerity to them at all, even less than those posted in General Apologetics.

Cheers,
Digit

 

[JoabAnias]

That is quite interesting. I'd like to read some of the actual notes on the scientific study. The fact remains, we have to take the legend at face value to believe that the heart and blood actually spontaneously transubstantiated. Otherwise it could very well just be a myth supported by a tradition of misguided monks.

I will grant you that and at the time there was no recourse to modern scientific advancements. They had to be done after the fact. Perhaps contacting the admin of that site would yeild more detail.

I think something that may also be revealing are documented modern medical healings. Any Dr. who has whitnessed one I am sure believes in miracles. Or even the investigations of stigmata by secular scientific sources left as unexplainable.

I'm just on my way out and don't have any sources at hand but the investigations into the stigmata of Padre Pio comes to mind. My ex-father in laws father was one such objective secular Dr. to examine the stigmata first hand. St. Pio (and others) had those stigma off and on for 50 years. I believe there is also documentation of the stigmatist Theresa Neuman of not having eaten for years but don't hold me to that one.

I will look for sources into the ongoing scientific investigations of the Church to legitimize alleged miracles as in the cases presented as cause for canonization when I get more time.

Peace and bye for now.

Pray for answers and they will come.

 

[musicman30mm]

Digit,

There is no great book of Atheist critiques, but in a figurative way, I see your point. There is alot of popular rhetoric out there, but it's not like I'm asking you, "Can god make a mountain so big he can't move it?"

I find it unfair to accuse atheists of being insincere or loading questions. I for one, am trying to understand religion in the only way I know how. I may ask questions you have heard before, but this is because they are good questions. It is just as frustrating for me to hear, "I know this because the Bible tells me so." As it is for you to hear "How do you know the Bible is right?"

I did change my question when is said, "Why is the Bible more credible?" but this is just where the conversation has lead. Ultimately, if you don't want to discuss these things with me, you don't have to, but it is intellectually dishonest to cry foul because I challenge your reasoning. Look at it from an outsider's point of view. From my standpoint, hearing people talk to me, all the time, in full earnest about a laundry list of immaculate conceptions, plagues of frogs, floods, women made from a man's rib, reincarnation etc... is equivolant to having a conversation with someone who believes everything Homer wrote is literal truth. I'm sorry if you find that disrespectful. It is simply honest.

Be assured I am not trying to convert any one. I am well aware that the religiouse will always try to trump logic with faith. When I ask debative questions, it is not to try that faith, but to find out the answer to what I feel is the ultimate question about religion: Why do the religiouse make acceptions to logic?

 

[JoabAnias]

Why do the religiouse make acceptions to logic?

Faith is about as much about plausibility as love is about emotion. There is an element of choice to each. To doubt is a sin against faith and faith isn't contrary to reason because we use reason to understand. We all have apprehensions about certain things and sometimes those apprehensions are unreasonable. If your looking for evidence to prove faith you only have to look at how it serves those who strengthen it. We are all given a measure of it, just in different increments. To those with a lesser measure it may appear that those with a greater depth are doing so blindly or without reason whenin reality they may have already forgotten more than he who percieves himself more wise or reasonable. If you want logic for faith you could persue humanism as even there there are many valid reasons for following religion. Its not about how we may harm ourselves though, its about how were united to the will of he who IS and orders all things. Perhaps your aware of the mathematical impossibility of randomness or string theory as case in point.


Peace.

 

[musicman30mm]

I could understand if you had read the Bible and said, Now this is a great moral code. I'm going to live my life by these practices because they make sense to me. and left it at that. The place where it gets nonsensical is when you begin attaching mythology. Why does a moral guidebook have to include a creation story? Why can't you just take the moral and say, okay, I love the morality in the Bible, and believe it to be absolute truth, but the mythology was obviously written at a time just after classical Rome. It doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

I'm not saying God is a crutch, but I think he's a gap filler. Humans have a need to know everything, so they fill in that gap beyond the limits of their own capabilities to precieve reality with God. Ancient tribal cultures did it with the forces of nature and topography. Ptolomy did it at the edges of his universal model, as did Gallileo. Descartes put god at the limits of his ability to philosophically reason through reality and existence. Newton placed him in the sector of Physics now occupied by General Relativity. Science has been pushing god's turf back. There's not much room for the Biblical mythology anymore. It's becoming debunked. The point is, this doesn't have to soften its impact on your life. If anything, it should be wonderful for you not to have to depend on a single text for everything.

 

[JoabAnias]

I could understand if you had read the Bible and said, Now this is a great moral code. I'm going to live my life by these practices because they make sense to me. and left it at that.

Yes, that is a humanistic view where by one turns inward toward self for their own good. There is a strange paradox there though as peace and contentment aren't found in that pursuit though one my think there would be.

There is something else that happens though that is odd and wonderful. A new form of freedom before unbeknownst to us becomes evident if we turn away from ourselves and toward God, which is sometimes where humanism can lead. In the beginning of humanism it may one to that realization when the bottom drops out of it.

The place where it gets nonsensical is when you begin attaching mythology. Why does a moral guidebook have to include a creation story?

This is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church has to say about this:

#390 “The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval even, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.”

Is it really that nonsensical to answer the age old question of where we come from and some of the ways in which we have become what we have?

Why can't you just take the moral and say, okay, I love the morality in the Bible, and believe it to be absolute truth,

Well, because its not all about explicit definition or just the Bible. There is a whole oral tradition that coincides with and pre-exists what is written down. Its filled with implicit truth as well. The Church applies a science to interpretation of Scripture. Its called Hermeneutics: Understanding Revelation

but the mythology was obviously written at a time just after classical Rome. It doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

I am not sure how you arrive at that time frame. The old covenant scriptures foreshadow the new and the new fulfill the old. All written before classical Rome and without much of its influence save from the point of Christs death onward. Never an influence religiously as Paganism is viewed as idolotry. Perhaps what you need to do is stop looking at scripture which you find non-sensical and turn to history and maybe others who once shared similar apprehensions.

I'm not saying God is a crutch, but I think he's a gap filler.

Shouldn't we ask why that deficiency is percieved in the first place. Kind of proves the existence of something more and a soul don't you think? I ask because I do not know how you classify yourself, as meerly agnostic or as athiest.

Humans have a need to know everything, so they fill in that gap beyond the limits of their own capabilities to precieve reality with God. Ancient tribal cultures did it with the forces of nature and topography. Ptolomy did it at the edges of his universal model, as did Gallileo. Descartes put god at the limits of his ability to philosophically reason through reality and existence. Newton placed him in the sector of Physics now occupied by General Relativity. Science has been pushing god's turf back.

I agree and it continues to do so to its own detriment in inho. I studied phorensic anthropology and psycho-biology in college and found nothing contradictory to creation but only supportive. For example, mitochondria DNA, radioactive isotopes and the impossiblity of randomness.

There's not much room for the Biblical mythology anymore. It's becoming debunked. The point is, this doesn't have to soften its impact on your life. If anything, it should be wonderful for you not to have to depend on a single text for everything.

How is it debunked exactly? Human advancement will not replace the need for God because He is unfathomable to understand. No matter how far we advance we will never attain Him in this life. We may delude ourselves in pride and think we are becoming like Him in this life but once the realization comes that we need Him that all falls away. I agree we do not need to depend on a single text for everything and I do not. I only use that text for what it is, a canon in the Greek means a measuring rod or rule of thumb if you will. Its not the sole means for truth. Thats a heresy to think it is. I know some fall into that trap but from the beginning it was not so. That phenomenon resulted from a revolt in the 16th century. It is not held by the universal faith. Keep in mind the word Katholikos means according to the whole. There is a paradosis of Faith that evolves through what pleases God to reveal to our understandings over time. Just as it pleases Him to reveal new understandings to science.

There is probably little I can say to convince you otherwise.

Jesus said: "seek and you shall find and knock and it shall be opened to you".

Unless you are willing to take the opportunity to do that and do it very adamantly you likely will persist in these apprehensions, however I promise you, if you do open your heart to the plausibility of God in sincere supplication you will see that He will answer those questions and gently dispell your fears. Try it, what have you got to loose?


Peace.

 

[Digit]

I could understand if you had read the Bible and said, Now this is a great moral code. I'm going to live my life by these practices because they make sense to me. and left it at that. The place where it gets nonsensical is when you begin attaching mythology. Why does a moral guidebook have to include a creation story? Why can't you just take the moral and say, okay, I love the morality in the Bible, and believe it to be absolute truth, but the mythology was obviously written at a time just after classical Rome. It doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

I'm not saying God is a crutch, but I think he's a gap filler. Humans have a need to know everything, so they fill in that gap beyond the limits of their own capabilities to precieve reality with God. Ancient tribal cultures did it with the forces of nature and topography. Ptolomy did it at the edges of his universal model, as did Gallileo. Descartes put god at the limits of his ability to philosophically reason through reality and existence. Newton placed him in the sector of Physics now occupied by General Relativity. Science has been pushing god's turf back. There's not much room for the Biblical mythology anymore. It's becoming debunked. The point is, this doesn't have to soften its impact on your life. If anything, it should be wonderful for you not to have to depend on a single text for everything.

If people were going to write a mythological text to fill the gaps as you say, I think they would do a far better job of making it more acceptable to us, because ultimately Christianity is not the sort of message people are going to want to hear. Bhuddism is, but not Christianity. I mean, who would form a picture of the afterlife that has no sex in it?!

Sorry, but the 'it's just a myth' theory has too many holes in it to be believable. Christianity has survived all this time even with it's somewhat alien claims, because it's true. Not because people have to do mental gymnastics to believe it, but because every carefully notated word in the Bible is true, and they speak truth to people.
Cheers,
Digit

 

[heron]

Here are some sites that collect individuals' reports of healings:
http://www.miracleshealing.com/mhs_index1.htm

Elijah Challenge - Egypt Report - Documented Healings

http://awesomepower.net/miracles.html (with list of linked articles)

http://www.born-again-christian.info/questions/answers.65.htm article with links

... you can keep Web-searching... there's lots more.

 

[heron]

There are a few on this thread... mixed in with general words of support.

http://christianforums.com/t6400133&page=2