Atheist Response to Catholic Miracles

[Mike_from_NJ]

I’ve always wanted to know why atheists put so much effort into fighting something they claim does not exist. If you don’t believe, why do you care? Why join a site like this? Would you do the same on a Muslim site? Probably not.

I’d like to chime in on this question as well. When a person states that they are atheist or really any non-Christain (especially one who left the Catholic Church like I did as a teenager) the person who usually be told that they haven’t researched the matter enough. So given a call to research the faith and aspects of the faith, like miracles, by believers the disbeliever takes pains to study the matter. Though if the non-believer starts using that studying to pointing out flaws in specific items, again like miracles, or the faith in general suddenly some will question why the non-believer takes so much time to tackle these matters. In other words, the non-believer who earlier was told he hadn’t studied the faith enough now has studied it too much. I’ve said in other threads, there doesn’t appear to be a sweet spot for the non-believer where he has neither studied the faith too much or not enough.

 

[Culurecatholic]

I’ve always wanted to know why atheists put so much effort into fighting something they claim does not exist. If you don’t believe, why do you care? Why join a site like this? Would you do the same on a Muslim site? Probably not.

I’m a cultural Catholic, like my name says. The traditions and customs have molded my life. No, I don’t believe in gods, including yours. But, as a historian, I know how important culture and tradition is to the shaping of a nation. Why do you resent us?

 

[Michael68]

I’m a cultural Catholic, like my name says. The traditions and customs have molded my life. No, I don’t believe in gods, including yours. But, as a historian, I know how important culture and tradition is to the shaping of a nation. Why do you resent us?

I for one don’t resent you and applaud your Catholic culture.
I believe the main thing here is Faith. Having said that we must also remember that Faith is a gift. I strongly believe that miracles are not seen without Faith. I think most miracles fall under this.
With Fatima, we have a miracle seen by the Faithful and the not faithful.
The Faithful know what it is, the not faithful have a strange occurrence that maybe they will further investigate.

 

[in_servitude]

Look at the photographs taken when “it happened.” Many, if not most, are not looking up. They see nothing. As a matter of fact, they look disgruntled.

This is your evidence against the miracle? That you can read the minds of others in a photograph?

Even as a small child, raised in a heart-felt eastern European Catholicism, I couldn’t accept it. I had questions, and when I asked the nuns in school they hit me. When it was reported to my parents, they hit me.

It sounds like these people sinned against you. They took advantage of their power and your weakness, and, did so in the name of the Church. I do appologize for the injuries that they caused you.

The gist is: “You must believe! Don’t ask questions!” As a child, even at six and seven years old, I found all this stuff about a god questionable. When I asked it for something I got nothing. I was told by the “godly” nuns: “You’re not holy enough for what you want.”

It sounds terrible. Please know that the Church does not teach any of this stuff. People make mistakes, and it sounds like you got under their skin.

But when I asked Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy, they all delivered. Maybe not everything I wanted (I never got that Lost In Space play set), but I got something (I did get that Lost In Space laser gun set). As for the god? Nothing. Guess I wasn’t holy enough.

Well, there is a lot of theology that goes into prayer and treating God like a magical mechanical “Pez Dispenser.”

Anyway, back to miracles and the sun and Fatima and all that (when photos show that most people saw nothing).

You have a source for this? It contradicts the tens of thousands of affidavits collected, including those that were nearby without any foreknowledge of the event that was predicted.

When will a god (your god, the Protestant god, the Jewish god, the Muslim god, whatever god) actually deliver.

It turns out that there is pretty much nothing that God can do to convince someone intent on not being convinced. You might enjoy this little video. Recently SpaceX landed a rocket on a barge. But, someone takes the time to “debunk” this fact by taking advantage of a video artifact. SpaceX Video

As the very prominent website says, why does god hate amputees? It can make a sun spin (which hasn’t been proven), but it won’t heal someone who lost a limb? Not once? Just once?

Yeah, there is evidence this has happened. Guess what! It’s not going to be good enough for you. Wiki Link

The counter argument isn’t that the leg was healed, but that it was never gone in the first place. If SpaceX can be accused of faking a rocket recovery (and have the video to prove it), then anything can be denied.

Now?

What would you do if this happened? Convert to Catholicism?

I’ll always be culturally Catholic. I use an advent wreath (along with a menorah). I eat oplatki on Christmas Eve along with smoked fish I get ashes on Ash Wednesday. I eat only fish on Fridays. In many ways, I’m more culturally Catholic than most Catholics. But “miracles?” Where are they? Where is your god or any god?

Miracles abound in my everyday life. I personally find it to be a wonderful thing to have a relationship with God. And, it is my hope that this relationship continues to grow.

Psalm 42:9-12

9 By day may the LORD send his mercy, and by night may his righteousness be with me! I will pray to the God of my life,
10 I will say to God, my rock: “Why do you forget me? Why must I go about mourning with the enemy oppressing me?”
11 It shatters my bones, when my adversaries reproach me, when they say to me every day: “Where is your God?”
12 Why are you downcast, my soul, why do you groan within me? Wait for God, for I shall again praise him, my savior and my God.

The same question has been coming up for thousands of years…

 

[michaelArc]

In regards to Fatima, I don’t understand how anyone can so easily dismiss the fact that they were given a promise from heaven, made at least three months in advance, that there will be a miracle on a precise day, hour and place. Not the morning before, or the day after.

Secular newspapers of Lisbon, which were vehemently anti-religion, had reporters there. To their credit they reported objectively what they saw. Thousands of agnostics and atheists converted on the spot. Thousands more witnessed the miracle up to 32 miles away, many of whom had no knowledge of the event was even taking place.

Just because some people didn’t see it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. There will always be some who would deny what they have seen. There is also a school of thought that a natural phenomena caused by bright light may be able to affect observers psychologically, thus distorting their perception of reality.

Dismissing the miracle based on inconsistencies seems rather shortsighted. Someone who has never responded in faith to the Gospels which Fatima reaffirms, would naturally gravitate to this conclusion. After all, the whole point of Fatima is a call for us to respond to Our Lord in faith, hope, and charity.

 

[Michael68]

In regards to Fatima, I don’t understand how anyone can so easily dismiss the fact that they were given a promise from heaven, made at least three months in advance, that there will be a miracle on a precise day, hour and place. Not the morning before, or the day after.

Secular newspapers of Lisbon, which were vehemently anti-religion, had reporters there. To their credit they reported objectively what they saw. Thousands of agnostics and atheists converted on the spot. Thousands more witnessed the miracle up to 32 miles away, many of whom had no knowledge of the event was even taking place.

Just because some people didn’t see it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. There will always be some who would deny what they have seen. There is also a school of thought that a natural phenomena caused by bright light may be able to affect observers psychologically, thus distorting their perception of reality.

Dismissing the miracle based on inconsistencies seems rather shortsighted. Someone who has never responded in faith to the Gospels which Fatima reaffirms, would naturally gravitate to this conclusion. After all, the whole point of Fatima is a call for us to respond to Our Lord in faith, hope, and charity.

 

[ffg]

I’ve always wanted to know why atheists put so much effort into fighting something they claim does not exist. If you don’t believe, why do you care? Why join a site like this? Would you do the same on a Muslim site? Probably not.

C’mon Man!

At least qualify with the ones you’ve run into (at least use the word ‘some’).

It is great that Atheists are here.

I joined this site, not for the Catholic stuff (or people) - for a place to converse with non-Catholics!

 

[Russell_SA]

How do you atheist respond to the Miracle of the sun which happened in Fatima in 1917. There were some 70,000 people at the site witnessing the miracle happen which contained not only Catholics but many secular pro-government (anti-Catholic free masons) at the site claiming to have seen the spectacular event.
How would an atheist answer these claims. Is it possible that this could be a super natural working of God?

Also, how do you explain the Incorruptible bodies of the saints at the Vatican which are not deteriorating? In order for a body to be considered fully incorruptible by the Catholic Church the body must not show any sign of decay and must not stiffen. The body must remain as if the person just died. A popular example of this is Fr. Pio who died in 1968.

I will start with these two. There are many others we can talk about.

As an atheist I’d start with this as a response:

1. What is the track record of supernatural claims that, once studied in modern scientific processes and equipment, have ever concluded that the event that claimed to be the result of supernatural intervention indicated this at all? - Answer: Zero, Nada, Not Once, Never in the history of ever. That’s it’s track record.
   There is a million dollar prize by James Randi that has yet be collected for over two decades where if anyone claiming supernatural powers or miracles occurred that could go to him and bring in scientists to setup an independent study to look at those claims. FYI - So stop hiding all your access to the supernatural and get paid for your channeling abilities.
2. What is the track record for refuted claims of supernatural events? Too many to count.
3. What is the track record of people being mistaken for what they concluded to be what actually happened in reality? Again, too many to count.
4. How many times are religious people going to have to keep moving the goal post back from claims of “here is where the deity resides and operates in” = “area of reality we currently couldn’t investigate” to “Oh we can investigate that now and…Yup no magic found here.” - guess the magicians and priests and yogies have to move the yard stick again.
5. How do you tell the difference between “I don’t know what happened here because we can not repeat the experiment yet or know when it will occur again for us to investigate it.” to “I do, and it’s magic by my favorite deity.”

As to the specific claim of the sun moving about the sky…
Yes that did not happen. Not once, not ever. The physics alone makes this claim of a miracle as absurd as if participating in a discussion with a flat earther claimer. Sorry but you have to have a minimum understanding of reality before your (name removed by moderator)ut to the conversation should be accepted as an option to be taken seriously. Try this conversation with your colleagues at work and see if people don’t start leaving tin foil on your desk and badly hiding their snickering.

Bodies in the vadican - bring in scientists to study it and see what they conclude? Current, unbiased, noncatholic-pay-roll-apologist scientists and then have the study peer reviewed and published in a scientific magazine with the results.

Side note:
You can run into all kinds of miracle claimers, alien abducted people, flat earth society, sightings of fairies in people’s gardens, borrowers in living in people’s walls, monsters under the bed people, etc. They are all entitled to believe what they claim to have seen first hand. However, everyone else that did not witness this event are not justified in believing them that what they claim happened is what actually happened. Also, we are justified in believing someone if they claim to have a dog, even if we haven’t seen the dog ourselves. We can see the collar, the dog fur, the holes dug up in the back yard, the pictures of the dog, the bills for paying for all the dog food, etc. But if someone claims to have a pet dragon, the default position is immediate disbelief until the amount of evidence provided matches the amount of ridiculousness of their claim.

 

[in_servitude]

As an atheist I’d start with this as a response:

1. What is the track record of supernatural claims that, once studied in modern scientific processes and equipment, have ever concluded that the event that claimed to be the result of supernatural intervention indicated this at all? - Answer: Zero, Nada, Not Once, Never in the history of ever. That’s it’s track record.

Can you please provide a source for this?

There is a million dollar prize by James Randi that has yet be collected for over two decades where if anyone claiming supernatural powers or miracles occurred that could go to him and bring in scientists to setup an independent study to look at those claims. FYI - So stop hiding all your access to the supernatural and get paid for your channeling abilities.

It appears that James Randi does not understand the definition of supernatural. When God chooses to do something that is outside the physical world, it is a choice that God makes based on a relationship between Him and people. What you are describing here is “magic”. There is a difference.

1. What is the track record for refuted claims of supernatural events? Too many to count.

Please site a source where there is a refuted claim that the Catholic Chruch has ruled as “worthy of belief.”

1. What is the track record of people being mistaken for what they concluded to be what actually happened in reality? Again, too many to count.

I’d like to see a mistake made by the Catholic Church were something was supposedly supernatural, but the Catholic Church was later shown to be mistaken.

1. How many times are religious people going to have to keep moving the goal post back from claims of “here is where the deity resides and operates in” = “area of reality we currently couldn’t investigate” to “Oh we can investigate that now and…Yup no magic found here.” - guess the magicians and priests and yogies have to move the yard stick again.

I’m not sure what this #4 means, so I can’t respond.

1. How do you tell the difference between “I don’t know what happened here because we can not repeat the experiment yet or know when it will occur again for us to investigate it.” to “I do, and it’s magic by my favorite deity.”

Magic and supernatural events are two different things. Magic is material control of material objects where the laws of physics are defied. Catholic understanding of supernatural events involve a relationship between God and man.

As to the specific claim of the sun moving about the sky…
Yes that did not happen. Not once, not ever. The physics alone makes this claim of a miracle as absurd as if participating in a discussion with a flat earther claimer. Sorry but you have to have a minimum understanding of reality before your (name removed by moderator)ut to the conversation should be accepted as an option to be taken seriously. Try this conversation with your colleagues at work and see if people don’t start leaving tin foil on your desk and badly hiding their snickering.

Well, if this is the evidence that you have against the miracle at Fatima, then I do not hold out much hope on receivng citations on the claims you made above. Supernatural events are ones where the laws of physics are not maintained. So, your effort to use physics to disprove a supernatural event is non-sequiter.

Bodies in the vadican - bring in scientists to study it and see what they conclude? Current, unbiased, noncatholic-pay-roll-apologist scientists and then have the study peer reviewed and published in a scientific magazine with the results.

Padre Pio - he lived in the 20th century and exibited the stigmata. When the Catholic Church investigated, it did just as you said - it brought in an atheist doctor to do a prolonged study and give a report. The doctor’s conclusion? Hysteria. Padre Pio’s wounds would not heal because of his hysteria. This, of course, is nonsense. But, that was the official report he filed with the Vatican. We’re talking factual history here.

Side note:
You can run into all kinds of miracle claimers, alien abducted people, flat earth society, sightings of fairies in people’s gardens, borrowers in living in people’s walls, monsters under the bed people, etc. They are all entitled to believe what they claim to have seen first hand. However, everyone else that did not witness this event are not justified in believing them that what they claim happened is what actually happened. Also, we are justified in believing someone if they claim to have a dog, even if we haven’t seen the dog ourselves. We can see the collar, the dog fur, the holes dug up in the back yard, the pictures of the dog, the bills for paying for all the dog food, etc. But if someone claims to have a pet dragon, the default position is immediate disbelief until the amount of evidence provided matches the amount of ridiculousness of their claim.

I’m not sure what your side note has to do with this. People do lie. People do fabricate things. People do see things that are not real. So what? When the Catholic Church investigates a supernatural event, they obviously know these are possible explanations.

 

[Russell_SA]

Please site a source where there is a refuted claim that the Catholic Chruch has ruled as “worthy of belief.”
I’d like to see a mistake made by the Catholic Church were something was supposedly supernatural, but the Catholic Church was later shown to be mistaken.

Here’s one quick example that took 5 seconds of googling to find
slate.com/articles/health_and_science/new_scientist/2012/07/a_statue_of_jesus_oozing_holy_water_an_indian_skeptic_debunks_miracle.html

If you want a comprehensive list of all of them, that may be a bar too high to reach because I don’t know how many it would take for you to finally concede the point that miracles have never been linked to supernatural causes in the entire history of reality.

 

[Russell_SA]

Can you please provide a source for this?

The scientific community, the people whose job it is to study reality and all things associated with it. If supernatural was ever linked to reality, we would all know that study by now. Science is not a liberal conspiracy that works to hide a fundamental change of reality like the existence of the supernatural or magic or hogwarts or how to channel a level 3 healing spell on the sick. Scientists don’t care about people’s personal beliefs about reality, they just find the data and how it works, then leave it up to the public to decide what to do about that reality.

 

[Russell_SA]

It appears that James Randi does not understand the definition of supernatural. When God chooses to do something that is outside the physical world, it is a choice that God makes based on a relationship between Him and people. What you are describing here is “magic”. There is a difference.

This appears to be splitting hairs over the following example:
Here is Jar A with nothing in it and here is Jar B with supernatural transcendent marbles and here is Jar C with actual children’s marbles. I’ll mix up the jars without you seeing where they end up and then you point out which one is which. So as to magic vs supernatural, it’s the same difference as Jar A and Jar B. They may actually be different, but if we have no way of determining the difference, the default position is that they both contain nothing. There is no difference between supernatural involvement and an event with supernatural involvement that we can detect at this point so the default position is that it’s just cultural mythology with no actual basis in reality.

 

[Russell_SA]

I’d like to see a mistake made by the Catholic Church were something was supposedly supernatural, but the Catholic Church was later shown to be mistaken.

slate.com/articles/health_and_science/new_scientist/2012/07/a_statue_of_jesus_oozing_holy_water_an_indian_skeptic_debunks_miracle.html

5 second google search

 

[Russell_SA]

Magic and supernatural events are two different things. Magic is material control of material objects where the laws of physics are defied. Catholic understanding of supernatural events involve a relationship between God and man.

Yeah this has no explanatory information in it, just an assertion. Please see my previous reply on this issue.

 

[Russell_SA]

Padre Pio - he lived in the 20th century and exibited the stigmata. When the Catholic Church investigated, it did just as you said - it brought in an atheist doctor to do a prolonged study and give a report. The doctor’s conclusion? Hysteria. Padre Pio’s wounds would not heal because of his hysteria. This, of course, is nonsense. But, that was the official report he filed with the Vatican. We’re talking factual history here.

I’d like to see this peer reviewed and repeated now and see if the scientists don’t get irritated at the result for wasting their time.

 

[NM505StKate]

How do you atheist respond to the Miracle of the sun which happened in Fatima in 1917. There were some 70,000 people at the site witnessing the miracle happen which contained not only Catholics but many secular pro-government (anti-Catholic free masons) at the site claiming to have seen the spectacular event.
How would an atheist answer these claims. Is it possible that this could be a super natural working of God?

Also, how do you explain the Incorruptible bodies of the saints at the Vatican which are not deteriorating? In order for a body to be considered fully incorruptible by the Catholic Church the body must not show any sign of decay and must not stiffen. The body must remain as if the person just died. A popular example of this is Fr. Pio who died in 1968.

I will start with these two. There are many others we can talk about.

By looking into the sun long enough beyond the damage you will see things. It will vary from person to person but things will be seen. Several of the girl’s claims were vague enough to be countered and at least one was said after it happened. We didn’t have cameras or any type of recording device so we just have eyewitness claims which are not evidence enough.

Now for the bodies. Well I am assuming the bodies are kept in air tight containers which means there is nothing to get at them. They probably have been washed thoroughly so no bacteria can grow and embalmed. Of course they can be just really good statues.

 

[Russell_SA]

Well, if this is the evidence that you have against the miracle at Fatima, then I do not hold out much hope on receiving citations on the claims you made above. Supernatural events are ones where the laws of physics are not maintained. So, your effort to use physics to disprove a supernatural event is non-sequitur.

Well I have some “holy” medallions to sell you then. Helps you move up the line to be at the table of Jesus when you pass on and by pass all the red tape once your there. When the rapture comes, make sure to setup an account to pay me for my services as a left behind individual to take care of all your left behind pets too.