Billions of people have HD video cameras in their pockets: why aren't we seeing lots of miracles on video?

[inocente]

Only God knows why He permitted your wife - or babies who have never had the opportunity to enjoy life - to die prematurely but there is certainly a reason apart from the physical causes. I’m not going to speculate but she could have suffered a far worse fate if she had survived…

Jesus didn’t promise all our prayers would be answered in this life. He chose to be tortured and crucified to show us we all have our crosses to bear, some far worse than others - like slaves and dissidents serving life sentences in prison in China and elsewhere. That is no consolation for those who are afflicted now but it is a cause for hope that we shall be reunited to those we love and have lost. I had a friend whose lovely twelve-year old daughter died of leukaemia after she had a remission and we all thought she had recovered in answer to our prayers. The mother kept asking me why God let her die but I knew nothing I could say would alleviate her grief. I probably quoted Pascal’s words: “Jesus is in agony until the end of the world”. In other words He shares our suffering and feels what we feel.

What more could He have done? One thing is certain: there has to be a limit to miracles - demonstrated by the fact that He could have saved Himself but chose not to even though the crowd mocked and jeered at him. It wasn’t because He was insane but because He identifies Himself with us and gives us the strength to follow Him to the bitter end of life on this earth - knowing we are never alone…

I can’t see how that’s in any way relevant. When so many Jews prayed in the Holocaust, and so many others have poured out their hearts in prayer, it is obscenely immoral to claim that God got some patients out of hospital a few days early in response to one person saying a quick prayer over a computer-generated list.

Obscenely immoral.

You guys saw a piece of research you thought confirmed your beliefs, and immediately became infatuated before you even considered the validity and morality of the claims. Which is why I asked you to cite Church teaching, which none of you have done.

Fools rush in where angels fear to tread. Perfect example of confirmation bias. The more we want to believe something, the more we should double-check everything.

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool” - Richard Feynman

 

[PumpkinCookie]

The reductio ad absurdum is that we don’t have to do anything because God will do everything for us! All we have to do is wait for things to happen and hope for the best…

I think this describes most of reality quite well actually. It’s not so much that we don’t have to do anything, but that we are unable. Can you make the rains fall? Can you make the stars burn? Do you pray: “God, please make the trees grow, please keep the nuclear forces balanced, please keep our planet in the proper orbit, etc?” I doubt it! This vast universe functions perfectly without any (name removed by moderator)ut from us whatsoever. So, why is the moral universe different?

Consider: by asking God to heal a sick child, aren’t you saying “God, please do the right thing. I know what is best in this situation, so take my advice and do what is best.” Isn’t that kind of absurd, if God is all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good? Why wouldn’t he always do what is best? Why would you have to convince him to do what is right? Do you also do rain-dances?

 

[Aloysium]

From what I understand there has been no public revelation since the death of the last apostle. Private revelation continues within our relationship with God. Some have been recognized by the Church as being significant in their time to help us grow in faith, hope and love. Through the grace of the Holy Spirit, the Church is able to discern what is an authentic call of Christ.

Conversion, I would see as a personal realization or revelation that connects us to God. Grace leads us through such experiences to grow in love and also understanding, guided by the Church.

I can’t imagine how one’s faith is going to hinge on the data obtained in a simple empirical study, in which one did not participate. However, in the context of one’s relationship with God, through such events, one can get an idea of how He works. In daily life, one may find some reminder of one’s spouse, for example, and it brings to mind that relationship, who they are, their traits and character. The object may be totally unrelated but it evokes feelings and memories of that person.The study discussed above was conducted in the same manner as other empirical experiments and the statistical results are valid, although the conclusion was tongue in cheek. I don’t think it could be replicated. It may be a miracle, in other words. Or, a weird statistical fluke as atheists would have it. The order behind the findings could very well be God, as He participates in our lives, listening to us when we pray. A number of people have noted within their experience, that when we do pray, it is He who calls us to share ourselves with Him.

We see what we expect to see, and God does not do miracles to impress us. This combination means that the OP is going to be out of luck.

Creation is all one huge miracle, all time and space, and everything in it. Small individual miracles, it seems, are meant to awaken us from a sleep that sees only the mundane, and also to show us how to adopt what has been revealed in Jesus Christ, to the challenges that arise in our particular time and situation.

 

[PRmerger]

I think this describes most of reality quite well actually. It’s not so much that we don’t have to do anything, but that we are unable. Can you make the rains fall? Can you make the stars burn?

No, but we do make plants grow. We do make medicines. We do create shelters, clothing, toys, art, literature…

So the “We can’t do anything about the weather so that means we can’t do anything about the physical universe (and therefore the moral universe)” is otiose.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

No, but we do make plants grow. We do make medicines. We do create shelters, clothing, toys, art, literature…

So the “We can’t do anything about the weather so that means we can’t do anything about the physical universe (and therefore the moral universe)” is otiose.

No, we cannot make anything grow. We can till soil, irrigate, and fertilize but the growth is all nature/God’s work. Aren’t we also nature/God’s work? Our imaginations produce many great and terrible things, true. Who created our imaginations though? Are they not the product of nature/God?

Actually this is related to my OP. People are saying “I see miracles everywhere.” I agree with this actually, but the problem here is that these miracles do not support Catholicism but some variety of pantheism.

In order for me to believe in Catholicism and reject pantheism or any other ism, I will need to see something truly beyond nature. I will need to see someone invoke Catholic dogma and then cause something impossible to happen. I think our ancient ancestors knew better than we do about this and filled their holy texts with such things. I want to see a column of fire, a horde of pigeons falling from the sky, a fig tree withering suddenly at the command of a prophet, something like this would convince me that I’m simply wrong about Catholicism. I accept the possibility that my thinking is wrong and that my conclusions are in error. However, I need some miraculous evidence because I’ve yet to come into contact with any convincing reasoning or other evidence.

 

[PRmerger]

No, we cannot make anything grow. We can till soil, irrigate, and fertilize but the growth is all nature/God’s work.

I think you need to re-think the above.

You started with some truths: we cannot make the stars burn and the rains fall.

However, we can indeed make things grow. Our human intervention is required in order to make corn and turnips appear on our plates.

This will NOT occur unless we act.
In contrast, stars will burn regardless of our actions.

God has given us the dignity of being co-creators with Him.

 

[PRmerger]

In order for me to believe in Catholicism and reject pantheism or any other ism, I will need to see something truly beyond nature.

I don’t think this will convince anyone who has an emotional rejection of Catholicism.

There were folks who saw Jesus perform miracles and be arisen after death, yet were not convinced and remained confirmed in their obduracy.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

I don’t think this will convince anyone who has an emotional rejection of Catholicism.

There were folks who saw Jesus perform miracles and be arisen after death, yet were not convinced and remained confirmed in their obduracy.

Do you think that emotions are more powerful than reason? Can we truly escape from reason? Do you think that people with an emotional attachment to Catholicism are immune to reason? For instance, if you saw Satyha Sai Baba perform a miracle, would you worship him as God? He has videos for you if you want some evidence. Or, if you encountered an undeniably true argument against Catholicism, would you be ready to leave? I like to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you would. Can you think of any examples of these kinds of arguments?

 

[PRmerger]

Do you think that emotions are more powerful than reason?

Errr… yes.

“I refuse to believe that Jesus is God, even though he rose from the dead, because yesterday one of his people ignored me when I wanted to talk to him.”

That’s an emotional reason for rejecting Christ that superceded his logic…and it’s a really bad reason, don’t you think?

 

[PumpkinCookie]

Errr… yes.

“I refuse to believe that Jesus is God, even though he rose from the dead, because yesterday one of his people ignored me when I wanted to talk to him.”

That’s an emotional reason for rejecting Christ that superceded his logic…and it’s a really bad reason, don’t you think?

Has anyone ever said that to you? That’s seems so irrational. Is a statement like this similarly irrational, or is it different:

“I don’t believe Satyha Sai Baba is God even though people have filmed him performing miracles because I already believe Jesus is God and the two beliefs are not compatible.”

Edit: I went to youtube to find a good video of a miracle being performed by Satyha Sai Baba, but there are a TON of Hindu miracle videos all over the place. Fascinating. I won’t link to them here, but why isn’t the Catholic world brimming over with miracles caught on video?

 

[PRmerger]

Has anyone ever said that to you?

Oh, yes, sir. I’ve heard this a multitude of times. “I left the Catholic Church because Father wouldn’t let me marry my sweetheart.” “I don’t believe in God because my cousin died at age 11”. “Sister Mary Joseph beat me with a ruler when it was actually Prudence McGillicuddy who threw the spitball. And I never believed since that time.”

Irrational, no?

“I don’t believe Satyha Sai Baba is God even though people have filmed him performing miracles because I already believe Jesus is God and the two beliefs are not compatible.”

So do you believe Baba is God?

 

[tonyrey]

I think this describes most of reality quite well actually. It’s not so much that we don’t have to do anything, but that we are unable. Can you make the rains fall? Can you make the stars burn? Do you pray: “God, please make the trees grow, please keep the nuclear forces balanced, please keep our planet in the proper orbit, etc?” I doubt it! This vast universe functions perfectly without any (name removed by moderator)ut from us whatsoever. So, why is the moral universe different?

Consider: by asking God to heal a sick child, aren’t you saying “God, please do the right thing. I know what is best in this situation, so take my advice and do what is best.” Isn’t that kind of absurd, if God is all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good? Why wouldn’t he always do what is best? Why would you have to convince him to do what is right? Do you also do rain-dances?

Why leave the loophole “most”?

 

[MPat]

Has anyone ever said that to you? That’s seems so irrational.

It might not be the kind of thing that one says often.

But it is the kind of thing one can easily see - in others.

Is a statement like this similarly irrational, or is it different:

“I don’t believe Satyha Sai Baba is God even though people have filmed him performing miracles because I already believe Jesus is God and the two beliefs are not compatible.”

No, it is neither similar nor irrational.

It is not similar, because emotion does not participate here.

It is not irrational, because adding existence of a video of something some non-Catholic or non-Christian does not contradict Catholicism. If it was rational to believe Catholicism before, it is still rational to do so afterwards.

In fact, Bible does mention non-Jews, non-Catholics and non-Christians doing something that looks like a miracle (for example, Exodus 7:10-12). So do the Fathers of the Church. So, wouldn’t the absence of such videos be more of an argument against Catholicism…?

Edit: I went to youtube to find a good video of a miracle being performed by Satyha Sai Baba, but there are a TON of Hindu miracle videos all over the place. Fascinating. I won’t link to them here, but why isn’t the Catholic world brimming over with miracles caught on video?

And here we have an example of reason being overcome by something - maybe emotion. You know that videos exist, you have seen them, you have talked about them - and yet, you still say “why isn’t the Catholic world brimming over with miracles caught on video?”, as if they didn’t exist. Perhaps you will even admit that adding “that would persuade me” would have been just as easy and far more accurate - and yet, you have said what you have said.

Or you can look at this:

I can’t see how that’s in any way relevant. When so many Jews prayed in the Holocaust, and so many others have poured out their hearts in prayer, it is obscenely immoral to claim that God got some patients out of hospital a few days early in response to one person saying a quick prayer over a computer-generated list.

Obscenely immoral.

You guys saw a piece of research you thought confirmed your beliefs, and immediately became infatuated before you even considered the validity and morality of the claims. Which is why I asked you to cite Church teaching, which none of you have done.

Fools rush in where angels fear to tread. Perfect example of confirmation bias. The more we want to believe something, the more we should double-check everything.

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool” - Richard Feynman

It is easy to see that the argument here is not logical - there is no logical contradiction between God both freely choosing to let someone be cured a bit sooner and freely choosing not to override the free will of the Nazis (especially given that Western Allies have been informed about Holocaust (almost miraculously, by “Witold’s Report”) and yet did not do much about it). Nor was any contradiction derived from those propositions.

But emotion stops the reason and the argument looks as if it would work.

Strawman (as I don’t think anyone has really claimed that the paper was truly good - only that it was interesting, that prayers for past unknown events are not inconsistent with Catholic doctrine, and that they are not supposed to change history) was also attacked for a similar reason.

That’s why the expression was “obscenely immoral” and not “self-contradicting” or “false”.

I see. So my wife died young of cancer because in the future no computer will randomly put her first name on a list which a researcher will ask someone of unknown faith to say a short prayer over.

Sorry to hear that… I’m sure that many of us (and readers) have already said a prayer for her soul…

 

[Little_Tiger]

On Baba -
youtu.be/VNMxQtwkIuk
God bless everyone!

 

[Little_Tiger]

This as well - integralworld.net/lane62.html
Be well all, and I wish you the peace of Christ Jesus the Lord!

 

[tonyrey]

Consider: by asking God to heal a sick child, aren’t you saying “God, please do the right thing. I know what is best in this situation, so take my advice and do what is best.” Isn’t that kind of absurd, if God is all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good? Why wouldn’t he always do what is best? Why would you have to convince him to do what is right? Do you also do rain-dances?

God always does what is best and doesn’t need to be convinced of anything but we need to express our faith, hope and love for Him and not regard Him as a remote Creator who takes no interest in what happens to us. If we never pray we are guilty of pride and churlish ingratitude for the gift of life and all the blessings we have received. We should be childlike in our prayers because He is our loving Father, not a distant deity devoid of the attribute we consider to be more precious than anything else: love which does its utmost for others. Such a God is not worth having - and doesn’t exist…

 

[tonyrey]

Do you think that emotions are more powerful than reason? Can we truly escape from reason? Do you think that people with an emotional attachment to Catholicism are immune to reason? For instance, if you saw Satyha Sai Baba perform a miracle, would you worship him as God? He has videos for you if you want some evidence. Or, if you encountered an undeniably true argument against Catholicism, would you be ready to leave? I like to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you would. Can you think of any examples of these kinds of arguments?

Miracles are not the monopoly of one religion or even of religion. Why should they be?

 

[PumpkinCookie]

I think you need to re-think the above.

You started with some truths: we cannot make the stars burn and the rains fall.

However, we can indeed make things grow. Our human intervention is required in order to make corn and turnips appear on our plates.

This will NOT occur unless we act.
In contrast, stars will burn regardless of our actions.

God has given us the dignity of being co-creators with Him.

We are part of nature and medicine/agriculture are applications of our imaginations to natural processes. We’re able to irrigate, plant, harvest, and fertilize but the actual growth is directly God’s doing.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

Oh, yes, sir. I’ve heard this a multitude of times. “I left the Catholic Church because Father wouldn’t let me marry my sweetheart.” “I don’t believe in God because my cousin died at age 11”. “Sister Mary Joseph beat me with a ruler when it was actually Prudence McGillicuddy who threw the spitball. And I never believed since that time.”

Irrational, no?

So do you believe Baba is God?

I don’t believe anyone is God except…God. I suppose it is within the realm of possibility that someone could know and believe Catholicism to be the truth of the universe and walk away because their feelings are hurt. More likely, they weren’t convinced anyway, and the emotional push was all they needed to walk out.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

Why leave the loophole “most”?

I’m not sure that God directly generates our thoughts. I don’t think it is possible to show the true source of our individual thoughts. The common sense approach is to suppose our thoughts are generated by our own distinct essences. That seems right to me, based on what I know, for now.