A
AgnosTheist
Guest
PRECISELY! And where are the miracles? Just in their heads. Catholics arent even better people than the rest of us (except muslims). I dont buy it. Its all just make-believe.
- Status
A
aristotle
Guest
Then what is your purpose in posting here?PRECISELY! And where are the miracles? Just in their heads. Catholics arent even better people than the rest of us (except muslims). I dont buy it. Its all just make-believe.
Clearly, you must accept that there is some credence to their claims, or at least a sufficient semblance of such, to continue to post here.
Catholics claim miracles. Miracles cannot be refuted, nor established, in and of themselves. If a miracle is necessary for the faith of a certain person, then that person can only wait and hope (or wait and not hope).
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
for sharing & exchanging ideas. i have learned a lot already.
i find the claims interesting, which is why i am still here. as of yet, i dont think they are what they are supposed to be (miracles). some are clever tricks (like the guadalupe painting), some are amazing natural phenomenon (like the incorruptibles)
this guy is able to refute a lot of ‘miracles’:
randi.org/
the million dollar challenge is still up.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
wouldn’t you like to live an extraordinary life?
You still don’t get it. It’s up to YOU
Holy Hour is not about YOU being holy, it’s about sitting and being with God in a holy place without distractions.
RE: The million $ guy refuting miracles - show me where he is refuting a miracle, like a tab or a link. I got tired of scrolling and looking at the pictures of himself and reading him write about himself.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
I forgot to welcome you. Have you heard of Roselyn Moss?
I just got this book. It’s really good.
amazon.com/Honey-Rock-Sixteen-Sweetness-Christ/dp/1586171151/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-4260207-2778511?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1189184003&sr=1-1
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
that would be a case to case basis.
No its up to God. What can humans do? Remember the stories (yeah I said ‘stories’ because i dont really believe it) about Paul & Constantine. They didnt do anything. They just went on with their lives and then KAZAAAM! God stepped in.
I dont have a “Randi in Action” link, but you could check this out:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Randi#Career_as_a_skeptic
Check
J
jimmy85
Guest
funny u said that, because skepticism cannot explain the logic of the miracles we have been discussing , those miracles can only be explained by religion.i just have a lot of logic. afterall thats how i make my living. error-control, troubleshooting, programming and making sense of things. i’m in IT.
Therefore right now skepticism lacks of logic, only religion is logical. because religion is giving a logical explanation of the phenomenon or miracles unlike skepticism.
sorry to hear that man,
anyway catholicism is not exclusively about “feelings” but it is about “faith”.
for example: I cant say that my feelings tell me that something is good or that something is wrong, that is just nonsense.
our feelings can decive us. It is better to rely in something more that our own feelings.
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
I agree. But if an alleged miracle can be done away with logic and rationalization, then its not really a miracle in the first place. So far there are no miracles here except those that exists in the mind of the faithful. Make-believe.
J
jimmy85
Guest
I disagree, the miracle have a logic and a rationalization for believers only because they have faith, althought they cannot explain them they know the reason of why the miracles happened.
Without faith you will never find a reason for those miracles and then you will state that those are phenomenons that happen by happenchance.
For exmaple: If we give a prove that Jesus did resurected, then you could go to the extreme of saying that Jesus resurected by happenchance or that the miracle was a phenomenon that has no explanation. while believers already know that it wasent by happenchance, and they are aware of its true meaning.
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
In the stories miracles were often made to create faith. Paul had not faith, and neither did Constantine. They believed because they witnessed something that defies reason.
The so called ‘miracles’ presented here can be reasoned with, so it failed the test. An event can only be considered a miracle if it defies logic and reasoning.
you are assuming too much. if your ‘proof’ is really an objective proof, then we cannot honestly refute it. we are not stupid, we know when to give in.
A
aristotle
Guest
Randi, for all his credit (as Schermer points out) has not been able to falsify one miracle, in all his career.
He cannot, because miracles are not repeatable. Simply because he can explain a non-miraculous way something occurred does not mean that there was no miracle. It just means the manner in which he reproduced a similar effect was likely not miraculous.
This is also why a 1 million dollar wager is safe. As miracles cannot be falsified, they cannot be verified either. Even if the great Randi were to experience a miracle, since he cannot repeat the occurrence, he cannot verify the occurrence.
He’d still be stuck.
A
aristotle
Guest
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
how do you define ‘miracle’? for me its anything that defies the laws of nature. He did expose as charlattans some people who claimed having supernatural powers. Like the guy who on T.V. was able to turn pages of a phone book without touching it.
in the stories jesus repeatedly healed people.
splitting the red sea on demand can be verified as defying the laws of nature. a miracle.
C
cheddarsox
Guest
it wasn’t a feeling. It was a definite experience. Not something I 'felt". And, as I mentioned, it was not in any way against any teaching of the faith, so I am not sure why others have told me it was Satan, etc.
I often sense a great deal of fear in very religious people, almost a sense of being haunted. Maybe they see things mere mortals are not able to.
C
cheddarsox
Guest
Is everything that exists merely in the mind make believe?
While I question the ultimate reality and meaning of many so called miracles…I don’t think it is wise to outright deny the importance of things that take place in the mind of a person.
That is where all progress, etc stems from. What we know, what we believe…and what our mind does with it.
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
Whatever the answer is, its always safe to assume that it is. Why? Because there have been tons of so called prophets who led people astray based on what they think they heard or seen. Look at Mohammad of Islam. Its all based on what he heard in his head. And now people are literally blowing up for it.
A
aristotle
Guest
We can use this definition. However, if we do so, then repeatability goes right out of the window.
Repeatability meaning repeatability by principle.
For example, maybe Jesus did heal people over and over. This would be natural for him. It would not be natural for us. It would be an exception to our damaged natures.
Repeatability by principle would mean: every time I drop a brick, it falls. Or, every time I pray “God, heal me of {insert problem here}” the problem would be removed. One works, the other doesn’t.
Miracles do not even fall into this category. If they did, they would be natural, and not supernatural.
For example, if the prayer I listed worked every time, it would not be a miracle, but simply a natural phenomenon (one that could theoretically be studied).
He did expose as charlattans some people who claimed having supernatural powers. Like the guy who on T.V. was able to turn pages of a phone book without touching it.
in the stories jesus repeatedly healed people.
Except here’s the problem. How do we really know the laws of nature had been violated? If I step on a stone over and over and a river parts over and over, one would expect there to be a predictable measurable interaction between my two actions. However, if one special person for a special reason were able to part a river once, and if this could not be repeated by a similar principle, then that would be super-natural, and so a good candidate for a miracle.
How would one refute that this happened, scientifically?
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
I don’t know what you experienced, but obviously it left a great impression on you. You don’t seem to think it was Satanic. BTW, you can talk about personal revelation if you leave it in that context, it’s like an opinion. I’d like to hear more about it. If God hugged you, that can be real. I sometimes get hugs too. We are humans, the CC realizes that, God knows that. Therefore the CC has a lot of “tactiles” to it, incense, candles, artwork, music.
Q
qui_est_ce
Guest
You believe Paul and Constantine were real people. You know they had a radical conversion because of some vision or “miracle.”
So, why don’t you believe in miracles? Also, by your logic, you would need a miracle in order to come back to the CC. The miracle has already happened. Can you guess what it is?
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
it would only be natural if it happens to everybody. otherwise what is natural for one guy can be supernatural for the rest of us. the latter is all that matters.
can be as simple as common sense. like if things fell upwards into the sky, thats good enough. no need for technicalities.
or if a person was able to turn randomly specified pages in a book on demand without physical contact and without moving any of the many scattered feathers around it. its good enough.
commons sense, most of the time. no need to be a rocket scientist.
there is no way. no way to replicate that without advanced gadgetry from the future. its good enough.
- Status