Free will, amputees, and Fatima

[Leela]

There are many prophecies in the Old Testament that a Messiah would come to liberate Israel. The Psalms were written over 900 years before the birth of Christ yet they contain references to a suffering Messiah, particularly Psalm 22:

“1 My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?
2 O my God, I cry in the daytime, but thou hearest not; and in the night season, and am not silent.
3 But thou art holy, O thou that inhabitest the praises of Israel.
4 Our fathers trusted in thee: they trusted, and thou didst deliver them.
5 They cried unto thee, and were delivered: they trusted in thee, and were not confounded.
6 But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people.
7 All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying,
8 He trusted on the Lord that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.
9 But thou art he that took me out of the womb: thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother’s breasts.
10 I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou art my God from my mother’s belly.
11 Be not far from me; for trouble is near; for there is none to help.
12 Many bulls have compassed me: strong bulls of Bashan have beset me round.
13 They gaped upon me with their mouths, as a ravening and a roaring lion.
14 I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels.
15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death.
16 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.
17 I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me.
18 They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.
19 But be not thou far from me, O Lord: O my strength, haste thee to help me.
20 Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling from the power of the dog.
21 Save me from the lion’s mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.
22 I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee.
23 Ye that fear the Lord, praise him; all ye the seed of Jacob, glorify him; and fear him, all ye the seed of Israel.
24 For he hath not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard.
25 My praise shall be of thee in the great congregation: I will pay my vows before them that fear him.
26 The meek shall eat and be satisfied: they shall praise the Lord that seek him: your heart shall live for ever.
27 All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the Lord: and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before thee.
28 For the kingdom is the Lord’s: and he is the governor among the nations.
29 All they that be fat upon earth shall eat and worship: all they that go down to the dust shall bow before him: and none can keep alive his own soul.
30 A seed shall serve him; it shall be accounted to the Lord for a generation.
31 They shall come, and shall declare his righteousness unto a people that shall be born, that he hath done this.”

Do you really see something in there to suggest that Jesus was the particular Messiah looked for? The above images are not exactly uncany in their accuracy and specificity.

Leela, according to you scribes invented the finest moral teaching ever given to mankind,

No, I don’t think that. I think that Jesus probably existed and was a teacher, but nothing he said was an orginial moral teaching except, perhaps, his teaching that we forgive one another.

imagined a life and death reflecting that teaching,

…and tell the story in such way as to be consistent with many Jewish prophecies? Wouldn’t that be pretty easy to do after the fact?

instituted an organization which has survived for over 2000 years and deceived countless millions of people in every country on earth, including many eminent scientists and philosophers, into believing their legend is true.

Isn’t this precisely what you think about other non-Christian religions of the world?

This would be a greater miracle than the Resurrection!

I don’t think so at all, but at least you’ve grasped the question at hand in believing the claims of miracles made by religions based on 2000 year old texts. It is only rational to believe that such a miracle happened if it would be even more miraculous for the claims to be false and be explained through some alternative explanation.

You have not answered my questions: Is the greatest love is to give one’s life for one’s friends?

I can imagine circumstances where such an act could be a demonstartion of love. I don’t know if we could ever argue that a particular act is the greatest possible act of love. Why do you ask?

Is there a solution to the problem of evil? Does the problem of evil even exist?

As I understand the problem of evil, it is about how a good, all-powerful God could allow evil. Since I don’t believe in God, I don’t have this question. It is only a problem for believers. It is an interesting one because it is one of the few occasions where the believer has to give a more nuanced answer than “God did it.” Lots of believers have come up with more or less complicated answers to this question while trying to avoid “God did it.” Maybe in thinking about this question, believers will come to understand that such complicated (relative to “God did it”) explanantions as Darwinian evolution are not any worse for being complicated. Sometimes simple answers are too simple as in the problem of evil.

If you believe we exist by chance I suppose you also believe good and evil are just human inventions…

I don’t believe we exist by chance. I don’t know why the universe exists. I just don’t think that you do either.

I don’t think that good and bad are human inventions. The difference is that I don’t see morality as concerns for pleasing or angering gods. I think morality is about human well-being.

 

[wcknight]

Firstoff no other religion has a nearly continusous line of saints who performed hundreds of miracles ALL in the name of Jesus and all believing in the divinity of Christ. IF there are please name ONE.

Second, each and every saint who performed these miracles proclaim and confirm the teachings and stories of scriptures about Jesus as being true. None have contradicted the gospels in any way. None have proclaimed any other faith as either being true nor having any merit.

SO it is NOT only the new testament that says these things about Jesus are true BUT all the saints and folks who have consistently proclaimed his life and teachings. IF there are muslim or buddhist or mormon miracle workers out there, then please name ONE. There are many, many Catholic miracle workers, St Padre Pio, St Catherine of Sinna, Blessed Martin De Porres, St Rose of Lima, St Theresa of Lisieux, St Anthony of Padua, all the Apostles, in nearly every century, there have been one or more CATHOLIC miracle workers of note.

Where are all the Protestants, mormons, muslims, buddhist, shintos, hindus or whatever ??? Please name ONE even close to one of ours.

 

[Leela]

Firstoff no other religion has a nearly continusous line of saints who performed hundreds of miracles ALL in the name of Jesus and all believing in the divinity of Christ. IF there are please name ONE.

Of course Christian miracle stories include attributions of those miracles to the truth of Christianity. Why would someone of a different religion attribute her miracles to belief in Jesus? The way it works is people of whatever faith claim that the miracles they tell about prove that their own religion is true. It is a standard formula.

Second, each and every saint who performed these miracles proclaim and confirm the teachings and stories of scriptures about Jesus as being true. None have contradicted the gospels in any way. None have proclaimed any other faith as either being true nor having any merit.

It would make no sense for Christian miracle stories to contradict Christian teaching. This isn’t evidence of Christianity’s validity, it just means that claiming that a miracle contradicts your own religion would defeat the purpose of miracle claims.

SO it is NOT only the new testament that says these things about Jesus are true BUT all the saints and folks who have consistently proclaimed his life and teachings. IF there are muslim or buddhist or mormon miracle workers out there, then please name ONE. There are many, many Catholic miracle workers, St Padre Pio, St Catherine of Sinna, Blessed Martin De Porres, St Rose of Lima, St Theresa of Lisieux, St Anthony of Padua, all the Apostles, in nearly every century, there have been one or more CATHOLIC miracle workers of note.

Where are all the Protestants, mormons, muslims, buddhist, shintos, hindus or whatever ??? Please name ONE even close to one of ours.

Of course there are claims of miracles from every religion. If you just want ONE, how about a modern day miracle worker:

Sathya Sai Baba is a south Indian guru with literally millions of followers. Thousands claim to be eye witnesses to his miracles. They believe he was born of a virgin, has raised the dead and materializes objects. And Sai Baba is not the only mystic or yogi said to be performing such feats in this day and age. The standard claims of walking on water and raising the dead and flying with out the aid of technology, parthogenesis, materializing objects, reading minds, telling the future, are all being made about various “living gods” right now. All of these claims have been made about my ONE example, Sai Baba the south Indian guru, and attested to by an huge numbers of eye witnesses.

So you don’t think that he is some David Koresh of Hinduism, know that his followers threw a birthday party for him and a million people showed up. A million!

Now let me guess your reaction to these claims. You will surely try to learn as much as you can about Sai Baba. If you are a “doubting Thomas” you will probably be booking a flight to India to see for yourself. Or you may be so impressed that so many other people believe in these miracles that they must be true. How could a million people be wrong? Why that would be a greater miracle than what is claimed by these people!

No, I doubt that will be your reaction at all. You will discount these claims without thinking twice about them. You know that such devotees have a strong desire to believe swuch things about their leader, and that these things just don’t happen. But somehow, you find such stories compelling in the context of 2000 year old claims made by people who knew less than nothing about science (I say “less than” because they “knew” so many things that were not true). You are right to dicount the claims about Sai Baba or Muhammed or Krishna, or Mithras, or Apollo, or Isis, or Baal. I just can’t understand why you find the same sorts of claims about Yahweh so interesting.

 

[tonyrey]

Do you really see something in there to suggest that Jesus was the particular Messiah looked for? The above images are not exactly uncanny in their accuracy and specificity.

This is but one example of many but are you open-minded enough to read through all the books of the Prophets?

“I think that Jesus probably existed and was a teacher, but nothing he said was original moral teaching except, perhaps, his teaching that we forgive one another.”

You need to support your claim by referring to specific sources. In the meantime, what about loving your enemies? Turning the other cheek? Blessing those who curse you, doing good to those who hate you , praying for those who persecute you and even kill you?

“…and tell the story in such way as to be consistent with many Jewish prophecies? Wouldn’t that be pretty easy to do after the fact?”

There were others who claimed to be the Messiah. If the Gospels are false why was Jesus singled out as the true Messiah by many of the Jews and subsequent generations? The Romans and the Sanhedrin would have seized the slightest opportunity of exposing a fraud yet no evidence has survived that they did so. There is a hint in the Gospels that the Apostles would be accused of stealing their Master’s body. But what would be their motive? And why was the body never found?

Nor have you explained the motive of inventing such a tissue of lies? What did the alleged liars stand to gain by misrepresenting the facts?

*Isn’t this precisely what you think about other non-Christian religions of the world?"

Not at all. All religions teach the same fundamental truths - that we are spiritual as well as physical beings, that there is cosmic justice and (with the exception of some forms of Buddhism) there is an afterlife in which goodness brings its own reward and evil its own punishment.

“I don’t think so at all, but at least you’ve grasped the question at hand in believing the claims of miracles made by religions based on 2000 year old texts. It is only rational to believe that such a miracle happened if it would be even more miraculous for the claims to be false and be explained through some alternative explanation.”

The claims of Christianity are not based solely on 2000 year old texts but on texts dating from 3000 years to the present day! And not solely on texts but on fundamental truths about love and compassion, on the lives of saints and mystics, on the pioneering work of monks and nuns in universities, schools, hospitals, orphanages and hospices, and on the personal experiences of millions of ordinary people inspired by the example of Christ. “By their fruits you shall know them”.

“I can imagine circumstances where such an act could be a demonstration of love. I don’t know if we could ever argue that a particular act is the greatest possible act of love. Why do you ask?”

Can you produce an example of greater love than giving your life for your friends? If not, your objection is based on prejudice rather than evidence. I ask because you are trying to disparage the character and moral teaching of Jesus and have failed to do so.

“As I understand the problem of evil, it is about how a good, all-powerful God could allow evil.”

I specifically referred to the practical problem of explaining the horrific amount of evil and injustice in the world, with particular reference to the diabolical torture inflicted by the Nazis on Jewish children. You have not ventured to give a natural explanation.

The metaphysical problem is a non-starter! If God is all-powerful how could He not allow evil? To do so would entail preventing us from exercising our freedom and shaping our own destiny.

“Darwinian evolution is not any worse for being complicated.”

On the contrary, Darwinism oversimplifies by attributing all biological development to random mutations and natural selection. NeoDarwinism oversimplifies still further by attributing the origin of life to fortuitous combinations of molecules. Neither explains
the origin of matter, physical energy, organization, complexity, consciousness, rationality, freedom and purposeful activity.

“I don’t believe we exist by chance. I don’t know why the universe exists. I just don’t think that you do either.”

If you don’t know why the universe exists why not believe we exist by chance? After all, we have emerged, according to NeoDarwinism, for no reason or purpose from atomic particles.

“I don’t think that good and bad are human inventions. The difference is that I don’t see morality as concerns for pleasing or angering gods. I think morality is about human well-being.”

If good and evil are not human inventions they must be objective facts. Morality is about human well-being but why restrict it to human beings? Why not animals and other beings? Don’t they have any rights?

But “well-being” is really a tautology when you are trying to explain morality. What does well-being consist of? Good things! What are good things and what makes them good? If you are a Neo-Darwinist you are compelled to answer, if you answer at all, anything that favours survival - because you believe we exist solely as the result of random mutations and natural selection. And the survival of the species is more important than the survival of the individual. So there is no such thing as justice, equality or rights in your scheme of things because we are just cogs in the blind machine of nature. What happens then, to your concern for human well-being? It becomes no more than a futile, unreasonable desire doomed to bring frustration and misery because it does not correspond to reality.

 

[Leela]

This is but one example of many

I don’t know what you are talking about. I keep asking for an example of a prophecy that you find interesting. I can’t tell what is being prophecized let alone what you find interesting about the quoted passage.

but are you open-minded enough to read through all the books of the Prophets?

I’ve read the Bible, if that’s what you mean.

“I think that Jesus probably existed and was a teacher, but nothing he said was original moral teaching except, perhaps, his teaching that we forgive one another.”

You need to support your claim by referring to specific sources. In the meantime, what about loving your enemies? Turning the other cheek? Blessing those who curse you, doing good to those who hate you , praying for those who persecute you and even kill you?

I’ll give sources when you say what you think Jesus taught that was original. The above “truning the other cheek”, etc are examples of Jesus teaching that we should forgive one another which I’ve said is the one thing (and a very important thing) that Jesus taught that other spiritual teachers in his or previous generations did not teach.

“…and tell the story in such way as to be consistent with many Jewish prophecies? Wouldn’t that be pretty easy to do after the fact?”

There were others who claimed to be the Messiah. If the Gospels are false why was Jesus singled out as the true Messiah by many of the Jews and subsequent generations? The Romans and the Sanhedrin would have seized the slightest opportunity of exposing a fraud yet no evidence has survived that they did so. There is a hint in the Gospels that the Apostles would be accused of stealing their Master’s body. But what would be their motive? And why was the body never found?

It would be easy to come up with various scenarios to explain the above, but they would only be speculation. If I gave one of these scenarios, you would say that it doesn’t around very likely. If I thenb gave another one, you would say that it doesn’t sound very likely either. But no matter how unlikely any of these possible scenarios would be, they only need to be more likely than the miracles that they would explain. As we’ve already discussed, the relevent standard for claiming a miracle happened is that such scenarios explaining the event would need to be even more miraculous. Is it really so miraculous that a body was never found? If so, there are a lot of unsolved missing person cases that must actually be miracles.

Nor have you explained the motive of inventing such a tissue of lies? What did the alleged liars stand to gain by misrepresenting the facts?

As I’v esaid before, these sorts of stories don’t get fabricated out of whole cloth. They start with eye witness accounts that are often exaggerated, and are later exaggerated or distorted in subsequent retellings. We also know for a fact that changes were made to this story because we have a lot of diverse manuscripts, and we can see how changes or errors where copied in later manuscripts.

*Isn’t this precisely what you think about other non-Christian religions of the world?"

Not at all. All religions teach the same fundamental truths - that we are spiritual as well as physical beings, that there is cosmic justice and (with the exception of some forms of Buddhism) there is an afterlife in which goodness brings its own reward and evil its own punishment.

But you said,"…instituted an organization which has survived for over 2000 years and deceived countless millions of people in every country on earth, including many eminent scientists and philosophers, into believing their legend is true."

You don’t believe that the legends of other religions are true. The only difference between us is that I don’t think the Christian legend is true, either, and I doubt this legend for the same reasons that you doubt that Muhammed flew to heaven on a winged horse or that Joseph Smith found some magic plates or that the SouthIndian Guru Sai Baba is a modern day living god, who can materialize objects out of thin air and heal the sick as thousands of eye-witnesses attest.

 

[Leela]

“I don’t think so at all, but at least you’ve grasped the question at hand in believing the claims of miracles made by religions based on 2000 year old texts. It is only rational to believe that such a miracle happened if it would be even more miraculous for the claims to be false and be explained through some alternative explanation.”

The claims of Christianity are not based solely on 2000 year old texts but on texts dating from 3000 years to the present day! And not solely on texts but on fundamental truths about love and compassion, on the lives of saints and mystics, on the pioneering work of monks and nuns in universities, schools, hospitals, orphanages and hospices, and on the personal experiences of millions of ordinary people inspired by the example of Christ. “By their fruits you shall know them”.

I can’t see how the fact that people do good works is any evidence that the legend of Jesus is true. People of other religions and no religion do good works as well, and we agree that these acts are no evidence for the truth of any other religion’s dogma.

“I can imagine circumstances where such an act could be a demonstration of love. I don’t know if we could ever argue that a particular act is the greatest possible act of love. Why do you ask?”

Can you produce an example of greater love than giving your life for your friends? If not, your objection is based on prejudice rather than evidence.

The love of a mother for her child? Donating a kidney to someone you don’t even know? Doesn’t this all depend on the circumstances? Can’t living for someone sometimes be a greater sacrifice than dieing for someone?

This isn’t an issue of predjudice or evidence. What sort of evidence could you give that there is no greater love than giving your life for a friend?

I ask because you are trying to disparage the character and moral teaching of Jesus and have failed to do so.

Disparage Jesus? Just because I don’t believe that Jesus is God doesn’t mean that I have any criticisms to make about his character.

“As I understand the problem of evil, it is about how a good, all-powerful God could allow evil.”

I specifically referred to the practical problem of explaining the horrific amount of evil and injustice in the world, with particular reference to the diabolical torture inflicted by the Nazis on Jewish children. You have not ventured to give a natural explanation.

I don’t understand what sort of explanation you are looking for. People are capable of really bad things especially when the view others as les than human. Why does that need explanation?

The metaphysical problem is a non-starter! If God is all-powerful how could He not allow evil? To do so would entail preventing us from exercising our freedom and shaping our own destiny.

If you say so, but it seems to be a big issue among Christians. There is a whole branch of theology which deals with the issue.

“I don’t believe we exist by chance. I don’t know why the universe exists. I just don’t think that you do either.”

If you don’t know why the universe exists why not believe we exist by chance? After all, we have emerged, according to NeoDarwinism, for no reason or purpose from atomic particles.

Chance isn’t an explanation. Saying that something is random is just to say that you can’t predict it. It is just a way of saying “I don’t know.”

I don’t know why some people think that there purposes ought to come from somewhere outside themselves.

“I don’t think that good and bad are human inventions. The difference is that I don’t see morality as concerns for pleasing or angering gods. I think morality is about human well-being.”

If good and evil are not human inventions they must be objective facts. Morality is about human well-being but why restrict it to human beings? Why not animals and other beings? Don’t they have any rights?

It is reasonable to think of morals as facts. I don’t see any hard line between facts and values.

But “well-being” is really a tautology when you are trying to explain morality. What does well-being consist of? Good things! What are good things and what makes them good? If you are a Neo-Darwinist you are compelled to answer, if you answer at all, anything that favours survival - because you believe we exist solely as the result of random mutations and natural selection. And the survival of the species is more important than the survival of the individual. So there is no such thing as justice, equality or rights in your scheme of things because we are just cogs in the blind machine of nature. What happens then, to your concern for human well-being? It becomes no more than a futile, unreasonable desire doomed to bring frustration and misery because it does not correspond to reality.

We have lots of other human purposes than mere survival. Well-being is a very flexible term but there are a lot of aspects of human well-being that I’m sure we can a gree on. We’d both cheer for low infant mortality rates, low crime rates, high literacy rates, low poverty rates, high life expectancies, human rights, etc.

 

[Shike]

I don’t know why some people think that there purposes ought to come from somewhere outside themselves.

Oh come now, have you even given it some thought why someone might think that? Or are you just using this for rhetorical flare?

It seems to me that it is reasonable to hold that one’s ultimate purpose comes from somewhere outside one’s self… one’s existence obviously does.

If you don’t try to walk in another’s shoes you won’t learn very much.

 

[wcknight]

You’re right I don’t find your example compelling at all. I’ve never heard of him, and I doubt many folks here have either. I’m sure that may be some folks out there claiming all sorts of miraculous events, but most have come up as charlatans or hoaxes. You may make the same claims about the saints, but the Church goes through much investigation to verify claimed miracles.

It’s a shame you can’t believe in much beyond your own experiences. Maybe some day you will experience something that expands your perception of what is real and what is myth. Or maybe you will meet and believe someone who you can trust enough not to think they are either deceived, delusional, or misguided.

In math and philosphy there is only one absolute truth, it either is, or it is not. I find it ironic that God chose the name “Yahweh” which in hebrew means “I am”. It’s a simple statement that says it all, God exists, nothing else matters. I hope one day you come to realize that, but even if you don’t, good luck to you.

SInce you frequent this site regularly, I think you want to believe but you just have not found the definitive argument that makes it all come together. Unless you really think, you can awaken all us delusional folks from our fantasies. I assure you, the latter is virtually impossible.

 

[wcknight]

As far as comparing saints and their miracles versus these other shysters, time will tell who the real saints are and who the pretenders are. With the Church, real saints continue doing miracles even after they have died.

 

[Leela]

Oh come now, have you even given it some thought why someone might think that? Or are you just using this for rhetorical flare?

It seems to me that it is reasonable to hold that one’s ultimate purpose comes from somewhere outside one’s self… one’s existence obviously does.

I can understand the desire to have a purpose given to you, but I don’t understand why people believe that the uiniverse is somehow obligated to provide them with a purpose.

Questions about meaning and purpose are hard to articulate. What does it even mean to say that something means something? As a philosphical pragmatist, I find that it gives clarity to thought to always try to understand beliefs in terms of their consequences in lived exerience. To say “what does this mean?” or “what is this for?” whether talking about the usage of a term or the purpose of a hammer amounts to “how is this used?” So, to ask, “what is the meaning of life?”, is to ask, “how is life used?”

Life is clearly used in lots of different ways. The most general thing we could say is that life is used to pursue happiness. It is what everyone does with their lives to greater or lesser success in one way or another. And I’m not sure that we will ever come up with a single one-size-fits-all solution to how this universal purpose is achieved. Some people mistake physical pleasure for happiness and in doing so miss the mark. Others seem to be succesful in pursuing happiness by denying themselves all physical pleasure and holing up in a cave and meditating for 20 years. Some people pursue happiness through a denial of earthly happiness in hope for future happiness after death. Other people seem to find happiness pursuing a middle way that accepts mundane pleasures in moderation taking them for what they are while seeking deeper joy in things that result in a happiness through loving others and being loved that can sustain one even through significant pain. I tend to think this middle way is best for me, but I don’t know. We are all working out our answers to the question of purpose in our lives in the act of living.

Evolutionary theory certainly doesn’t tell us what our purpose is. It may be thought of as a great burden to not know what we are supposed to do with our lives and a great responsibility to figure it out. Note that it is a burden that only presents itself once a lot of other fundamental needs have been met (when we are hungry or tired or cold it is very clear what we should do), but it would still be a great relief to me and many others to be told by some authority what our purpose is so that we wouldn’t have to create or find our own purposes. But the fact that it would be nice to have purpose come from outside ourselves does not mean that the universe is obliged to provide an easy answer.

What external authority could even be thought of as legitimate on the question of our individual purpose? Even if you claim that the Church is the legitimate authority to say what your purpose is, you have still personally decided to accept that authority. Then the authority must have been yours to give. Such an attempt to shirk the responsibility of finding your own purpose fails, since one must constantly decide to accept the Church’s authority and that acceptance can only happen on your own authority. Everyone has to work out his own salvation, so to speak (not that I think there is anything to be saved from other than our own desire for greater meaning.) Personally, I don’t think of myself (or anyone else) as playing any great part in a cosmically significant story, and I don’t think I usually have a need to feel that way. Whenever I do start to think along those lines, I note the narcisism or solipsism of such desires. I don’t want to live as though the world owes me anything, especially not a lead part in a great cosmic play. I think it is better to simply say “yes” to life, and for me, that “yes” and learning to give it is the meaning of life.

 

[Leela]

You’re right I don’t find your example compelling at all. I’ve never heard of him, and I doubt many folks here have either. I’m sure that may be some folks out there claiming all sorts of miraculous events, but most have come up as charlatans or hoaxes. You may make the same claims about the saints, but the Church goes through much investigation to verify claimed miracles.

Here is an interesting article about how teh Vatican investigates miracles:
slate.com/id/2090198/

"Monica Besra, a Bengali woman from a remote Indian village, was reportedly suffering from a malignant ovarian tumor when she went, in 1998, to a hospice founded by Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity. Nuns at the mission reportedly placed a medallion with Teresa’s image on Besra’s abdomen, and the tumor disappeared.

Indian physicians who treated the woman, however, told a reporter from the Times of London that during the nine months before she arrived at the hospice, Besra had received drugs to treat tubercular adenitis, and that the tumor was actually a tubercular cyst. The treating physicians say they were never contacted by Vatican officials. "

More here:

time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,501021021-364433,00.html

"All this irritates Monica’s husband Seiku. “It is much ado about nothing,” he says. “My wife was cured by the doctors and not by any miracle.”

 

[Shike]

I can understand the desire to have a purpose given to you, but I don’t understand why people believe that the uiniverse is somehow obligated to provide them with a purpose.

Basically, what you mean is that it’s not logically necessary that someone would have a purpose… but that wasn’t what you said.

So, to ask, “what is the meaning of life?”, is to ask, “how is life used?”

But how do you use something, you use it for a purpose or an end goal. Now why can’t there be an ultimate end goal for a human life? Why not?

But the fact that it would be nice to have purpose come from outside ourselves does not mean that the universe is obliged to provide an easy answer.

What’s easy about following someone who ended up crucified? The Christian life is simple, not easy.

Even if you claim that the Church is the legitimate authority to say what your purpose is, you have still personally decided to accept that authority. Then the authority must have been yours to give. Such an attempt to shirk the responsibility of finding your own purpose fails, since one must constantly decide to accept the Church’s authority and that acceptance can only happen on your own authority.

So… we are free agents.

Personally, I don’t think of myself (or anyone else) as playing any great part in a cosmically significant story, and I don’t think I usually have a need to feel that way. Whenever I do start to think along those lines, I note the narcisism or solipsism of such desires. I don’t want to live as though the world owes me anything, especially not a lead part in a great cosmic play.

The lead is God, don’t confuse the Protagonist with us.

I think it is better to simply say “yes” to life, and for me, that “yes” and learning to give it is the meaning of life.

And perhaps that “yes” we all have the opportunity to give culminates to a common goal.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Padre Pio prayed for healing for I think it was a little girl who had no vision, not even an eyeball and the eyeball grew back! Wow! God granted the girl a new eyeball! I know Jesus healed a man’s ear that was cut off by placing the ear back on the man’s head. Maybe God wants those amputee victims not to hope in a new arm or leg, but rather hope for spiritual wholeness and for things spiritual…

IOW, forget reality, & hope in some mumbo-jumbo for the reality of which there is not a scrap of evidence. This is a typical Christian evasion. the alleged miracle looks impressive only if one completely ignores the millions of people to whom MiracleGod (as he may be called) gives no help at all. No doubt his “goodness” is proved by allowing them to be maimed or tortured or killed or harmed in the first place . If that’s goodness, he can keep it - it looks like hatred of the human race for such a god to behave is such a horrible way.​

maybe they have something in particular to benefit from by not having or by not ever having the limb they are missing…maybe others spiritually benefit by their kind acts to that person. Maybe it is just not in God’s plan, maybe it is exactly what the apologist says too.

IOW, the only people whose prayers God hears are Saints What is the point of praying if one is not one ? Instead of wasting time on idiocies such as prayer, we should be taking steps to get what we want: prayer is a waste of breath & time & effort, of much less use than than a 12-step programme; they get something done, unlike prayer.​

“Miraculous” healings are of no relevance or good to anyone but the person cured & that person’s family. A real God would not leave 99.99999995 % of people in the lurch - & a good God would have mercy on those who are sick with incurable maladies. To judge from his inactivity, this good God is a fiction, a fantasy, a consoling lie. As for the healings, most of these alleged miracles are either frauds, or misdiagnosed events.

 

[tonyrey]

“People of other religions and no religion do good works as well, and we agree that these acts are no evidence for the truth of any other religion’s dogma.”

We don’t agree at all. I believe there is much that is true in other religions. Christianity does not have a monopoly of miracles!

“What sort of evidence could you give that there is no greater love than giving your life for a friend?”

It’s a question of simple logic. If you give your life you give every atom of your physical being! What more can you give? To give your life for others presupposes that you live for them while you can but to die for them is the supreme test of a love that is courageous and totally unselfish.

“Just because I don’t believe that Jesus is God doesn’t mean I have any criticisms to make about his character.”

If you have no criticisms to make of Jesus you believe his life reflected his teaching.

“I don’t understand what sort of explanation you are looking for. People are capable of really bad things especially when they view others as less than human. Why does that need explanation?”

The very fact you ask the question shows you don’t understand the enormity of the problem or grasp the full implications of human freedom. No animal is capable of premeditated atrocities on a vast scale. It is not a question of insanity, ignorance or any other mitigating factor.To take sheer delight in having others totally in your power, constantly devising new ways of torturing them and killing them in cold blood is sheer, undiluted evil for which there can never be any excuse or justification.The only way to evade this conclusion is to reject the reality of evil (and freedom and responsibility).

(The metaphysical problem is a non-starter! If God is all-powerful how could He not allow evil? To do so would entail preventing us from exercising our freedom and shaping our own destiny.)
“If you say so, but it seems to be a big issue among Christians. There is a whole branch of theology which deals with the issue.”

So what? It is also the standard weapon used by atheists! But that doesn’t mean I’m wrong. If you believe evil is an insurmountable difficulty for believers the onus is on you to refute my explanation.

"Chance isn’t an explanation. Saying that something is random is just to say that you can’t predict it. It is just a way of saying “I don’t know.” "

If chance isn’t an explanation why did the Nobel Laureate Jacques Monod attribute the origin of life to “Chance and Necessity” in his book with that title? A chance event may be unpredictable but more significant is the fact that it is not intended or planned. Since you are an atheist you must agree with Monod rather than say “I don’t know.” Otherwise you’re an agnostic…

“It is reasonable to think of morals as facts. I don’t see any hard line between facts and values.”

In that case you believe we live in a moral universe, i.e. that science does not explain good and evil. This is an extraordinary view for an atheist It raises the problem of how good and evil originated.

“We have lots of other human purposes than mere survival. Well-being is a very flexible term but there are a lot of aspects of human well-being that I’m sure we can agree on.”

Of course we can and do. The question is how purposes originated in the first place. How did purposeful activity emerge from purposeless molecules?

“I think Jesus probably existed and was a teacher, but nothing he said was original moral teaching except, perhaps, his teaching that we forgive one another.”

“The above “turning the other cheek”, etc are examples of Jesus teaching that we should forgive one another which I’ve said is the one thing (and a very important thing) that Jesus taught that other spiritual teachers in his or previous generations did not teach.”

I admire your honesty in conceding the originality of Jesus in this respect. But it was more than the important truth of forgiveness. The context is even more important. Unlike others he taught that God is a loving Father who cares for His children and forgives us to the exact extent that we forgive others - because He is just as well as merciful. No one else has said we must be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect.

“It would be easy to come up with various scenarios to explain the above, but they would only be speculation. If I gave one of these scenarios, you would say that it doesn’t sound very likely. If I then gave another one, you would say that it doesn’t sound very likely either.”

I’m glad you admit your scenarios wouldn’t sound likely Not surprising because none of those proposed by sceptics has stood the test of time.

“Is it really so miraculous that a body was never found? If so, there are a lot of unsolved missing person cases that must actually be miracles.”

Jesus was not just a missing person but a missing person with a flawless character who taught at least one very important truth - that of love and forgiveness.

Nor have you explained the motive of inventing such a tissue of lies? What did the alleged liars stand to gain by misrepresenting the facts?

"These sorts of stories don’t get fabricated out of whole cloth. "

There were a lot of diverse manuscripts which the facts but that does not mean they were all false. You have used the phrase “eye-witness accounts”, perhaps inadvertently, but it sums up the record of the trial and crucifixion of Jesus in St Mark’s Gospel. Try to pick out something you regard as exaggerated or distorted…

“You don’t believe that the legends of other religions are true.”

Once again you are mistaken about my attitude to other religions. Why should miracles be confined to Christians? Or even to religious people? I don’t believe atheists are excluded from divine love! They are obviously less likely to pray for a miracle but that doesn’t mean they or some one they love cannot be miraculously cured. That doesn’t mean I accept every claim but neither do I exclude the possibility of divine intervention. God would be a heartless monster if He totally ignored human suffering…

 

[tonyrey]

I don’t know what you are talking about. I keep asking for an example of a prophecy that you find interesting. I can’t tell what is being prophesied let alone what you find interesting about the quoted passage.

Perhaps these lines will ring a bell:

"My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people.
All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying,
He trusted in the Lord that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.
I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels.
My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death.
For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.
I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me.
They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.
But be not thou far from me, O Lord: O my strength, haste thee to help me.
Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling from the power of the dog.
Save me from the lion’s mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.
I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee.
Ye that fear the Lord, praise him; all ye the seed of Jacob, glorify him; and fear him, all ye the seed of Israel.
For he hath not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard.
All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the Lord: and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before thee.

And take this in conjunction with Isaiah 53:

“He was despised and rejected by men;
a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief;
and as one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
Surely he has borne our griefs
and carried our sorrows;
yet we esteemed him stricken,
smitten by God, and afflicted.
But he was wounded for our transgressions;
he was crushed for our iniquities;
upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace,
and with his stripes we are healed.
All we like sheep have gone astray;
we have turned—every one—to his own way;
and the Lord has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.
He was oppressed, and he was afflicted,
yet he opened not his mouth;
like a lamb that is led to the slaughter,
and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent,
so he opened not his mouth.
By oppression and judgment he was taken away;
and as for his generation, who considered
that he was cut off out of the land of the living,
stricken for the transgression of my people?
And they made his grave with the wicked
and with a rich man in his death,
although he had done no violence,
and there was no deceit in his mouth.
Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him;
he has put him to grief;
when his soul makes an offering for guilt,
he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days;
the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.
Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied;
by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant,
make many to be accounted righteous,
and he shall bear their iniquities.
Therefore I will divide him a portion with the many,
and he shall divide the spoil with the strong,
because he poured out his soul to death
and was numbered with the transgressors;
yet he bore the sin of many,
and makes intercession for the transgressors.”

 

[Leela]

The natural sciences and the investigation techniques of observation, trial and error and statistics are suited for the natural world and its phenomena. When it comes to the supernatural and its phenomena we are in a different domain where proof comes through the acceptence of a whole body of knowledge not accepted by the rationalistic naturalists who don’t even aknowledge the spiritual worlds (angels, demons, purgatory, etc.).
It would be stupid of me to waste my time debating with those in the sciences who are so ignorant to think that they can treat the supernatural the same way they would the natural.

But you said, “Padre Pio prayed for healing for I think it was a little girl who had no vision, not even an eyeball and the eyeball grew back! Wow! God granted the girl a new eyeball! I know Jesus healed a man’s ear that was cut off by placing the ear back on the man’s head.”

Is it ignorant to think that there are natural effects that should be investigated scientifically or not? Either these sorts of things happen or they don’t. if they do, they can be observed and investigated.

 

[Leela]

Perhaps these lines will ring a bell:

"My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people.
All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying,
He trusted in the Lord that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.
I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels.
My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death.
For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.
I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me.
They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.
But be not thou far from me, O Lord: O my strength, haste thee to help me.
Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling from the power of the dog.
Save me from the lion’s mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.
I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee.
Ye that fear the Lord, praise him; all ye the seed of Jacob, glorify him; and fear him, all ye the seed of Israel.
For he hath not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard.
All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the Lord: and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before thee.

And take this in conjunction with Isaiah 53:

“He was despised and rejected by men;
a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief;
and as one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
Surely he has borne our griefs
and carried our sorrows;
yet we esteemed him stricken,
smitten by God, and afflicted.
But he was wounded for our transgressions;
he was crushed for our iniquities;
upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace,
and with his stripes we are healed.
All we like sheep have gone astray;
we have turned—every one—to his own way;
and the Lord has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.
He was oppressed, and he was afflicted,
yet he opened not his mouth;
like a lamb that is led to the slaughter,
and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent,
so he opened not his mouth.
By oppression and judgment he was taken away;
and as for his generation, who considered
that he was cut off out of the land of the living,
stricken for the transgression of my people?
And they made his grave with the wicked
and with a rich man in his death,
although he had done no violence,
and there was no deceit in his mouth.
Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him;
he has put him to grief;
when his soul makes an offering for guilt,
he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days;
the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.
Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied;
by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant,
make many to be accounted righteous,
and he shall bear their iniquities.
Therefore I will divide him a portion with the many,
and he shall divide the spoil with the strong,
because he poured out his soul to death
and was numbered with the transgressors;
yet he bore the sin of many,
and makes intercession for the transgressors.”

I really don’t know what all that is supposed to tell me. Can’t you just say in your own words what you think was predicted and what actually happened?

 

[Leela]

"Chance isn’t an explanation. Saying that something is random is just to say that you can’t predict it. It is just a way of saying “I don’t know.” "

If chance isn’t an explanation why did the Nobel Laureate Jacques Monod attribute the origin of life to “Chance and Necessity” in his book with that title? A chance event may be unpredictable but more significant is the fact that it is not intended or planned. Since you are an atheist you must agree with Monod rather than say “I don’t know.” Otherwise you’re an agnostic…

You can call me whatever you want. I don’t know why I am expected to answer for some author I never heard of.

“It is reasonable to think of morals as facts. I don’t see any hard line between facts and values.”

In that case you believe we live in a moral universe, i.e. that science does not explain good and evil. This is an extraordinary view for an atheist It raises the problem of how good and evil originated.

Morals can be studied like anything else. Either some moral prohibition really is good for people or it isn’t. If such truths exists we can try to know them. We don’t need to wait for such truths to be “revealled” to us in the theistic sense of the term.

“We have lots of other human purposes than mere survival. Well-being is a very flexible term but there are a lot of aspects of human well-being that I’m sure we can agree on.”

Of course we can and do. The question is how purposes originated in the first place. How did purposeful activity emerge from purposeless molecules?

I don’t know.

“I think Jesus probably existed and was a teacher, but nothing he said was original moral teaching except, perhaps, his teaching that we forgive one another.”

“The above “turning the other cheek”, etc are examples of Jesus teaching that we should forgive one another which I’ve said is the one thing (and a very important thing) that Jesus taught that other spiritual teachers in his or previous generations did not teach.”

I admire your honesty in conceding the originality of Jesus in this respect. But it was more than the important truth of forgiveness. The context is even more important. Unlike others he taught that God is a loving Father who cares for His children and forgives us to the exact extent that we forgive others - because He is just as well as merciful. No one else has said we must be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect.

God as a loving father (and lots of other metaphors) predates Jesus in the OT for example. Personal perfection is pretty standard. isn’t it?

“It would be easy to come up with various scenarios to explain the above, but they would only be speculation. If I gave one of these scenarios, you would say that it doesn’t sound very likely. If I then gave another one, you would say that it doesn’t sound very likely either.”

I’m glad you admit your scenarios wouldn’t sound likely Not surprising because none of those proposed by sceptics has stood the test of time.

Yeah, but the point is that they don’t have to sound very plausible at all. They only need to sound more plausible than a man dieing and three days later rising from the dead and later ascending into Heaven.

Nor have you explained the motive of inventing such a tissue of lies? What did the alleged liars stand to gain by misrepresenting the facts?

"These sorts of stories don’t get fabricated out of whole cloth. "

There were a lot of diverse manuscripts which the facts but that does not mean they were all false. You have used the phrase “eye-witness accounts”, perhaps inadvertently, but it sums up the record of the trial and crucifixion of Jesus in St Mark’s Gospel. Try to pick out something you regard as exaggerated or distorted…

The Jesus who is being crucified in Mark is a very despairing Jesus (why have you forsaken me, etc., while the Jesus in Luke is completely in control–“Father forgive them, they know not what they do,” “Truly today you will be with me in Paradise,” and, most importantly, not “Why have you forsaken me,” but “Into your hands I commend my spirit.”

“You don’t believe that the legends of other religions are true.”

Once again you are mistaken about my attitude to other religions. Why should miracles be confined to Christians? Or even to religious people? I don’t believe atheists are excluded from divine love! They are obviously less likely to pray for a miracle but that doesn’t mean they or some one they love cannot be miraculously cured. That doesn’t mean I accept every claim but neither do I exclude the possibility of divine intervention. God would be a heartless monster if He totally ignored human suffering…

What do you think about the legend of Muhammed or the legend of the Buddha or Krishna or Joseph Smith?

 

[Leela]

We don’t agree at all. I believe there is much that is true in other religions. Christianity does not have a monopoly of miracles!

“What sort of evidence could you give that there is no greater love than giving your life for a friend?”

It’s a question of simple logic. If you give your life you give every atom of your physical being! What more can you give? To give your life for others presupposes that you live for them while you can but to die for them is the supreme test of a love that is courageous and totally unselfish.

But how can I say whether giving up your life is a good thing or a bad thing if I don’t know anything about the circumstances? People have done heroic acts in war. Is this what you are talking about?

I can’t figure out what the point is to this line of questioning.

“Just because I don’t believe that Jesus is God doesn’t mean I have any criticisms to make about his character.”

If you have no criticisms to make of Jesus you believe his life reflected his teaching.

Ok… Again, what is your point?

“I don’t understand what sort of explanation you are looking for. People are capable of really bad things especially when they view others as less than human. Why does that need explanation?”

The very fact you ask the question shows you don’t understand the enormity of the problem or grasp the full implications of human freedom. No animal is capable of premeditated atrocities on a vast scale. It is not a question of insanity, ignorance or any other mitigating factor.To take sheer delight in having others totally in your power, constantly devising new ways of torturing them and killing them in cold blood is sheer, undiluted evil for which there can never be any excuse or justification.The only way to evade this conclusion is to reject the reality of evil (and freedom and responsibility).

No animal is capale of premeditated atrocities because no animal is capable of premeditation at all. The fact that we have these big brains and the capablilities that go with them means that we also have the potential for complicated psychology and psuchological pathogies that could not afflict animals.

(The metaphysical problem is a non-starter! If God is all-powerful how could He not allow evil? To do so would entail preventing us from exercising our freedom and shaping our own destiny.)
“If you say so, but it seems to be a big issue among Christians. There is a whole branch of theology which deals with the issue.”

So what? It is also the standard weapon used by atheists! But that doesn’t mean I’m wrong. If you believe evil is an insurmountable difficulty for believers the onus is on you to refute my explanation.

What are you talking about? I never said that the problem of evil can’t be gotten around. I just said that it requires a more nuanced answer than “God did it.” I have faith in theologians to rationalize anything as supporting whatever it is their particular religion teaches.

 

[ready]

Leela,

The girl Padre Pio healed had no pupils and was miraculously was given sight without them. She had her eyeballs and so they didn’t grow back. Unlike the Vatican, I was sloppy and hasty with relaying testimony. But if you don’t believe in miracles I won’t try and convince you, Leela. I’ll just pray for you along with all the members of the CA Forums that I pray for on a daily basis. You are a definite atheist and it appears that only prayer can help you understand what the Church readily accepts as fact, I’m afraid. But keep seeking truth, keep being faithful to your conscience and open to Jesus and things should work out for you in your relationship to the true God sooner or later.