Miracles do Happen and are a problem for the Naturalist

  • Thread starter Thread starter Paddy1989
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Paddy1989

Guest
Whenever i read about ST Padre Pio and other Catholic saints who experienced miracles such as the stigmata, visions, healings etc which were observed by many witnesses and medically verified one of the most plausible excuses i feel given by Atheists is that these were sort of psychic abilities. Panning them off as liars and magicians doesn’t work when there is plenty of evidence to verify these things happened whether by witnesses or especially verified scientifically. The only way to accept them under a naturalist world-view is sort of a psychic ability which has been suggested by many atheists throughout the ages and the only one i have heard thus far that is most plausible, In others words they were healings or abilities induced by their own mind based on their radical faith in God. This was told to St Padre Pio about his stigmata wounds that they were a result of his mind manipulating the physicality of his own body based on his Christian faith. St Padre pio then replied suppose if one were to think hard enough that they were an ox would they grown horns?

My question is this, if this truly is the position taken upon by Atheists then shouldn’t they ask the serious question, are many Catholic Saints in fact what we call today, superheroes? Based on their abilities to do these things with their minds why aren’t they studied rigorously? The Soviet union and US did actually research into psychic phenomena yet could never advance in such an area. Why didn’t they just research those such as Catholic Saints who were experiencing what may be perceived as psychic abilities? I personally believe the reason such people ignore miracles and those who experience them do so because it provides too much evidence for something they CHOOSE not to believe in, in fact their statement that these miracles are just psychic abilities is proven to be a scapegoat whenever as quickly as they make such a statement they do their very best to ignore such things exist. If miracles do happen and can be verified which many times we know they do happen and are verified then either they are an aid in proving God’s existence and Grace upon us or are a super ability induced by the person experiencing it which are also deceptions. Either way they prove a problem for the Atheist and ignoring them after first claiming them to be a ‘‘psychic ability’’ just doesn’t cut it anymore
 
Last edited:
One more question to the Atheist is this, If naturalism is true and since these miracles only happen to religious people whether they be an atheist prior to these events and later convert then doesn’t it stand to reason that religious people have special psychic abilities that the atheist does not? Wouldn’t it actually prove that the religious person is more evolutionary advanced than their atheist counterpart whose mind prohibits them from experiencing such things?
 
Last edited:
Paddy1989 said:
I personally believe the reason such people ignore miracles and those who experience them do so because it provides too much evidence for something they CHOOSE not to believe in
Click to expand...
You’re right. They choose not to believe it. No evidence will convince them and they will not actively seek real evidence. Miracles are written off as conveniently and quickly as possible.
Atheists tend to pride themselves on their intellect and ability to reason, but in fact their senses are stunted and they are as closed-minded as anyone.

One favorite put-down by skeptics is the old “Why doesn’t God grow someone’s leg back? Huh?” Then you tell them about the Miracle of Calanda and they just cover their ears and go “la, la, la, la…” They don’t want to hear it. It’s their loss!
 
So to put it simply at the very most the Atheist would have to concede these miracles do give proof for God’s existence and at the very least if naturalism is true then this proves religious people are somehow superior to the atheist because of these special abilities. Both choices hurt the atheists’s ego which is a big no no for them as many are so clearly driven by it so the best they can do is run from the argument and hope it’s never brought up. To be honest i’d like to see more arguments for miracles presented in debates
 
Last edited:
I’m all for it. And by the way, atheist doesn’t require a capital ‘A’.
 
I am agnostic (but believe in some sort of higher power). I don’t believe in these miracles. These are a couple of reasons why:
  • The ones from hundreds of years ago I don’t believe in because the scientific knowledge we have today didn’t exist back in those days. When things weren’t understood, they were miracles. Then the stories grow as they get passed down through generations. This is human nature.
  • I believe mental illness plays into to most of these “documented” miracles. Mental illness manifests itself in so many ways. Self-harm, hallucinations, and multiple personality disorders are just a few.
And finally, yes, the question about growing back missing limbs is a good one. Never happens. Then someone starts talking about a saint that grew back legs 400 or 600 years ago. Not believable (see the reasons, above).

It is a choice to believe these things. For the most part, that is what the Church teaches. I choose not to believe. It doesn’t mean I don’t marvel at the miracle of life, or the naturals “miracles” in the world…art, music, etc.
 
Last edited:
I often quote the miracle of Mary’s appearance on a church roof Zeitoun in these type of dicussions. Which generally gets a response along the lines of ‘Uh?’ Not many people seem to be familiar with it. But it was seen by hundreds of thousands of people over a period of years for hours at a time. Which was the problem.

If there is TOO much information, if the miracle can be easily tested (climb up on to the roof why don’t you), then the church backs off. It has never been approved by the Church.

One guy posted a photo of the miracle on another forum and swore that it was genuine. Mary even had a halo. Which was odd because halos are just artistic license from the middle ages to indicate holiness. Maybe the guy who photoshopped the piccie didn’t realise this.

But to repeat, there never are miracles that can be accurately tested. Only the ones like Padre Pio’s can be accepted as such.
 
Wasn’t this miracle witnessed almost exclusively by muslims, including the President of Egypt? What reason would they have to make the story up?
 
Because people love to have something to believe in. Then there are those who feel more holy having been “selected” to witness the miracle. Hundreds of reasons why. These are just two.
 
KJW5551 said:
Wasn’t this miracle witnessed almost exclusively by muslims, including the President of Egypt? What reason would they have to make the story up?
Click to expand...
You are making an error in logic. Lots of people saw something. Only a few claimed it to be a miracle.
 
Oh, I’m sorry. What else did they say it was then if not a miracle?
 
Hey, look at the pretty lights on the roof! It almost looks like it’s a person. Cool…

Or words to that effect.
 
Are you aware than there are numerous miracles of stigmata for example that have been verified and where the wounds have opened and closed over without a scar only to later open again. Your points I feel are weakened by the fact miracles happen in modern society and actually modern technology helps proves them to be miracles such as the Eucharistic miracle of being able to determine the blood formed from the eucharist was that from heart tissue and was able to prove the source of it was under extreme stress.
 
I would have preffered to see what they said rather than what someone said they said.
 
Paddy1989 said:
since these miracles only happen to religious people
Click to expand...
I think you have hit the nail on the head here. Miracles usually only do happen to religious people. Womder why that is? Christian miracles happen to Christians, Islamic miracles happen to Muslims, Hindu miracles happen to Hindu’s. When people.have an NDE they usually convinetly see their diety. There lies the problem. Every religion has these claims of great miracles that just “can’t be refuted”. We know they can’t all be right, which sets the president that obviously at least some heavily witnessed miracles can be faked. Once a good fake happens once it’s totally possible to happen again. Using Occam’s Razor and knowing how humans behave it’s quite obvious to think they are all fake. I don’t believe in God so I don’t believe in miracles. It’s not that I don’t want to believe as so many put it, it just looks so silly. You have this all powerful God who can do anything, but his miracles are honestly just so weak. Like he is the creator of the universe and the best he can do are random images appearing somewhere to a specific group of people. All he had to do was literally move the sun for everyone in the world at Fatima. It would have been picked up by almost every observatory. That would be a real miracle, it would leave no doubt.
 
As would I. But the chance of me, an American, finding the original source in Arabic? Not very good.
 
wkj_123 said:
Christian miracles happen to Christians, Islamic miracles happen to Muslims, Hindu miracles happen to Hindu’s.
Click to expand...
And how about the case above being discussed, Zeitoun? Your argument kind of breaks down in that case, no?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top