Science debunking miracles?

[fnr]

Science may try to answer all questions, but it will never be able to answer all.

It’s necessary that we enter directly into questions of metaphysics and epistemology in addressing the intersection of science and faith. Fundamentally, science is about repeatable phenomena. Miracles are one-off events, brought by the grace of God, and therefore, not subject to scientific explanation.

 

[Sister_Terese]

It’s necessary that we enter directly into questions of metaphysics and epistemology in addressing the intersection of science and faith. Fundamentally, science is about repeatable phenomena. Miracles are one-off events, brought by the grace of God, T

That is exactly why the theory of evolultion is not scientific: it cannot be repeated and observed. It is either scientific (which it can’t be because it cannot be tested or observed) or it is a matter which requires an act of faith. So, if it is not scientific, then it must be a concept which requires an act of faith. I believe it takes a greater act of faith to believe in a clearly spurious and non-scientific theory than it is to believe in an omnipotent Being that created all things from nothing.

 

[HisIsTheCrown]

fnr;9641569:

It’s necessary that we enter directly into questions of metaphysics and epistemology in addressing the intersection of science and faith. Fundamentally, science is about repeatable phenomena. Miracles are one-off events, brought by the grace of God, T

That is exactly why the theory of evolultion is not scientific: it cannot be repeated and observed. It is either scientific (which it can’t be because it cannot be tested or observed) or it is a matter which requires an act of faith. So, if it is not scientific, then it must be a concept which requires an act of faith. I believe it takes a greater act of faith to believe in a clearly spurious and non-scientific theory than it is to believe in an omnipotent Being that created all things from nothing.

You cannot go inside the sun, so if you had to experiment everything you could not say anything about the inside of the sun.
That is when comes “Gedankenexperiment”, which you may see here: cleck to see

 

[EPICURES]

Is there a miracle where a person without a limb found a limb as a result of prayer?Like he woke up next day and found the limb he was lacking was there? That could be a miracle! Instead of curing diseases we wern’t even sure the person actually had.

 

[neophyte]

Is there a miracle where a person without a limb found a limb as a result of prayer?Like he woke up next day and found the limb he was lacking was there? That could be a miracle! Instead of curing diseases we wern’t even sure the person actually had.

Anyone wbo says things like this merely shows that they have no clue what the miracles are. We have multiple tubercular lesions, fistulae draining copious amounts of putrescent discharge and that have been entirely resistant to years of medical treatment, completely disappearing within days of a visit to Lourdes. And you think that these are somehow less objectively known to exist and compelling when cured than a regrown limb? With that attitude, even if you saw a limb regrown with your own eyes, it wouldn’t be enough; you’d just start asking why we haven’t seen a head regrown on its neck!

en.lourdes-france.org: recognition of a miracle

 

[AnimalSpirits]

What’s the CAF policy on necromancy? This thread was dead for a lot longer than three days. I’d love to discuss the validity of what the church calls miracles, but this probably isn’t the place to do it.

 

[Ignatius]

Sceptics say that the miracles we use as evidence for beatifications and canonisations are not really miracles

What Vatican approved miracles have been disproved? I am not aware of any.
So they are simple making false accusations that they cannot back up.

 

[EPICURES]

Anyone wbo says things like this merely shows that they have no clue what the miracles are. We have multiple tubercular lesions, fistulae draining copious amounts of putrescent discharge and that have been entirely resistant to years of medical treatment, completely disappearing within days of a visit to Lourdes. And you think that these are somehow less objectively known to exist and compelling when cured than a regrown limb? With that attitude, even if you saw a limb regrown with your own eyes, it wouldn’t be enough; you’d just start asking why we haven’t seen a head regrown on its neck!

So you don’t have any instances where a limb regrows.Why? Don’t you thinks those folks haven’t prayed hard enough?And what’s the point of a miracle?Either it’s to lessen your burden in life or to make people believe that he’s up there in the sky watching over you. So why doesn’t he show a miracle that can’t be debunked?!Like appearing up in the sky for everyone to see?Once and for all finishing all these debates whether he exists or not? Well,the inventors of God always made sure to claim he’s invisible. So none can disprove his existence.Religious apologists can always claim,the others don’t believe enough to feel him!

 

[EPICURES]

fnr;9641569:

It’s necessary that we enter directly into questions of metaphysics and epistemology in addressing the intersection of science and faith. Fundamentally, science is about repeatable phenomena. Miracles are one-off events, brought by the grace of God, T

That is exactly why the theory of evolultion is not scientific: it cannot be repeated and observed. It is either scientific (which it can’t be because it cannot be tested or observed) or it is a matter which requires an act of faith. So, if it is not scientific, then it must be a concept which requires an act of faith. I believe it takes a greater act of faith to believe in a clearly spurious and non-scientific theory than it is to believe in an omnipotent Being that created all things from nothing.

It has been repeated and it has been observed, sister!Our ignorance of science is not a proof for God’s existence

 

[EPICURES]

What Vatican approved miracles have been disproved? I am not aware of any.
So they are simple making false accusations that they cannot back up.

You mean the same VATICAN which made saints out of people who never lived?

 

[Nixbits]

fnr:

Fundamentally, science is about repeatable phenomena. Miracles are one-off events, brought by the grace of God, and therefore, not subject to scientific explanation.

I agree, true miracles are not subject to scientific explanations. That’s what would make them miracles. But alleged miracles can, and should, be subject to scientific investigation, otherwise you will never be able to distinguish real miracles from rare and unexpected but explainable phenomena.

 

[neophyte]

So you don’t have any instances where a limb regrows.Why? Don’t you thinks those folks haven’t prayed hard enough?And what’s the point of a miracle?Either it’s to lessen your burden in life or to make people believe that he’s up there in the sky watching over you. So why doesn’t he show a miracle that can’t be debunked?!

There are miracles that can’t be debunked, you just refuse to acknowledge them because they aren’t the special one that you want to see. And it you saw it, you’d just rationalize it away as you do the others.

Like appearing up in the sky for everyone to see?Once and for all finishing all these debates whether he exists or not?

Since there’s already ample evidence for his existence, I can only conclude that you mean “why doesn’t he do something so incredibly mind-blowing that even people who refuse to believe it are forced to against their will?” That just shows that you not only don’t understand the nature of God, you don’t understand yourself. It would break you if he did that, and the likely outcome would be that you’d be so pissed off at him for it that you’d definitively and permanently fix your will against him. He doesn’t do that because it would be bad for you.

God is a lover, and like any good lover he won’t force you to do anything against your will.

 

[EPICURES]

there is no evidence of his existence,let alone ample.and since we are on the subject of free will, would it be so bad or even worse than killing everyone on earth (except for noah’s family) for acting on their will?

 

[neophyte]

there is no evidence of his existence,let alone ample…

That is, none besides the miracles at you refuse, despite all evidence, to admit happen? I guess that’s why you try to change the subject.

Keep coming back.

 

[EPICURES]

I didn’t change the subject at all.You said I would not be able to take this miracle if he performs it because of free will.I was only quoting one of the so called ‘miracles’ as it happened!

 

[ericc]

Sceptics say that the miracles we use as evidence for beatifications and canonisations are not really miracles, but due to either spontaneous remission or some other medical reason as of yet unknown. What would be the Church’s response to that?

a) Miracle. it shouldn’t, couldn’t happen , but it did.
b) It shouldn’t, it couldn’t. It is something else unexplained.

a) accepts the possibility of phenomena outside the current known laws of science/nature.
b) defer unexplained phenomena to ignorance.

There is no reconciling of these viewpoints. b) refuses to accept difficult phenomena even in the presence of multiple reliable eyewitnesses. Even in hospitals surrounded by intelligent doctors, miraculous cures are dismissed by skeptics as miracles. One can always kick the can of ignorance further down the street.

I think it is a futile task to convince skeptics. Even if a miracle were to happen to them, they would just dismiss it.