Miracles

Confronted with mountains of empirical evidence and rational arguments that contradict their beliefs, religious people often resort to invoking what they consider to be absolute proof of the truth of their religion: divine miracles. We can tell them that their creationist dogma is absurd and that they have problems with epistemically justifiying their beliefs, but they will eventually bring something up like "But what about this miracle?" as what they regard as an irrefutable point in their favor.

Questioning them further, we find that they deny that anything besides the god they believe in could have caused that miracle. It's really an appeal to absurdity: it's inconceivable, in their minds, that something like that could be a mere anomaly in nature, and not a sign that their god(s) exists. I disagree with them here; that something seems implausible doesn't mean it's impossible. Ergo, it's not necessarily their god who caused that miracle. In the face of that refutation, their religion's epistemic foundations crumble like a cookie.

Now, here's my question: can a divine miracle ever serve as proof for the truth of some religion? Or are all appeals to miracles appeals to absurdity in disguise, and hence necessarily false? Discuss. 

Miracles can't be used as proof for a religion. They are inherently subjective, and anyone from any religion could claim a miracle on behalf of their religion. Besides, there's always a naturalistic explanationimaps3fanboy

What if a miracle was observed recently, with reliable witnesses? What makes you think that they are necessarily subjective?

Also, just because there's always a naturalistic explanation, doesn't mean that it can't coincidentally be a divine miracle. 

[spoiler] I'm just playing devil's advocate with you, FYI. :V [/spoiler]  

[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"]Miracles can't be used as proof for a religion. They are inherently subjective, and anyone from any religion could claim a miracle on behalf of their religion. Besides, there's always a naturalistic explanationghoklebutter

What if a miracle was observed recently, with reliable witnesses? What makes you think that they are necessarily subjective?

Also, just because there's always a naturalistic explanation, doesn't mean that it can't coincidentally be a divine miracle. 

[spoiler] I'm just playing devil's advocate with you, FYI. :V [/spoiler]  

Historians, just recently irc, have found out that Jesus of Nazareth might have been part of a cult. This cult lived in caves, and ate hallucinegic mushrooms. This could have likely been the trigger that set off all of Christianity. So I would say it boils doing to a mass hysteria/delusion that we so commonly see in humans. I also wouldn't want to be worshipping a god that only reveals himself to a small audience, and not the mass population. 

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"]

[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"]Miracles can't be used as proof for a religion. They are inherently subjective, and anyone from any religion could claim a miracle on behalf of their religion. Besides, there's always a naturalistic explanationimaps3fanboy

What if a miracle was observed recently, with reliable witnesses? What makes you think that they are necessarily subjective?

Also, just because there's always a naturalistic explanation, doesn't mean that it can't coincidentally be a divine miracle. 

[spoiler] I'm just playing devil's advocate with you, FYI. :V [/spoiler]  

Historians, just recently irc, have found out that Jesus of Nazareth might have been part of a cult. This cult lived in caves, and ate hallucinegic mushrooms. This could have likely been the trigger that set off all of Christianity. So I would say it boils doing to a mass hysteria/delusion that we so commonly see in humans. I also wouldn't want to be worshipping a god that only reveals himself to a small audience, and not the mass population. 

I did know of some link between Christmas and Fly-agaric mushrooms - the red caps with white spots being the colours of Christmas, flying reindeer, etc. Such "shamanic" mushroom/cactus induced vision-questing is not uncommon in religion at all though.

(more info: http://www.washedashore.com/rants/xmas) 

N.B. DO NOT EAT THESE MUSHROOMS - THEY CAN KILL - EVEN IN SMALL QUANTITIES

Regarding "miracles": 

If you look at places like Lourdes, where there is a Catholic commission (unbiased of course) to "approve" miracles, you will see that there were only 67 of them over 150 years, despite the droves of people in their thousands turning up there every day in the hope of a cure. Such small numbers seem to make going to Lourdes less miraculous than staying at home!

(source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4902332.stm) 

Recently sainted (and beatified) people are supposed to have miracles associated with them. I've written about some rather suspect miracles that have lead directly to sainthood here:

http://www.gamespot.com/unions/Nonrelgious/forums/27445953/saint-thomas-aquinas-quiz

Which is meanless to those who insist that supernatural are only natural that has yet to be explain.alexside1

Precisely. 

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"]

[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"]Miracles can't be used as proof for a religion. They are inherently subjective, and anyone from any religion could claim a miracle on behalf of their religion. Besides, there's always a naturalistic explanationimaps3fanboy

What if a miracle was observed recently, with reliable witnesses? What makes you think that they are necessarily subjective?

Also, just because there's always a naturalistic explanation, doesn't mean that it can't coincidentally be a divine miracle.

[spoiler] I'm just playing devil's advocate with you, FYI. :V [/spoiler]

Historians, just recently irc, have found out that Jesus of Nazareth might have been part of a cult. This cult lived in caves, and ate hallucinegic mushrooms. This could have likely been the trigger that set off all of Christianity. So I would say it boils doing to a mass hysteria/delusion that we so commonly see in humans. I also wouldn't want to be worshipping a god that only reveals himself to a small audience, and not the mass population.

[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"][QUOTE="ghoklebutter"]

[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"]Miracles can't be used as proof for a religion. They are inherently subjective, and anyone from any religion could claim a miracle on behalf of their religion. Besides, there's always a naturalistic explanationwis3boi

What if a miracle was observed recently, with reliable witnesses? What makes you think that they are necessarily subjective?

Also, just because there's always a naturalistic explanation, doesn't mean that it can't coincidentally be a divine miracle.

[spoiler] I'm just playing devil's advocate with you, FYI. :V [/spoiler]

Historians, just recently irc, have found out that Jesus of Nazareth might have been part of a cult. This cult lived in caves, and ate hallucinegic mushrooms. This could have likely been the trigger that set off all of Christianity. So I would say it boils doing to a mass hysteria/delusion that we so commonly see in humans. I also wouldn't want to be worshipping a god that only reveals himself to a small audience, and not the mass population.

Nah I didn't see that. I remember Richard Carrier saying something about it though 

[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"][QUOTE="ghoklebutter"]

What if a miracle was observed recently, with reliable witnesses? What makes you think that they are necessarily subjective?

Also, just because there's always a naturalistic explanation, doesn't mean that it can't coincidentally be a divine miracle.

[spoiler] I'm just playing devil's advocate with you, FYI. :V [/spoiler]

wis3boi

Historians, just recently irc, have found out that Jesus of Nazareth might have been part of a cult. This cult lived in caves, and ate hallucinegic mushrooms. This could have likely been the trigger that set off all of Christianity. So I would say it boils doing to a mass hysteria/delusion that we so commonly see in humans. I also wouldn't want to be worshipping a god that only reveals himself to a small audience, and not the mass population.

People must have been terribly impressionable back then as to believe all this garbage though.

I still find it difficult to believe that in todays modern society people can't think for themselves or they logically think some form of supernatural power exists like walking on water, turning water into wine etc even when the hard science proves something like that can't be done. Well not the way it's described anyway.

I still find it difficult to believe that in todays modern society people can't think for themselves or they logically think some form of supernatural power exists like walking on water, turning water into wine etc even when the hard science proves something like that can't be done. Well not the way it's described anyway.

seanmcloughlin

That's because your worldview differ from other people. Besides I wouldn't jump to conclusion of "not thinking for themselves" without knowing the individual.

[QUOTE="wis3boi"][QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"]

Historians, just recently irc, have found out that Jesus of Nazareth might have been part of a cult. This cult lived in caves, and ate hallucinegic mushrooms. This could have likely been the trigger that set off all of Christianity. So I would say it boils doing to a mass hysteria/delusion that we so commonly see in humans. I also wouldn't want to be worshipping a god that only reveals himself to a small audience, and not the mass population.

seanmcloughlin

People must have been terribly impressionable back then as to believe all this garbage though.

I still find it difficult to believe that in todays modern society people can't think for themselves or they logically think some form of supernatural power exists like walking on water, turning water into wine etc even when the hard science proves something like that can't be done. Well not the way it's described anyway.

 The books being written many years after the main cult leader (jesus) died explains the exaggerated stories. I think it's all based around fear...fear that if you don't worship, bad things happen to you, and worshiping gets you box seat tickets to god's stadium and eternal bliss....etc. I doubt that many of those miracle stories were preached when jesus was alive, if such a man existed. Back then life was bleak, and it was easy to fall for this kind of thing though. Vikings thought the god Sköll was responsible for what we now know as a solar eclipse...they thought he was hungry and would feast on the sun, so they chanted and screamed at the sun for him to stop. Back then if we were vikings we'd probably believe it toowis3boi

I agree. In particular, I've always wondered why several dodgy constructs in the new Testament get so often ignored by Christians:

The Paulean Epistles (13 or 14 books of the New Testament), as reputedly  to have been written by Saul of Tarsus (Paul), do not contain any reference to Jesus' supposed  miracles or divine birth at all. At least 7 of these books are of disputed authorship too. Many ideas are stolen from Plato and other Greek authorship.

The "Synotic Gospels" (Matthew, Mark and Luke) seem to have been shared from a single source, since they often contain exactly the same wording. But still, they are used as a primary source for historical information abut Jesus.

The "Synotic Gospels" (Matthew, Mark and Luke) seem to have been shared from a single source, since they often contain exactly the same wording. But still, they are used as a primary source for historical information abut Jesus.

RationalAtheist

Of course they came from a single source. It was being spread by word of mouth by the disciples and followers before it was written down.

I strongly disagree about the fear thing. His messages strikes as a message about compassion and loving ones neighbor.

That's just my opinion on it though.

Also original manuscripts of Matthew containing no references to Jesus' supernatural powers or resurrection before the Council of Nicea.Zeviander

Link to the original manuscripts please? Cause you got me intrested.

Many of the personal "miracles" I've been presented with are very self-centered. Not taking into account that improbable coincidences happen all the time, then merely falling into a regressive fallacy. When it comes to the more extraordinary claims all there ever is are eye-witness accounts to back it up. Which is not sufficient evidence for a claim that breaks the natural order of things. If we were to take those with great credence then we must also give credence to claims of spotting bigfoot, or UFOs. Nothing definitive to bring into account, so they can then be rightfully dismissed on such.Jazz_Fan

Very good points. I think the only way the believer could respond is to argue that one should trust the witnesses, but trust is not even close to being a requisite for knowledge. I don't "trust" in reason to help me arrive at true conclusions. Trust is a virtue in my eyes, but it's not some kind of epistemic bridge that makes something absolutely true. After all, human perception can only be trusted so much. 

I know I'm basically repeating your points, but I'm just sharing my thoughts on them.

I still find it difficult to believe that in todays modern society people can't think for themselves or they logically think some form of supernatural power exists like walking on water, turning water into wine etc even when the hard science proves something like that can't be done. Well not the way it's described anyway.

seanmcloughlin

I do as well, but all it takes is for me to flip on the Trinity Broadcasting Network and I'll catch a guy up on stage pushing people down and yelling "you are healed!!!" and there is a stadium worth of individuals eating it all up. If that happens today in a developed county where an overwhelming majority are literate imagine how easy it was when nearly everyone was illiterate and science was basically unknown and only in its infancy among even the most highly educated.

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

I still find it difficult to believe that in todays modern society people can't think for themselves or they logically think some form of supernatural power exists like walking on water, turning water into wine etc even when the hard science proves something like that can't be done. Well not the way it's described anyway.

Uloset

I do as well, but all it takes is for me to flip on the Trinity Broadcasting Network and I'll catch a guy up on stage pushing people down and yelling "you are healed!!!" and there is a stadium worth of individuals eating it all up. If that happens today in a developed county where an overwhelming majority are literate imagine how easy it was when nearly everyone was illiterate and science was basically unknown and only in its infancy among even the most highly educated.

If there was a time machine and I got one chance to go back in time....you know where I would go and when? Jesus' time. To see how much BS all these tales are.

If there was a time machine and I got one chance to go back in time....you know where I would go and when? Jesus' time. To see how much BS all these tales are.

wis3boi

You know... this begs the question of why do you even need to go back in time if you think it's all BS in the first place.

[QUOTE="wis3boi"]

If there was a time machine and I got one chance to go back in time....you know where I would go and when? Jesus' time. To see how much BS all these tales are.

alexside1

You know... this begs the question of why do you even need to go back in time if you think it's all BS in the first place.

billion of people follow it as concrete fact...if you could go back in time and watch it, record it, i think it'd be interesting

[QUOTE="alexside1"][QUOTE="wis3boi"]

If there was a time machine and I got one chance to go back in time....you know where I would go and when? Jesus' time. To see how much BS all these tales are.

wis3boi

You know... this begs the question of why do you even need to go back in time if you think it's all BS in the first place.

billion of people follow it as concrete fact...if you could go back in time and watch it, record it, i think it'd be interesting

While as the same time you think that it's all BS as a concrete fact. (We all are bias to some degree.) If you actually did the recording thing you most likely create a time paradox.

I'm just gonna leave this here...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSXhHDjrt6o

I'm just gonna leave this here...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSXhHDjrt6o

Ryan_Som

goddamn I love that show. I think I've spent a few hundred hours of listening to it while I browse the net and play games since the summer alone